Results 1  10
of
15
Inductive Sets and Families in MartinLöf's Type Theory and Their SetTheoretic Semantics
 Logical Frameworks
, 1991
"... MartinLof's type theory is presented in several steps. The kernel is a dependently typed calculus. Then there are schemata for inductive sets and families of sets and for primitive recursive functions and families of functions. Finally, there are set formers (generic polymorphism) and univer ..."
Abstract

Cited by 80 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
MartinLof's type theory is presented in several steps. The kernel is a dependently typed calculus. Then there are schemata for inductive sets and families of sets and for primitive recursive functions and families of functions. Finally, there are set formers (generic polymorphism) and universes. At each step syntax, inference rules, and settheoretic semantics are given. 1 Introduction Usually MartinLof's type theory is presented as a closed system with rules for a finite collection of set formers. But it is also often pointed out that the system is in principle open to extension: we may introduce new sets when there is a need for them. The principle is that a set is by definition inductively generated  it is defined by its introduction rules, which are rules for generating its elements. The elimination rule is determined by the introduction rules and expresses definition by primitive recursion on the way the elements of the set are generated. (In this paper I shall use the term ...
A General Formulation of Simultaneous InductiveRecursive Definitions in Type Theory
 Journal of Symbolic Logic
, 1998
"... The first example of a simultaneous inductiverecursive definition in intuitionistic type theory is MartinLöf'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 re ..."
Abstract

Cited by 79 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
The first example of a simultaneous inductiverecursive definition in intuitionistic type theory is MartinLöf'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 MartinLöf's intuitionistic type theory. We extend previously given schematic formulations of inductive definitions in type theory to encompass a general notion of simultaneous inductionrecursion. 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 ...
Inductive Families
 Formal Aspects of Computing
, 1997
"... A general formulation of inductive and recursive definitions in MartinLof's type theory is presented. It extends Backhouse's `DoItYourself Type Theory' to include inductive definitions of families of sets and definitions of functions by recursion on the way elements of such sets ar ..."
Abstract

Cited by 78 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
A general formulation of inductive and recursive definitions in MartinLof's type theory is presented. It extends Backhouse's `DoItYourself Type Theory' to include inductive definitions of families of sets and definitions of functions by recursion on the way elements of such sets are generated. The formulation is in natural deduction and is intended to be a natural generalization to type theory of MartinLof's theory of iterated inductive definitions in predicate logic. Formal criteria are given for correct formation and introduction rules of a new set former capturing definition by strictly positive, iterated, generalized induction. Moreover, there is an inversion principle for deriving elimination and equality rules from the formation and introduction rules. Finally, there is an alternative schematic presentation of definition by recursion. The resulting theory is a flexible and powerful language for programming and constructive mathematics. We hint at the wealth of possible applic...
A finite axiomatization of inductiverecursive definitions
 Typed Lambda Calculi and Applications, volume 1581 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, 1999
"... Inductionrecursion is a schema which formalizes the principles for introducing new sets in MartinLöf’s type theory. It states that we may inductively define a set while simultaneously defining a function from this set into an arbitrary type by structural recursion. This extends the notion of an in ..."
Abstract

Cited by 51 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Inductionrecursion is a schema which formalizes the principles for introducing new sets in MartinLöf’s type theory. It states that we may inductively define a set while simultaneously defining a function from this set into an arbitrary type by structural recursion. This extends the notion of an inductively defined set substantially and allows us to introduce universes and higher order universes (but not a Mahlo universe). In this article we give a finite axiomatization of inductiverecursive definitions. We prove consistency by constructing a settheoretic model which makes use of one Mahlo cardinal. 1
AutomataDriven Automated Induction
 Information and Computation
, 1996
"... . This work investigates inductive theorem proving techniques for firstorder functions whose meaning and domains can be specified by Horn Clauses built up from the equality and finitely many unary membership predicates. In contrast with other works in the area, constructors are not assumed to be fr ..."
Abstract

