Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userCanonicity and homotopy canonicity for cubical type theory
88
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Christian Sattler
Publication date
2019
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Cubical type theory provides a constructive justification of homotopy type theory. A crucial ingredient of cubical type theory is a path lifting operation which is explained computationally by induction on the type involving several non-canonical choices. We present in this article two canonicity results, both proved by a sconing argument: a homotopy canonicity result, every natural number is path equal to a numeral, even if we take away the equations defining the lifting operation on the type structure, and a canonicity result, which uses these equations in a crucial way. Both proofs are done internally in a presheaf model.
rate research
Read More
We show canonicity and normalization for dependent type theory with a cumulative sequence of universes and a type of Boolean. The argument follows the usual notion of reducibility, going back to Godels Dialectica interpretation and the work of Tait. A key feature of our approach is the use of a proof relevant notion of reducibility.
Univalent homotopy type theory (HoTT) may be seen as a language for the category of $infty$-groupoids. It is being developed as a new foundation for mathematics and as an internal language for (elementary) higher toposes. We develop the theory of factorization systems, reflective subuniverses, and modalities in homotopy type theory, including their construction using a localization higher inductive type. This produces in particular the ($n$-connected, $n$-truncated) factorization system as well as internal presentations of subtoposes, through lex modalities. We also develop the semantics of these constructions.
Fix 2<n<omega. Let L_n denote first order logic restricted to the first n variables. CA_n denotes the class of cylindric algebras of dimension n and for m>n, Nr_nCA_m(subseteq CA_n) denotes the class of n-neat reducts of CA_ms. The existence of certain finite relation algebras and finite CA_ns lacking relativized complete representations is shown to imply that the omitting types theorem (OTT) fails for L_n with respect to clique guarded semantics (which is an equivalent formalism of its packed fragments), and for the multi-dimensional modal logic S5^n. Several such relation and cylindric algebras are explicitly exhibited using rainbow constructions and Monk-like algebras. Certain CA_n constructed to show non-atom canonicity of the variety SNr_nCA_{n+3} are used to show that Vaughts theorem (VT) for L_{omega, omega}, looked upon as a special case of OTT for L_{omega, omega}, fails almost everywhere (a notion to be defined below) when restricted to L_n. That VT fails everywhere for L_n, which is stronger than failing almost everywhere as the name suggests, is reduced to the existence, for each n<m<omega, of a finite relation algebra R_m having a so-called m-1 strong blur, but R_m has no m-dimensional relational basis. VT for other modal fragments and expansions of L_n, like its guarded fragments, n-products of uni-modal logics like K^n, and first order definable expansions, is approached. It is shown that any multi-modal canonical logic L, such that $K^nsubseteq Lsubseteq S5^n$, L cannot be axiomatized by canonical equations. In particular, L is not Sahlqvist. Elementary generation and di-completeness for L_n and its clique guarded fragments are proved. Positive omitting types theorems are proved for L_n with respect to standard semantics.
We implement in the formal language of homotopy type theory a new set of axioms called cohesion. Then we indicate how the resulting cohesive homotopy type theory naturally serves as a formal foundation for central concepts in quantum gauge field theory. This is a brief survey of work by the authors developed in detail elsewhere.
This is an introduction to Homotopy Type Theory and Univalent Foundations for philosophers, written as a chapter for the book Categories for the Working Philosopher (ed. Elaine Landry)
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
