Hostname: page-component-65f69f4695-htdms Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-30T04:25:22.393Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modal dependent type theory and dependent right adjoints

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 December 2019

Lars Birkedal ,
Ranald Clouston ,
Bassel Mannaa Open the ORCID record for Bassel Mannaa [Opens in a new window] ,
Rasmus Ejlers Møgelberg ,
Andrew M. Pitts Open the ORCID record for Andrew M. Pitts [Opens in a new window]  and
Bas Spitters
Lars Birkedal
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, Aarhus University, Denmark
Ranald Clouston
Affiliation:
Research School of Computer Science, Australian National University, Australia
Bassel Mannaa*
Affiliation:
eToroX Labs, Denmark
Rasmus Ejlers Møgelberg
Affiliation:
IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Andrew M. Pitts
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science and Technology, University of Cambridge, UK
Bas Spitters
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, Aarhus University, Denmark
*
*Corresponding author. Email: bassel.mannaa@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In recent years, we have seen several new models of dependent type theory extended with some form of modal necessity operator, including nominal type theory, guarded and clocked type theory and spatial and cohesive type theory. In this paper, we study modal dependent type theory: dependent type theory with an operator satisfying (a dependent version of) the K axiom of modal logic. We investigate both semantics and syntax. For the semantics, we introduce categories with families with a dependent right adjoint (CwDRA) and show that the examples above can be presented as such. Indeed, we show that any category with finite limits and an adjunction of endofunctors give rise to a CwDRA via the local universe construction. For the syntax, we introduce a dependently typed extension of Fitch-style modal λ-calculus, show that it can be interpreted in any CwDRA, and build a term model. We extend the syntax and semantics with universes.

