SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2601.12536

Examples and counterexamples of injective types

Abstract

It is known that, in univalent mathematics, type universes, the type of $n$-types in a universe, reflective subuniverses, and the underlying type of any algebra of the lifting monad are all (algebraically) injective. Here, we further show that the type of ordinals, the type of iterative (multi)sets, the underlying type of any pointed directed complete poset, as well as the types of (small) $\infty$-magmas, monoids, and groups are all injective, among other examples. Not all types of mathematical structures are injective in general. For example, the type of inhabited types is injective if and only if all propositions are projective. In contrast, the type of pointed types and the type of non-empty types are always injective. The injectivity of the type of two-element types implies Fourman and \v{S}\v{c}edrov's world's simplest axiom of choice. We also show that there are no nontrivial small injective types unless a weak propositional resizing principle holds. Other counterexamples include the type of booleans, the simple types, the type of Dedekind reals, and the type of conatural numbers, whose injectivity implies weak excluded middle. More generally, any type with an apartness relation and two points apart cannot be injective unless weak excluded middle holds. Finally, we show that injective types have no non-trivial decidable properties, unless weak excluded middle holds, which amounts to a Rice-like theorem for injective types.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tom de Jong, Martín Hötzel Escardó. 2026-01-18. Examples and counterexamples of injective types. https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.12536

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

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

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

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