## EM + Ext − + ACint is equivalent to ACext (2004)

Citations: | 1 - 0 self |

### BibTeX

@MISC{Carlström04em+,

author = {Jesper Carlström},

title = {EM + Ext − + ACint is equivalent to ACext},

year = {2004}

}

### OpenURL

### Abstract

It is well known that the extensional axiom of choice (ACext) implies the law of excluded middle (EM). We here prove that the converse holds as well if we have the intensional (‘type-theoretical’) axiom of choice ACint, which is provable in Martin-Löf’s type theory, and a weak extensionality principle (Ext−), which is provable in Martin-Löf’s extensional type theory. In particular, EM ⇔ ACext holds in extensional type theory. The following is the principle ACint of intensional choice: if A, B are sets and R a relation such that (∀x: A)(∃y: B)R(x, y) is true, then there is a function f: A → B such that (∀x: A)R(x, f(x)) is true. It is provable in Martin-Löf’s type theory [8, p. 50]. It follows from ACint that surjective functions have right inverses: If =B is an equivalence relation on B and f: A → B, we say that f is surjective if (∀y: B)(∃x: A)(y =B f(x)) is true. With R(y, x) def = (y =B f(x)), surjectivity

### Citations

408 | Constructive Analysis - Bishop, Bridges - 1985 |

341 | Intuitionistic type theory - Martin-Löf - 1984 |

97 | Martin-Löf Type Theory
- Nordstrom, Petersson, et al.
- 2000
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...r. It suffices to consider ACext, since ACint can be seen as the special case when the equalities are Id(A) and Id(B), defined inductively as the smallest reflexive relations on A and B, respectively =-=[9]-=-. Given an extensional relation R between sets A, B with (∀x : A)(∃y : B)R(x, y) true. Form the set {(x, y) ∈ A×B | R(x, y)}, 2 with equality inherited from A × B. (a, b) =× (a ′ , b ′ ) ⇐⇒ a =A a ′ ∧... |

25 |
Axiom of choice and complementation
- Diaconescu
- 1975
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...m Bool to prop, such that ¬T (0) and T (1) are true. Such a function can be defined in Martin-Löf’s 1 This was left as an exercise by Bishop [2, p. 58, pb. 2]. It was proved for toposes by Diaconescu =-=[3]-=-, for constructive set theory by Goodman–Myhill [4], and for some intensional type theories e.g. by Lacas–Werner [5] and Maietti [6, 7]. We give a somewhat different proof in this paper. 2 In type the... |

17 | The independence of Peano’s fourth axiom from Martin-Lof’s type theory without universes
- Smith
- 1988
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...ol, so we could have weakened it further. 3 In fact, we need a universe reflecting ⊥ and ⊤ for the proof of ¬T (0), as type theory without universes has a model in which Id-equalities are always true =-=[10]-=-. 4 Using Bool as a small universe was proposed by P. Martin-Löf [10]. To have a primitive mechanism for defining sets by cases on Bool is an old idea by P. Aczel. It can be found in print in e.g. [1]... |

12 | Collection principles in dependent type theory
- Aczel, Gambino
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...10]. 4 Using Bool as a small universe was proposed by P. Martin-Löf [10]. To have a primitive mechanism for defining sets by cases on Bool is an old idea by P. Aczel. It can be found in print in e.g. =-=[1]-=-. 5 Thanks to Per Martin-Löf for reminding me of this argument. 6 In particular, as the referee pointed out, ˆ· is idempotent. 3sTheorem. EM + Ext− + ACint is equivalent to ACext Proof. (ACext ⇒ EM + ... |

11 |
Choice implies excluded middle
- Goodman, Myhill
- 1978
(Show Context)
Citation Context .... Such a function can be defined in Martin-Löf’s 1 This was left as an exercise by Bishop [2, p. 58, pb. 2]. It was proved for toposes by Diaconescu [3], for constructive set theory by Goodman–Myhill =-=[4]-=-, and for some intensional type theories e.g. by Lacas–Werner [5] and Maietti [6, 7]. We give a somewhat different proof in this paper. 2 In type theory, the set should be (Σz : A × B)R(πℓ(z), πr(z)),... |

10 |
About effective quotients in Constructive Type Theory
- Maietti
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...y Bishop [2, p. 58, pb. 2]. It was proved for toposes by Diaconescu [3], for constructive set theory by Goodman–Myhill [4], and for some intensional type theories e.g. by Lacas–Werner [5] and Maietti =-=[6, 7]-=-. We give a somewhat different proof in this paper. 2 In type theory, the set should be (Σz : A × B)R(πℓ(z), πr(z)), where πℓ and πr are the left and right projections, respectively. 2stype theory by ... |

7 | Can you add power-sets to MartinLöf’s intuitionistic set theory
- Maietti, Valentini
- 1999
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...y Bishop [2, p. 58, pb. 2]. It was proved for toposes by Diaconescu [3], for constructive set theory by Goodman–Myhill [4], and for some intensional type theories e.g. by Lacas–Werner [5] and Maietti =-=[6, 7]-=-. We give a somewhat different proof in this paper. 2 In type theory, the set should be (Σz : A × B)R(πℓ(z), πr(z)), where πℓ and πr are the left and right projections, respectively. 2stype theory by ... |

2 |
Which choices imply the excluded middle
- Lacas, Werner
- 1999
(Show Context)
Citation Context ...as an exercise by Bishop [2, p. 58, pb. 2]. It was proved for toposes by Diaconescu [3], for constructive set theory by Goodman–Myhill [4], and for some intensional type theories e.g. by Lacas–Werner =-=[5]-=- and Maietti [6, 7]. We give a somewhat different proof in this paper. 2 In type theory, the set should be (Σz : A × B)R(πℓ(z), πr(z)), where πℓ and πr are the left and right projections, respectively... |