From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from mail-vk1-xa3e.google.com (mail-vk1-xa3e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::a3e]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 8ebc536c for ; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 07:29:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk1-xa3e.google.com with SMTP id k127sf6360980vka.10 for ; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:41 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1572766180; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=pGny1n8UbA3/bikAcwaMRa+1myTw54gQ0AHK5GLexi5JDkiDMA2XuEQBt3pJD8aHl2 4U+QrNJV/EN/PEqmTgYhaoDKvL+Q66XJykmeTmvECPVf8rAcKVMshfJafQA3AgI9XDOr 5CNtRIhNrfTUTjaJWuld11e0stvUH7pZ1II/tYP1CIV4rgs0ILnT6uWYnqe1Uj2QrCj+ 4Xqr+edROC+GMWt3FZ8XhhVKPaN3rHTHGQrZE4uQu5ar2mhRtfak918MYQpofIIxXckj iByf2nf5xngr/6zztdeIzD3w4T1owRRzS954uBTulqlUlroGd+L2EGpBWLB50mdZT1bE gfrQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-unsubscribe:list-archive:list-help:list-post:list-id :mailing-list:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:sender:dkim-signature; bh=wkB+5dByIL5Iu5hn/weT8PTtEhuXp14ZJeCIPcnGQTQ=; b=srKXYo+U+shcj6pfeKaxJS1p/PTxTVmNuwfhybOzM3LWQIMKQYIPqwKuBzLqjzofQM QnO7BqTI9niqSNpUx/I/s/RP0InWqoTLeb4V+5yvboEk8pqSmkpFom7+ZV/MAe9FckVO UPxqo9DD40NI7nWdwG2ZTrFWhKLaRFcRPXCuid8Lcsj0m6s/UdFRqCgqQURQYfKOM7wS 3DMfV1lp8ncAWmgiu7jzhXKJ8XGV95BO3Ws4G1S023inlsSQZ9xfbZqcRpPBfZPhHx2S YFQPeE+XExqoJ+cDb1d4SBxVayUbb6jtl9urLb8pOwvKRuEsR8NIRHLfjbPyUfDSEsrt D3Hw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@sandiego-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=lQx4ElGN; spf=pass (google.com: domain of shulman@sandiego.edu designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2a as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shulman@sandiego.edu DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20161025; h=sender:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-unsubscribe; bh=wkB+5dByIL5Iu5hn/weT8PTtEhuXp14ZJeCIPcnGQTQ=; b=We6xjO5x9Iu7aviW3xK+kphzzmdkoO3KyiTRjtII7XMm1mDWP9brD2aSqeZr0BHXEF ytqbWvMLHnbhzGyNNzL5/CNQxSc4iLAfWSxqjUU32TnYyk3B5uzAx5dqHyKC9QcZir4L pXYJzgIw27Lt9Uvy8BVolQeQAkV+E8hJb9xQ2SjCKpvzcWAsnYCrNR4v593xwaZ+ap7z UhVdNdk5MZV//ex+W2CoDOMfs4lf7IZDxAB5DA3H5xXnx3/4211uFiiN4hZwcHWEt2rV 10HFJQ/fWo3PhzgqVfUAscFZ5KGN3ZHsPPGVdYTmFbEAexyvyp8GXcHnz47uzOmKhPAP vLZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=sender:x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-unsubscribe; bh=wkB+5dByIL5Iu5hn/weT8PTtEhuXp14ZJeCIPcnGQTQ=; b=kKD91/iKzX8egUT5sM4zZrTGskT5RxjZAQx3y2SkBcZe7nER5ZwmDsW0O+Zqvsy1M2 M64Ks3x3AFkNqqSszQavIO64s9LLg4F/N9sKMcborzmWKUDmRy82QZivZKstn7xaYxBJ TxxpOROZx5Tjy5L8vKKZbwqkqCAqN5UA7pth7jSW0rUB+iMNs5Y3UfxdvzBeJc8OcRQz hnWq7OtBqOoa5hXV1QJxjkD2mb++FQgux5stMHgFDU87O5IoztnhPSyJkLvuCmtfYT+H r/rEPyzxIIgZGZAUs84ol7SCrGHZya5BNtq+X29lAGpOcSGZlheJBQoZdFhnpL4JPiU7 L94g== Sender: homotopytypetheory@googlegroups.com X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX26ETUaZQt681kaq/oy4c5dxLZZwjFG+NpeGh3eYwUz13P7tPv bBp/+hmmna8p/GL/Buv/AA8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzI6ejotiIgdEtOcJpbpA0id7xuY1pBuz0jeWCXG81OFb9BTbCAQmrCRG7cD8rwgDuNHTsIEQ== X-Received: by 2002:ab0:1896:: with SMTP id t22mr9074572uag.82.1572766178945; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:38 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: homotopytypetheory@googlegroups.com Received: by 2002:ab0:421:: with SMTP id 30ls518632uav.9.gmail; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:ab0:b16:: with SMTP id b22mr1852117uak.133.1572766178432; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:38 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1572766178; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Gc5svGzIV/FZLwHR07lqr1njAyJzUZKXplYkr3/14Z3KWBGlAzzltEQ8CVHiQhT6xE 3+MRuuNWWK7pSHIegO+mInXh8ZedoqzLv1uYfUhZKaewMZo/E+1Yt4OoLLqcJfhIBEMq S/RJ/edcsyKUdU9hg1GLgy8fsbrbSYX0g3nu/nloyUDNxscmIQamHRjA5keBN5eKXf1b LMhejoVRS4TkjI8mZT2dK3LHCwPGJeEN32vUa82nN0RYyRGCrHRhYk1hQ1BFjPTPeEyX 8ZYnlPlnZjNpbQ7f+0wBDXj26tVOe1JXFsNRKippIqLZnrlUj5a0yQnZVu6AJMJfTE5I +gjQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=AbKZAlg7XUz9oJFTGT/1l11Ny66ffBhoMZkXzmpfqdA=; b=tWzqb9qeVYu5ej6cOcgAeWclmCIkvKKy3DZUE1WVioe4HAiHRA+WBIMWosrsmkSUSv JhXLf63XlKr6rWckMBl0w8b/DSFs+Bcug0M/kTxBAAMvOmjsBUBnAblkcdCtACvHuPQg 8j3XNkjYjtuoFI0cY4CmQqOuyrxmZ8pCpDg5WcVr2Y7gXh272t5jfi+p2emWvAZF2nEJ El5Iuu8LCctMKCSyjw7eK2C5te1WEQK5eIzdy5yNkgel/XTYhreKM6qIEzZAWI+fz28i n0GiODpkWoihqy2xS8PUqtOXm42kmL6sJqhz59DRJk7epJ777GIP8GgAWvOsNzKl6rg7 s5xA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@sandiego-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=lQx4ElGN; spf=pass (google.com: domain of shulman@sandiego.edu designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2a as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shulman@sandiego.edu Received: from mail-yw1-xc2a.google.com (mail-yw1-xc2a.