Cited by 19 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
. This work investigates inductive theorem proving techniques for firstorder functions whose meaning and domains can be specified by Horn Clauses built up from the equality and finitely many unary membership predicates. In contrast with other works in the area, constructors are not assumed to be free. Techniques originating from tree automata are used to describe ground constructor terms in normal form, on which the induction proofs are built up. Validity of (free) constructor clauses is checked by an original technique relying on the recent discovery of a complete axiomatisation of finite trees and their rational subsets. Validity of clauses with defined symbols or nonfree constructor terms is reduced to the latter case by appropriate inference rules using a notion of ground reducibility for these symbols. We show how to check this property by generating proof obligations which can be passed over to the inductive prover. 1 Introduction The need for large formal proofs has lead to t...
Representing Inductively Defined Sets by Wellorderings in MartinLöf's Type Theory
, 1996
"... We prove that every strictly positive endofunctor on the category of sets generated by MartinLof's extensional type theory has an initial algebra. This representation of inductively defined sets uses essentially the wellorderings introduced by MartinLof in "Constructive Mathematics and C ..."
Abstract

Cited by 18 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We prove that every strictly positive endofunctor on the category of sets generated by MartinLof's extensional type theory has an initial algebra. This representation of inductively defined sets uses essentially the wellorderings introduced by MartinLof in "Constructive Mathematics and Computer Programming". 1 Background MartinLof [10] introduced a general set former for wellorderings in intuitionistic type theory. It has formation rule Aset (x : A) B(x)set W x:A B(x)set introduction rule a : A (x : B(a)) b(x) : W x:A B(x) sup(a; b) : W x:A B(x) : elimination rule c : W x:A B(x) (x : A; y : B(x) !W x:A B(x); z : Q t:B(x) C(y(t))) d(x; y; z) : C(sup(a; b)) T (c; d) : C(c) and equality rule a : A (x : B(a)) b(x) : W x:A B(x) (x : A; y : B(x) !W x:A B(x); z : Q t:B(x) C(y(t))) d(x; y; z) : C(sup(a; b)) T (sup(a; b); d) = d(a; b; t:T (b(t); d) : C(c) The elimination rule can be viewed either as a rule of transfinite induction or as a rule of definition by transfinite re...
Inductive Data Types: Wellordering Types Revisited
 Logical Environments
, 1992
"... We consider MartinLof's wellordering type constructor in the context of an impredicative type theory. We show that the wellordering types can represent various inductive types faithfully in the presence of the fillingup equality rules or jrules. We also discuss various properties of the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We consider MartinLof's wellordering type constructor in the context of an impredicative type theory. We show that the wellordering types can represent various inductive types faithfully in the presence of the fillingup equality rules or jrules. We also discuss various properties of the fillingup rules. 1 Introduction Type theory is on the edge of two disciplines, constructive logic and computer science. Logicians see type theory as interesting because it offers a foundation for constructive mathematics and its formalization. For computer scientists, type theory promises to provide a uniform framework for programs, proofs, specifications, and their development. From each perspective, incorporating a general mechanism for inductively defined data types into type theory is an important next step. Various typetheoretic approaches to inductive data types have been considered in the literature, both in MartinLof's predicative type theories (e.g., [ML84, Acz86, Dyb88, Dyb91, B...
Finite axiomatizations of inductive and inductiverecursive definitions
 Workshop on Generic Programming, Marstrand
, 1998
"... ..."
(Show Context)
Quotient Types: A Modular Approach
 ITUT Recommendation H.324
, 2002
"... In this paper we introduce a new approach to axiomatizing quotient types in type theory. We suggest replacing the existing monolithic rule set by a modular set of rules for a specially chosen set of primitive operations. This modular formalization of quotient types turns out to be much easier to use ..."
Abstract

Cited by 7 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we introduce a new approach to axiomatizing quotient types in type theory. We suggest replacing the existing monolithic rule set by a modular set of rules for a specially chosen set of primitive operations. This modular formalization of quotient types turns out to be much easier to use and free of many limitations of the traditional monolithic formalization. To illustrate the advantages of the new approach, we show how the type of collections (that is known to be very hard to formalize using traditional quotient types) can be naturally formalized using the new primitives. We also show how modularity allows us to reuse one of the new primitives to simplify and enhance the rules for the set types.