Discussion of Homotopy Type Theory and Univalent Foundations
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Shulman <shulman@sandiego.edu>
To: Valery Isaev <valery.isaev@gmail.com>
Cc: Jon Sterling <jon@jonmsterling.com>,
Subject: Re: [HoTT] New theorem prover Arend is released
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 08:39:46 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOvivQxMwmkA0o2XBecGQaiaVFO0rjwKvZfbMqS+e363GJwRbA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA520ftYLYwiZs0B3fmuYb==8mWiOpVD0yVbV8otfTEfgWV8UQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 6:47 AM Valery Isaev <valery.isaev@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't remember well, but I think the idea is that you need to prove that there is a trivial cofibration Eq(A,B) -> F(U^I,A,B), where the first object is the object of equivalences between A and B and the second object is the fiber of U^I over A and B. The fact that this map is a weak equivalence is just the univalence axiom. The problem is to show that it is a cofibration and whether this is true or not depends on the definition of Eq(A,B). I don't actually remember whether I finished this proof.

Yes, in a straightforward approach that's what you would need to
prove, or more precisely that the map Eq -> U^I is a trivial
cofibration in the slice over UxU (since the lifting has to be done in
the universal case rather than just over each global element).
Possibly you could get away with less, since you're only asking to
recover the action of the given equivalence as a function (rather than
the entire equivalence data).  Perhaps a clever choice of fibration
structure in the equivalence extension property would suffice.

> Since F(A,p) is the usual (inductive) data type, you can do everything you can do with other data types. In particular, since it has only one constructor with one parameter A, it is easy to proof that it is equivalent to A.

Okay, it sounds like you're saying that the datatype defined with
\use\level is F(A,p) and the analogous one defined without \use\level
is A, while both have their usual rules but are not identical.  In
this case you have somewhat *more* than an equivalence between F(A,p)
and A, at least if all datatypes have their usual definitional
computation rules, since an arbitrary type "F(A,p)" that is only
*equivalent* to a datatype will only inherit a typal computation rule.
It seems plausible though that one could construct universes of
n-types that are strictly closed under a given datatype construction
that preserves n-types (at least, assuming one can do the same for
arbitrary universes).

However, the documentation also suggests that \use\level can be
applied to plain definitions (\func).  How is F(A,p) distinguished
from A in this case?

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 HomotopyTypeTheory+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/HomotopyTypeTheory/CAOvivQxMwmkA0o2XBecGQaiaVFO0rjwKvZfbMqS%2Be363GJwRbA%40mail.gmail.com.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-11 12:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-06 22:16 Валерий Исаев
2019-08-07 15:01 ` Andrej Bauer
2019-08-07 22:13 ` Nicolai Kraus
2019-08-08  9:55   ` Valery Isaev
2019-08-10  9:47     ` Michael Shulman
2019-08-10 12:30       ` Valery Isaev
2019-08-10 12:37       ` Valery Isaev
2019-08-08 12:20 ` Jon Sterling
2019-08-08 12:29   ` Bas Spitters
2019-08-08 14:44     ` Valery Isaev
2019-08-08 15:11       ` Jon Sterling
2019-08-08 15:22         ` Valery Isaev
2019-08-10  9:42           ` Michael Shulman
2019-08-10 12:24             ` Valery Isaev
2019-08-10 23:37               ` Michael Shulman
2019-08-11 10:46                 ` Valery Isaev
2019-08-11 12:39                   ` Michael Shulman [this message]
2019-08-11 16:55                     ` Michael Shulman
2019-08-12 14:44                       ` Daniel R. Grayson
2019-08-12 17:32                         ` 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:

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAOvivQxMwmkA0o2XBecGQaiaVFO0rjwKvZfbMqS+e363GJwRbA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=shulman@sandiego.edu \
    --cc=homotopytypetheory@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=jon@jonmsterling.com \
    --cc=valery.isaev@gmail.com \


* 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).