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2a]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c126si893255vkb.3.2019.11.03.00.29.38 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:38 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of shulman@sandiego.edu designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2a as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2a; Received: by mail-yw1-xc2a.google.com with SMTP id z144so4143074ywd.1 for ; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a81:7506:: with SMTP id q6mr15420258ywc.187.1572766177782; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yb1-f171.google.com (mail-yb1-f171.google.com. [209.85.219.171]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l127sm7756461ywb.21.2019.11.03.00.29.35 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-f171.google.com with SMTP id c13so6481713ybq.3 for ; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a25:383:: with SMTP id 125mr5045935ybd.45.1572766175249; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 00:29:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Michael Shulman Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 00:29:23 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [HoTT] Why did Voevodsky find existing proof assistants to be 'impractical'? To: Nicolas Alexander Schmidt Cc: Homotopy Type Theory Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Original-Sender: shulman@sandiego.edu X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@sandiego-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=lQx4ElGN; spf=pass (google.com: domain of shulman@sandiego.edu designates 2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2a as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shulman@sandiego.edu Precedence: list Mailing-list: list HomotopyTypeTheory@googlegroups.com; contact HomotopyTypeTheory+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1041266174716 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , I know hardly anything about Mizar, so I can't comment on it. And I don't know for sure exactly what Voevodsky meant (and perhaps no one now does). But I am pretty sure that he was not thinking about synthetic homotopy theory at the time, because the possibility of synthetic homotopy theory wasn't really even imagined until later on (specifically, with the advent of higher inductive types). Instead, I expect he was thinking about category theory and higher category theory. The advantage of univalence in such contexts is that it formalizes the isomorphism-invariant behavior of category theory, incorporating it directly into the logical structure of the foundations so that you don't have to worry about whether your theorems are invariant under isomorphism, or prove explicitly that they are. Is this a substantial advantage over a ZFC-based system? Maybe, maybe not. (One might argue that it's not much of an advantage at all until univalence becomes "computational", as with cubical type theories, so that transporting along it can be done automatically by the proof assistant.) But there are other points to consider. Firstly, before even getting to univalence, there is a difference between membership-based set theories and type theories, which is more closely analogous to the assembly language / high level programming language divide. Type-theoretic foundations for mathematics, like strongly/statically typed programming languages, provide automatic "error-checking" for the user, catching various kinds of mistakes at "compile time", and allow more intelligent compiler optimization and inference due to the more informative nature of types. Dependent type theories are even better at this. And just as the advantages of static typing are not belied by the fact that a lot of people happily write code in dynamically typed languages, so the advantages of typed mathematics for formalization