Results 1 
6 of
6
Types in logic and mathematics before 1940
 Bulletin of Symbolic Logic
, 2002
"... Abstract. In this article, we study the prehistory of type theory up to 1910 and its development between Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica ([71], 1910–1912) and Church’s simply typed λcalculus of 1940. We first argue that the concept of types has always been present in mathematics, thou ..."
Abstract

Cited by 11 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this article, we study the prehistory of type theory up to 1910 and its development between Russell and Whitehead’s Principia Mathematica ([71], 1910–1912) and Church’s simply typed λcalculus of 1940. We first argue that the concept of types has always been present in mathematics, though nobody was incorporating them explicitly as such, before the end of the 19th century. Then we proceed by describing how the logical paradoxes entered the formal systems of Frege, Cantor and Peano concentrating on Frege’s Grundgesetze der Arithmetik for which Russell applied his famous paradox 1 and this led him to introduce the first theory of types, the Ramified Type Theory (rtt). We present rtt formally using the modern notation for type theory and we discuss how Ramsey, Hilbert and Ackermann removed the orders from rtt leading to the simple theory of types stt. We present stt and Church’s own simply typed λcalculus (λ→C 2) and we finish by comparing rtt, stt and λ→C. §1. Introduction. Nowadays, type theory has many applications and is used in many different disciplines. Even within logic and mathematics, there are many different type systems. They serve several purposes, and are formulated in various ways. But, before 1903 when Russell first introduced
A Correspondence between MartinLöf Type Theory, the Ramified Theory of Types and Pure Type Systems
 Journal of Logic, Language and Information
, 2001
"... In Russell's Ramified Theory of Types rtt, two hierarchical concepts dominate: orders and types. The use of orders has as a consequence that the logic part of rtt is predicative. The concept of order however, is almost dead since Ramsey eliminated it from rtt. This is why we find Church's simple the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In Russell's Ramified Theory of Types rtt, two hierarchical concepts dominate: orders and types. The use of orders has as a consequence that the logic part of rtt is predicative. The concept of order however, is almost dead since Ramsey eliminated it from rtt. This is why we find Church's simple theory of types (which uses the type concept without the order one) at the bottom of the Barendregt Cube rather than rtt. Despite the disappearance of orders which have a strong correlation with predicativity, predicative logic still plays an influential role in Computer Science. An important example is the proof checker Nuprl, which is based on MartinLöf's Type Theory which uses type universes. Those type universes, and also degrees of expressions in Automath, are closely related to orders. In this paper, we show that orders have not disappeared from modern logic and computer science, rather, orders play a crucial role in understanding the hierarchy of modern systems. In order to achieve our goal, we concentrate on a subsystem of Nuprl. The novelty of our paper lies in: 1) a modest revival of Russell's orders, 1 2) the placing of the historical system rtt underlying the famous Principia Mathematica in a context with a modern system of computer mathematics (Nuprl) and modern type theories (MartinLöf's type theory and PTSs), and 3) the presentation of a complex type system (Nuprl) as a simple and compact PTS.
Ramified HigherOrder Unification
, 1996
"... While unification in the simple theory of types (a.k.a. higherorder logic) is undecidable, we show that unification in the pure ramified theory of types with integer levels is decidable. Since pure ramified type theory is not very expressive, we examine the impure case, which has an undecidable uni ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
While unification in the simple theory of types (a.k.a. higherorder logic) is undecidable, we show that unification in the pure ramified theory of types with integer levels is decidable. Since pure ramified type theory is not very expressive, we examine the impure case, which has an undecidable unification problem even at order 2. However, the decidability result for the pure subsystem indicates that unification terminates more often than general higherorder unification. We present an application to ACA 0 and other expressive subsystems of secondorder Peano arithmetic.
RUSSELL’S OTHER CONTRADICTION: THE PARADOX OF PROPOSITIONS
, 2001
"... statement of his theory of logical types.This simple version of the theory is designed to block the reasoning that leads to the paradox of the Russell class. But Russell notes immediately that new problems arise.The problems culminate in the paradox of propositions.This is a problem that seems to ru ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
statement of his theory of logical types.This simple version of the theory is designed to block the reasoning that leads to the paradox of the Russell class. But Russell notes immediately that new problems arise.The problems culminate in the paradox of propositions.This is a problem that seems to run in exact parallel to the paradox of the Russell class.It seemed therefore desirable to Russell that a single solution to both paradoxes be found.Since the simple theory of types (ST) does not offer such a solution it is commonly believed that the paradox of propositions was Russell’s principal motive— at least at the time when he had just finished writing the Principles—for searching for and eventually formulating a ramified theory of types (RT). In the next section I shall present the very first version of ST as it occurs in the Principles.I shall explain in which direction Russell was seeking for a solution to the paradox of propositions which would run in parallel to his solution to the class paradox. Next I turn to the RussellFrege correspondence of 1902 and 1903.Apart
Logic in the 1930s: Type Theory and Model Theory
, 2013
"... In historical discussions of twentiethcentury logic, it is typically assumed that model theory emerged within the tradition that adopted firstorder logic as the standard framework. Work within the typetheoretic tradition, in the style of Principia Mathematica, tends to be downplayed or ignored in ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
In historical discussions of twentiethcentury logic, it is typically assumed that model theory emerged within the tradition that adopted firstorder logic as the standard framework. Work within the typetheoretic tradition, in the style of Principia Mathematica, tends to be downplayed or ignored in this connection. Indeed, the shift from type theory to firstorder logic is sometimes seen as involving a radical break that first made possible the rise of modern model theory. While comparing several early attempts to develop the semantics of axiomatic theories in the 1930s, by proponents of the typetheoretic tradition (Carnap and Tarski) and the firstorder tradition (Gödel and Hilbert), we argue that, instead, the move from type theory to firstorder logic is better understood as a gradual transformation, and further, that the contributions to semantics made in the typetheoretic tradition should be seen as central to the evolution of model theory. 1