Advertisement

A simple model for quotient types

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 902)

Abstract

We give an interpretation of quotient types within in a dependent type theory with an impredicative universe of propositions (Calculus of Constructions). In the model, type dependency arises only at the propositional level, therefore universes and large eliminations cannot be interpreted. In exchange, the model is much simpler and more intuitive than the one proposed by the author in [10]. Moreover, we interpret a choice operator for quotient types that, under certain restrictions, allows one to recover a representative from an equivalence class. Since the model is constructed syntactically, the interpretation function from the syntax with quotient types to the model gives rise to a procedure which eliminates quotient types by replacing propositional equality by equality relations defined by induction on the type structure (“book equalities”).

Keywords

Type Theory Inductive Type Choice Operator Interpretation Function Terminal Object 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Thorsten Altenkirch. Constructions, normalization, and inductive types. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hendrik Barendregt. Functional programming and lambda calculus. Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Michael Beeson. Foundations of Constructive Mathematics. Springer, 1985.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Errett Bishop and Douglas Bridges. Constructive Analysis. Springer, 1985.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Cartmell. Generalized algebraic theories and contextual categories. PhD thesis, Univ. Oxford, 1978.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thierry Coquand and Gérard Huet. The calculus of constructions. Information and Computation, 76:95–120, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Robert Constable et al. Implementing Mathematics with the Nuprl Development System. Prentice-Hall, 1986.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herman Geuvers and Benjamin Werner. On the Church-Rosser property for expressive type systems. LICS '94.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. J. C. Gordon and T. F. Melham. Introduction to HOL. Cambridge, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Martin Hofmann. Elimination of extensionality for Martin-Löf type theory. LNCS 806.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bart Jacobs. Quotients in Simple Type Theory. submitted.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bart Jacobs. Comprehension categories and the semantics of type theory. Theoretical Computer Science, 107:169–207, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Lambek and P. Scott. Introduction to Higher-Order Categorical Logic. Cambridge, 1985.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    I. Moerdijk and S. Mac Lane. Sheaves in Geometry and Logic. Springer, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. Nordström, K. Petersson, and J. M. Smith. Programming in Martin-Löf's Type Theory, An Introduction. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1990.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wesley Phoa. An introduction to fibrations, topos theory, the effective topos, and modest sets. Technical Report ECS-LFCS-92-208, LFCS Edinburgh, 1992.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Andrew Pitts. Categorical logic. In Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier Science, 199? to appear.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jan Smith. The independence of Peano's fourth axiom from Martin-Löfs type theory without universes. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 53(3), 1988.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thomas Streicher. Semantics of Type Theory. Birkhäuser, 1991.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Edinburgh JCMB, KBEdinburghScotland

Personalised recommendations