are not belied by the fact that some mathematicians are happy to do without them. It's worth noting that many of the recent high-profile formalizations of *recent* mathematical results, such as the four-color theorem, the odd-order theorem, and the Kepler conjecture, use type-theoretic proof assistants like Coq and HOL rather than set-theoretic ones like Mizar. >From this perspective, the advantage of HoTT/UF is that it "fixes" certain infelicities in previously existing type theories. Now we understand quotients better and have more tools for doing without setoids; now we know what the equality type of the universe is; now we are better at computing with function extensionality and propositional extensionality; etc. So HoTT/UF gives us the benefits of a type-theoretic foundation while ameliorating some of the traditional disadvantages of that approach. But in my own opinion (which is, I believe, rather different from Voevodsky's, at least in emphasis), all of this is kind of beside the point. It's like arguing about whether or not my laptop can play movies better than an 80s-era VCR; it overlooks the main point that my laptop does *so much more* than just play movies. The real advantage of type-theoretic, and homotopy-type-theoretic, foundations, is that they have a plethora of categorical and higher-categorical models. Proving a theorem once, in constructive homotopy type theory, automatically entails the "internal" truth of the corresponding theorem in all higher toposes. I think this is a much more important selling point than whether or not we get a more practical system for formalizing plain old set-based mathematics. Mike On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 7:41 AM Nicolas Alexander Schmidt wrote: > > In [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw6NcwME7yI&t=1680) 2014 talk > at IAS, Voevodsky talks about the history of his project of "univalent > mathematics" and his motivation for starting it. Namely, he mentions > that he found existing proof assistants at that time (in 2000) to be > impractical for the kinds of mathematics he was interested in. > > Unfortunately, he doesn't go into details of what mathematics he was > exactly interested in (I'm guessing something to do with homotopy > theory) or why exactly existing proof assistants weren't practical for > formalizing them. Judging by the things he mentions in his talk, it > seems that (roughly) his rejection of those proof assistants was based > on the view that predicate logic + ZFC is not expressive enough. In > other words, there is too much lossy encoding needed in order to > translate from the platonic world of mathematical ideas to this formal > language. > > Comparing the situation to computer programming languages, one might say > that predicate logic is like Assembly in that even though everything can > be encoded in that language, it is not expressive enough to directly > talk about higher level concepts, diminishing its practical value for > reasoning about mathematics. In particular, those systems are not > adequate for *interactive* development of *new* mathematics (as opposed > to formalization of existing theories). > > Perhaps I am just misinterpreting what Voevodsky said. In this case, I > hope someone can correct me. However even if this wasn't *his* view, to > me it seems to be a view held implicitly in the HoTT community. In any > case, it's a view that one might reasonably hold. > > However I wonder how reasonable that view actually is, i.e. whether e.g. > Mizar really is that much more impractical than HoTT-Coq or Agda, given > that people have been happily formalizing mathematics in it for 46 years > now. And, even though by browsing the contents of "Formalized > Mathematics" one can get the impression that the work consists mostly of > formalizing early 20th century mathematics, neither the UniMath nor the > HoTT library for example contain a proof of Fubini's theorem. > > So, to put this into one concrete question, how (if at all) is HoTT-Coq > more practical than Mizar for the purpose of formalizing mathematics, > outside the specific realm of synthetic homotopy theory? > > > -- > > Nicolas > > > -- > 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/e491d38b-b50a-6172-dca9-40d45fe1b6d2%40fromzerotoinfinity.xyz. -- 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/CAOvivQxVHxFhGzoSvMU9iw5_z9kgjD7w3c_VEYX5ANH-mOS_0g%40mail.gmail.com.