Discussion of Homotopy Type Theory and Univalent Foundations
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bas Spitters <b.a.w.s...@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Streicher <stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Cc: Michael Shulman <shu...@sandiego.edu>,
	Ambrus Kaposi <kaposi...@gmail.com>,
	 Altenkirch Thorsten <thorsten....@nottingham.ac.uk>,
	 "HomotopyT...@googlegroups.com" <homotopyt...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [HoTT] Where is the problem with initiality?
Date: Sun, 27 May 2018 07:14:40 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOoPQuSFOdWzbQcFobXWaDKC2CFiJxnd5atB4-em_NL6QxR+Uw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ac2f6239b66c27aa3598ea8d62d10a5f.squirrel@webmail.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de>

One question that recently came up in our work on modal type theory,
https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.05236
is: what is the right notion of morphism for CwF.
In the paper (def 9, thm 10) we propose a notion of weak CwF morphism,
where comprehension is only preserved upto iso.

The notion fits well with the local universe construction, but I
hadn't seen it before.
Peter Lumsdaine later told me that it sees CwFs as discrete
comprehension categories and where one uses pseudo-maps of comp cats.

I also noticed that the literature on categories of models of type
theory seems quite scattered (I guess this complaint is due to
Vladimir).
We know how to translate between different models of type theory, but
I don't know of a convenient place to find all the functorial
properties.

On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 6:47 PM,  <stre...@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de> wrote:
>> Thomas, are you saying that the hard part is proving that the syntax
>> of type theory is a CwF?  I always thought that was perfectly obvious
>> and the hard part was interpreting the syntax into some other CwF.
>
> That was a misunderstanding on my side. Correctness is also quite an issue.
>
> But I thought you just discussed the initiality problem!
> For this the laborious part is indeed showing that Lindenbaum-Tarski gives
> a model. I mean this is intuitively clear and without any surprises.
> If one is not overly formalist one is happy to believe this. I possibly
> was more formalist those days (:-
>
> But formulating the correctness in terms of a partial interpretation
> function on raw syntax is a nice unorthodox idea. To perform it is also a
> bit dull but getting the idea how to proceed took me some time.
>
> If I had thought in terms of initial models for essentially algebraic
> theories I wouldn't have proven my completeness theorem but rather relied
> on algebraic and variable syntax as obviously “isomorph“.
>
> Thomas
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Homotopy Type Theory" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to HomotopyTypeThe...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-27  5:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-22  5:46 Michael Shulman
2018-05-22 16:47 ` Ambrus Kaposi
2018-05-23 16:26 ` [HoTT] " Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-24  5:52   ` Michael Shulman
2018-05-24  8:11     ` Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-24  9:53       ` Ambrus Kaposi
2018-05-24 17:26         ` Michael Shulman
2018-05-26  9:21           ` Thomas Streicher
2018-05-26 11:47             ` Michael Shulman
2018-05-26 16:47               ` stre...
2018-05-27  5:14                 ` Bas Spitters [this message]
2018-05-28 22:39 ` Michael Shulman
2018-05-29  9:15   ` [HoTT] " Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-29 15:15     ` Michael Shulman
2018-05-30  9:33       ` Thomas Streicher
2018-05-30  9:37         ` Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-30 10:10           ` Thomas Streicher
2018-05-30 12:08             ` Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-30 13:40               ` Thomas Streicher
2018-05-30 14:38                 ` Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-30 10:53           ` Alexander Kurz
2018-05-30 12:05             ` Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-30 19:07               ` Michael Shulman
2018-05-31 10:06                 ` Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-31 11:05                   ` Michael Shulman
2018-05-31 19:02                     ` Alexander Kurz
2018-06-01  9:55                       ` Martin Escardo
2018-06-01 17:07                       ` Martín Hötzel Escardó
2018-06-01 17:43                         ` Eric Finster
2018-06-01 19:55                           ` Martín Hötzel Escardó
2018-06-01 20:59                             ` András Kovács
2018-06-01 21:06                               ` Martín Hötzel Escardó
2018-06-01 21:23                                 ` Michael Shulman
2018-06-01 21:53                                   ` Eric Finster
2018-06-01 22:09                                     ` Michael Shulman
2018-06-02 15:06                                       ` Eric Finster
2018-06-05 20:04                                         ` Michael Shulman
2018-06-02  5:13                                 ` Thomas Streicher
2018-06-01 21:52                               ` Jasper Hugunin
2018-06-01 22:00                                 ` Eric Finster
2018-06-01 21:27                           ` Matt Oliveri
2018-06-02  5:21                             ` Ambrus Kaposi
2018-06-02  6:01                               ` Thomas Streicher
2018-06-02 14:35                           ` Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-05-30 13:30             ` Jon Sterling
2018-06-05  7:52             ` Andrej Bauer
2018-06-05  8:37               ` David Roberts
2018-06-05  9:46                 ` Gabriel Scherer
2018-06-05 22:19                 ` Martín Hötzel Escardó
2018-06-05 22:54                   ` Martín Hötzel Escardó
2018-06-05 22:12               ` Richard Williamson
2018-06-06 15:05                 ` Thorsten Altenkirch
2018-06-06 19:25                   ` Richard Williamson
2018-05-29 14:00   ` Jon Sterling
2018-05-30 22:35     ` Michael Shulman
2018-05-31 10:48       ` Martín Hötzel Escardó
2018-05-31 11:09         ` Michael Shulman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAOoPQuSFOdWzbQcFobXWaDKC2CFiJxnd5atB4-em_NL6QxR+Uw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to="b.a.w.s..."@gmail.com \
    --cc="homotopyt..."@googlegroups.com \
    --cc="kaposi..."@gmail.com \
    --cc="shu..."@sandiego.edu \
    --cc="stre..."@mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de \
    --cc="thorsten...."@nottingham.ac.uk \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).