It is commonly agreed that the success of future proof assistants will rely on their ability to incorporate computations within deduction in order to mimic the mathematician when replacing the proof of a proposition P by the proof of an equivalent proposition P ’ obtained from P thanks to possibly complex calculations. In this paper, we investigate a new version of the calculus of inductive constructions which incorporates arbitrary decision procedures into deduction via the conversion rule of the calculus. The novelty of the problem in the context of the calculus of inductive constructions lies in the fact that the computation mechanism varies along proof-checking: goals are sent to the decision procedure together with the set of user hypotheses available from the current context. Our main result shows that this extension of the calculus of constructions does not compromise its main properties: confluence, subject reduction, strong normalization and consistency are all preserved.

Pure type systems and computational monads are two parameterized frameworks that have proved to be quite useful in both theoretical and practical applications. We join the foundational concepts of both of these to obtain monadic type systems. Essentially, monadic type systems inherit the parameterized higher-order type structure of pure type systems and the monadic term and type structure used to capture computational effects in the theory of computational monads. We demonstrate that monadic type systems nicely characterize previous work and suggest how they can support several new theoretical and practical applications. A technical foundation for monadic type systems is laid by recasting and scaling up the main results from pure type systems (confluence, subject reduction, strong normalisation for particular classes of systems, etc.) and from operational presentations of computational monads (notions of operational equivalence based on applicative similarity, co-induction proof techni...