The Compatibility of the Minimalist Foundation with Homotopy Type Theory

Michele Contente; Maria Emilia Maietti

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2207.03802

The Compatibility of the Minimalist Foundation with Homotopy Type Theory

Michele Contente·Maria Emilia Maietti

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The Minimalist Foundation, for short MF, is a two-level foundation for constructive mathematics ideated by Maietti and Sambin in 2005 and then fully formalized by Maietti in 2009. MF serves as a common core among the most relevant foundations for mathematics in the literature by choosing for each of them the appropriate level of MF to be translated in a compatible way, namely by preserving the meaning of logical and set-theoretical constructors. The two-level structure consists of an intensional level, an extensional one, and an interpretation of the latter in the former in order to extract intensional computational contents from mathematical proofs involving extensional constructions used in everyday mathematical practice. In 2013 a completely new foundation for constructive mathematics appeared in the literature, called Homotopy Type Theory, for short HoTT, which is an example of Voevodsky's Univalent Foundations with a computational nature. So far no level of MF has been proved to be compatible with any of the Univalent Foundations in the literature. Here we show that both levels of MF are compatible with HoTT. This result is made possible thanks to the peculiarities of HoTT which combines intensional features of type theory with extensional ones by assuming Voevodsky's Univalence Axiom and higher inductive quotient types. As a relevant consequence, MF inherits entirely new computable models.

Explore related subjects

math.LO

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Michele Contente, Maria Emilia Maietti. 2022-07-08. The Compatibility of the Minimalist Foundation with Homotopy Type Theory. https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.03802

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO↗

arXiv2026

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO↗

arXiv2026

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO↗