The first example of a simultaneous inductive-recursive definition in intuitionistic type theory is Martin-Löf's universe à la Tarski. A set U0 of codes for small sets is generated inductively at the same time as a function T0 , which maps a code to the corresponding small set, is defined by recursion on the way the elements of U0 are generated. In this paper we argue that there is an underlying general notion of simultaneous inductiverecursive definition which is implicit in Martin-Löf's intuitionistic type theory. We extend previously given schematic formulations of inductive definitions in type theory to encompass a general notion of simultaneous induction-recursion. This enables us to give a unified treatment of several interesting constructions including various universe constructions by Palmgren, Griffor, Rathjen, and Setzer and a constructive version of Aczel's Frege structures. Consistency of a restricted version of the extension is shown by constructing a realisability model ...

ion is written as [x: oe]M instead of x: oe:M and application is written M(N) instead of App [x:oe] (M; N ). 1 Iterated abstractions and applications are written [x 1 : oe 1 ; : : : ; x n : oe n ]M and M(N 1 ; : : : ; N n ), respectively. The lacking type information can be inferred. The universe is written Set instead of U . The El-operator is omitted. For example the \Pi-type is described by the following constant and equality declarations (understood in every valid context): ` \Pi : (oe: Set; : (oe)Set)Set ` App : (oe: Set; : (oe)Set; m: \Pi(oe; ); n: oe) (m) ` : (oe: Set; : (oe)Set; m: (x: oe) (x))\Pi(oe; ) oe: Set; : (oe)Set; m: (x: oe) (x); n: oe ` App(oe; ; (oe; ; m); n) = m(n) Notice, how terms with free variables are represented as framework abstractions (in the type of ) and how substitution is represented as framework application (in the type of App and in the equation). In this way the burden of dealing correctly with variables, substitution, and binding is s...

1 Introduction Induction-recursion is a powerful definition method in intuitionistic type theory in the sense of Scott ("Constructive Validity") [31] and Martin-L"of [17, 18, 19]. The first occurrence of formal induction-recursion is Martin-L"of's definition of a universe `a la Tarski [19], which consists of a set U

We present a new approach to introducing an extensional propositional equality in Intensional Type Theory. Our construction is based on the observation that there is a sound, intensional setoid model in Intensional Type theory with a proof-irrelevant universe of propositions and -rules for - and -types. The Type Theory corresponding to this model is decidable, has no irreducible constants and permits large eliminations, which are essential for universes. Keywords. Type Theory, categorical models. 1. Introduction and Summary In Intensional Type Theory (see e.g. [11]) we differentiate between a decidable definitional equality (which we denote by =) and a propositional equality type (Id ( ; ) for any given type ) which requires proof. Typing only depends on definitional equality and hence is decidable. In Intensional Type Theory the type corresponding to the principle of extensionality Ext x2:(x) f;g2(x2:(x)) ( x2 Id (x) (f(x); g(x))) ! Id x2:(x) (f; g) is not...

Abstract not found

. This paper studies the problem of coherence in category theory from a type-theoretic viewpoint. We first show how a Curry-Howard interpretation of a formal proof of normalization for monoids almost directly yields a coherence proof for monoidal categories. Then we formalize this coherence proof in intensional intuitionistic type theory and show how it relies on explicit reasoning about proof objects for intensional equality. This formalization has been checked in the proof assistant ALF. 1 Introduction Mac Lane [18, pp.161--165] proved a coherence theorem for monoidal categories. A basic ingredient in his proof is the normalization of object expressions. But it is only one ingredient and several others are needed too. Here we show that almost a whole proof of this coherence theorem is hidden in a Curry-Howard interpretation of a proof of normalization for monoids. The second point of the paper is to contribute to the development of constructive category theory in the sense of Huet a...

ion and application Suppose that M 2 Tm(B). We define its abstraction A;B (M) 2 Tm(\Pi LF (A; B)) on objects by A;B (M)(fl)(a) = M(fl; a) A;B (M)(fl)(q) = M(id fl ; q) If p : fl ! fl 0 then we need a natural transformation A;B (M)(p) : p \Delta A;B (M)(fl) ! A;B (M)(fl 0 ) At object a 2 A(fl 0 ) it is given by M(p; id a ). Conversely, if M 2 Tm(\Pi(A; B)) we define a dependent object \Gamma1 A;B 2 Tm(B). Its object part is given by \Gamma1 A;B (M)(fl; a) = M(fl)(a) For the morphism part assume p : fl ! fl 0 and q : p \Delta a ! a 0 . We define \Gamma1 A;B (M)(p; q) = M(fl 0 )(q) ffi (id fl 0 ; q) \Delta M(p) p \Delta a We claim that \Gamma1 A;B (M)(p; q) : (p; q) \Delta \Gamma1 A;B (M)(fl; a) ! \Gamma1 A;B (M)(fl 0 ; a 0 ) as required. To see this, first note that M(fl 0 )(q) : (id fl 0 ; q) \Delta M 0 (fl 0 )(p \Delta a) !M 0 (fl 0 )(a 0 ) because q : p \Delta a ! a 0 . On the other hand M(p) : p \Delta M(fl) !M(fl 0 )...

Type-checking algorithms for dependent type theories often rely on the interpretation of terms in some semantic domain of values when checking equalities. Here we analyze a version of Coquand’s algorithm for checking the βη-equality of such semantic values in a theory with a predicative universe hierarchy and large elimination rules. Although this algorithm does not rely on normalization by evaluation explicitly, we show that similar ideas can be employed for its verification. In particular, our proof uses the new notions of contextual reification and strong semantic equality. The algorithm is part of a bi-directional type checking algorithm which checks whether a normal term has a certain semantic type, a technique notion of semantic domain in order to accommodate a variety of possible implementation techniques, such as normal forms, weak head normal forms, closures, and compiled code. Our aim is to get closer than previous work to verifying the type-checking algorithms which are actually used in practice.

It is demonstrated how a dependently typed lambda calculus (a logical framework) can be formalised inside a language with inductive-recursive families. The formalisation does not use raw terms; the well-typed terms are defined directly. It is hence impossible to create ill-typed terms. As an example of programming with strong invariants, and to show that the formalisation is usable, normalisation is proved. Moreover, this proof seems to be the first formal account of normalisation by evaluation for a dependently typed language.

Abstract. We are investigating McBride’s idea that the type of one-hole contexts are the formal derivative of a functor from a categorical perspective. Exploiting our recent work on containers we are able to characterise derivatives by a universal property and show that the laws of calculus including a rule for initial algebras as presented by McBride hold — hence the differentiable containers include those generated by polynomials and least fixpoints. Finally, we discuss abstract containers (i.e. quotients of containers) — this includes a container which plays the role of e x in calculus by being its own derivative. 1