Keywords

Dependent type theorymodal logiccategory theory

Information

Type
Paper
Information
Mathematical Structures in Computer Science , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , February 2020 , pp. 118 - 138
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Atkey, R. and McBride, C. (2013) Productive coprogramming with guarded recursion. In: 18th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Functional Programming (ICFP 2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Awodey, S. and Bauer, A. (2004). Propositions as types. Journal of Logic and Computation 14 (4), 447–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bahr, P., Grathwohl, H. B. and Møgelberg, R. E. (2017). The clocks are ticking: No more delays! In: 2017 32nd Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS), IEEE, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellin, G., De Paiva, V. and Ritter, E. (2001). Extended curry-howard correspondence for a basic constructive modal logic. In: Proceedings of Methods for Modalities.Google Scholar
Bierman, G. M. and de Paiva, V. C. V. (2000) On an intuitionistic modal logic. Studia Logica 65 (3), 383–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkedal, L., Bizjak, A., Clouston, R., Grathwohl, H. B., Spitters, B. and Vezzosi, A. (2018). Guarded cubical type theory. Journal of Automated Reasoning.Google Scholar
Birkedal, L. and Møgelberg, R. E. (2013). Intensional type theory with guarded recursive types qua fixed points on universes. In: Proceedings of the 2013 28th Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, IEEE Computer Society, 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkedal, L., Møgelberg, R. E., Schwinghammer, J. and Støvring, K. (2012). First steps in synthetic guarded domain theory: Step-indexing in the topos of trees. LMCS 8(4), 1–45.Google Scholar
Bizjak, A., Grathwohl, H. B., Clouston, R., Møgelberg, R. E. and Birkedal, L. (2016), Guarded dependent type theory with coinductive types. In: International Conference on Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures, Springer, 20–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bizjak, A. and Møgelberg, R. (2018). Denotational semantics for guarded dependent type theory, arXiv:1802.03744.Google Scholar
Blackburn, P., De Rijke, M. and Venema, Y. (2002). Modal Logic, Vol. 53. Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Borghuis, V. A. J. (1994). Coming to terms with modal logic: on the interpretation of modalities in typed lambda-calculus, PhD thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.Google Scholar
Castellan, S. (2014). Dependent type theory as the initial category with families, Technical report, Chalmers University of Technology. Internship Report. http://iso.mor.phis.me/archives/2011-2012/stage-2012-goteburg/report.pdfGoogle Scholar
Castellan, S., Clairambault, P. and Dybjer, P. (2017). Undecidability of equality in the free locally cartesian closed category (extended version). LMCS 13(4).Google Scholar
Clairambault, P. and Dybjer, P. (2014). The biequivalence of locally cartesian closed categories and Martin-Löf type theories. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 24(6).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clouston, R. (2018). Fitch-style modal lambda calculi. In: International Conference on Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures, Springer, 258–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clouston, R., Bizjak, A., Grathwohl, H. B. and Birkedal, L. (2015). Programming and reasoning with guarded recursion for coinductive types. In: International Conference on Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures, Springer, 407–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, C., Coquand, T., Huber, S. and Mörtberg, A. (2018). Cubical type theory: A constructive interpretation of the univalence axiom. In: Uustalu, T. (ed.) 21st International Conference on Types for Proofs and Programs (TYPES 2015), Vol. 69. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany, 5:1–5:34.Google Scholar
Coquand, T. (2012). Presheaf model of type theory. Unpublished note. www.cse.chalmers.se/~coquand/presheaf.pdfGoogle Scholar
Davies, R. and Pfenning, F. (2001). A modal analysis of staged computation. JACM 48 (3), 555–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Paiva, V. and Ritter, E. (2016). Fibrational modal type theory. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 323, 143–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dybjer, P. (1995). Internal type theory. In: International Workshop on Types for Proofs and Programs, Springer, 120–134.Google Scholar
Fitch, F. B. (1952). Symbolic Logic, An Introduction, Ronald Press Co.Google Scholar
Giraud, J. (1965). Cohomologie non abélienne, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 260, 2666–2668.Google Scholar
Hofmann, M. (1994). On the interpretation of type theory in locally cartesian closed categories. In: International Workshop on Computer Science Logic, Springer, 427–441.Google Scholar
Hofmann, M. (1997). Syntax and semantics of dependent types. In: Extensional Constructs in Intensional Type Theory, Springer, 13–54.Google Scholar
Johnstone, P. (2002). Sketches of An Elephant: A Topos Theory Compendium, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kapulkin, C. and Lumsdaine, P. L. (2018). The simplicial model of univalent foundations (after Voedodsky). Journal of the European Mathematical Society. To appear.Google Scholar
Kavvos, G. (2017). Dual-context calculi for modal logic. In 2017 32nd Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS), IEEE, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krishnaswami, N. R., Pradic, P. and Benton, N. (2015). Integrating linear and dependent types. In: ACM SIGPLAN Notices, Vol. 50, ACM, 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Licata, D. R., Orton, I., Pitts, A. M. and Spitters, B. (2018). Internal universes in models of homotopy type theory. In: 3rd International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction, FSCD 2018, July 9–12, 2018, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Licata, D. R., Shulman, M. and Riley, M. (2017). A fibrational framework for substructural and modal logics. In: LIPIcs-Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, Vol. 84, Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik.Google Scholar
Lumsdaine, P. L. and Warren, M. A. (2015). The local universes model: An overlooked coherence construction for dependent type theories. ACM Trans. Comput. Logic 16 (3), 23:1–23:31.Google Scholar
Luo, Z. (1989). ECC, an extended calculus of constructions. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS 1989), Pacific Grove, California, USA, June 5–8, 1989, 386–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mannaa, B. and Møgelberg, R. E. (2018). The clocks they are adjunctions denotational semantics for clocked type theory. In: 3rd International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction, FSCD 2018, July 9–12, 2018, Oxford, UK, 23:1–23:17.Google Scholar
Martini, S. and Masini, A. (1996). A computational interpretation of modal proofs. In: Proof theory of modal logic, Springer, 213–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Møgelberg, R. E. (2014). A type theory for productive coprogramming via guarded recursion. In Joint Meeting of the Twenty-Third EACSL Annual Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL) and the Twenty-Ninth Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS), CSL-LICS 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 14–18, 2014, 71:1–71:10.Google Scholar
Nakano, H. (2000). A modality for recursion. In: 15th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, Santa Barbara, California, USA, June 26–29, 2000, 255–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norell, U. (2007). Towards a practical programming language based on dependent type theory, PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology.Google Scholar
Nuyts, A., Vezzosi, A. and Devriese, D. (2017). Parametric quantifiers for dependent type theory. PACMPL 1 (ICFP), 32:1–32:29.Google Scholar
Pitts, A. M. (2013). Nominal Sets: Names and Symmetry in Computer Science, Vol. 57. Cambridge Tracts in Theoretical Computer Science, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pitts, A. M., Matthiesen, J. and Derikx, J. (2015). A dependent type theory with abstractable names. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 312, 19–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rijke, E., Shulman, M. and Spitters, B. (2018). Modalities in homotopy type theory. LMCS.Google Scholar
Shulman, M. (2018). Brouwer’s fixed-point theorem in real-cohesive homotopy type theory. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 28 (6), 856–941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streicher, T. (1993). Investigations into intensional type theory, Habilitation thesis, Ludwig Maximilian Universität.Google Scholar
Vákár, M. (2017). In search of effectful dependent types, PhD thesis, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
Voevodsky, V. (2014). A C-system defined by a universe category, arXiv:1409.7925.Google Scholar
Wellen, F. (2017). Formalizing Cartan Geometry in Modal Homotopy Type Theory, PhD thesis, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie.Google Scholar