The need for subtyping in type-systems with dependent types has been realized for some years. But it is hard to prove that systems combining the two features have fundamental properties such as subject reduction. Here we investigate a subtyping extension of the system *P, which is an abstract version of the type system of the Edinburgh Logical Framework LF. By using an equivalent formulation, we establish some important properties of the new system *P^, including subject reduction. Our analysis culminates in a complete and terminating algorithm which establishes the decidability of type-checking.

Abstract not found

Record types are an important tool for programming and are essential in objectoriented calculi. Dependent record types are proven to be very useful for program specification and verification. Unfortunately, all known embedding of the dependent record type in the type theory had some imperfections. In this paper we present a new type constructor, dependent intersection, i.e., the intersection of two types, where the second type may depend on elements of the first one (do not confuse it with the intersection of a family of types). This new type constructor allows us to define dependent records in a very simple way.

This article presents a theory of classes and inheritance built on top of constructive type theory. Classes are defined using dependent and very dependent function types that are found in the Nuprl constructive type theory. Inheritance is defined in terms of a general subtyping relation over the underlying types. Among the basic types is the intersection type which plays a critical role in the applications because it provides a method of composing program components. The class theory is applied to defining algebraic structures such as monoids, groups, rings, etc. and relating them. It is also used to define communications protocols as infinite state automata. The article illustrates the role of these formal automata in defining the services of a distributed group communications system. In both applications the inheritance mechanisms allow reuse of proofs and the statement of general properties of system composition. 1

this paper appears in Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics, TPHOLs 2000, c

Abstract. We address the problem of representing mathematical structures in a proof assistant which: 1) is based on a type theory with dependent types, telescopes and a computational version of Leibniz equality; 2) implements coercive subtyping, accepting multiple coherent paths between type families; 3) implements a restricted form of higher order unification and type reconstruction. We show how to exploit the previous quite common features to reduce the “syntactic ” gap between pen&paper and formalised algebra. However, to reach our goal we need to propose unification and type reconstruction heuristics that are slightly different from the ones usually implemented. We have implemented them in Matita. 1

. We present an example of formalization of systems of algebras using an extension of Martin-Lof's theory of types with record types and subtyping. This extension has been presented in [5]. In this paper we intend to illustrate all the features of the extended theory that we consider relevant for the task of formalizing algebraic constructions. We also provide code of the formalization as accepted by a type checker that has been implemented. 1. Introduction We shall use an extension of Martin-Lof's theory of logical types [14] with dependent record types and subtyping as the formal language in which constructions concerning systems of algebras are going to be represented. The original formulation of Martin-Lof's theory of types, from now on referred to as the logical framework, has been presented in [15, 7]. The system of types that this calculus embodies are the type Set (the type of inductively defined sets), dependent function types and for each set A, the type of the elements of A...

Abstract. Manifest fields in a type of modules are shown to be expressible in intensional type theory without strong extensional equality rules. These intensional manifest fields are made available with the help of coercive subtyping. It is shown that, for both Σ-types and dependent record types, the with-clause for expressing manifest fields can be introduced by means of the intensional manifest fields. This provides not only a higher-order module mechanism with ML-style sharing, but a powerful modelling mechanism in formalisation and verification of OO-style program modules. 1

. In this work we put forward an algorithm for the mechanical verification of an extension of Martin-Lof's theory of types with dependent record types and subtyping. We first give a concise description of that theory and motivate its use for the formalization of algebraic constructions. Then we concentrate in the informal explanation and specification of a proof checker that we implemented on machine. The logical heart of this proof checker is a type checking algorithm for the forms of judgement of a particular formulation of the extended theory which incorporates a notion of parameter. The algorithm has been proven sound with respect to the latter calculus. We include a discussion on that proof in the present work. 1. Introduction The subject of this paper is the specification and implementation of a proof checker for an extension of Martin-Lof's theory of logical types [Mar87] with dependent record types and subtyping. The original formulation of Martin-Lof's theory of types...

The basic concepts of type theory are fundamental to computer science, logic and mathematics. Indeed, the language of type theory connects these regions of science. It plays a role in computing and information science akin to that of set theory in pure mathematics. There are many excellent accounts of the basic ideas of type theory, especially at the interface of computer science and logic — specifically, in the literature of programming languages, semantics, formal methods and automated reasoning. Most of these are very technical, dense with formulas, inference rules, and computation rules. Here we follow the example of the mathematician Paul Halmos, who in 1960 wrote a 104-page book called Naïve Set Theory intended to make the subject accessible to practicing mathematicians. His book served many generations well. This article follows the spirit of Halmos ’ book and introduces type theory without recourse to precise axioms and inference rules, and with a minimum of formalism. I start by paraphrasing the preface to Halmos ’ book. The sections of this article follow his chapters closely. Every computer scientist agrees that every computer scientist must know some type theory; the disagreement begins in trying to decide how much is some. This article contains my partial answer to that question. The purpose of the article is to tell the beginning student of advanced computer science the basic type theoretic facts of life, and to do so with a minimum of philosophical discourse and logical formalism. The point throughout is that of a prospective computer scientist eager to study programming languages, or database systems, or computational complexity theory, or distributed systems or information discovery. In type theory, “naïve ” and “formal ” are contrasting words. The present treatment might best be described as informal type theory from a naïve point of view. The concepts are very general and very abstract; therefore they may