Questions tagged [foundations]
Use this tag for questions about mathematical or logical foundations of proof assistants. Questions should be related in some way to proof assistants. Possible topics might include mathematical modelling, consistency and computability, universes, etc.
22
questions
8
votes
1
answer
184
views
Feferman's universes for proof assistants?
I asked this question on MathOverflow a few months ago, but received no answers.
There are some mathematicians who are comfortable with ZFC but uneasy with large cardinals. For them, it may be ...
- 495
0
votes
2
answers
155
views
Does a proof assistant have to be interactive?
I have thought of systems like Coq & Isabelle as programming languages specialised for writing proofs.
A programming language might or might not have a REPL making it interactive but the REPL is ...
- 151
3
votes
0
answers
122
views
Uniform notions of pattern matching at dependent types with impredicative proof strength
I am looking for axioms/inference rules that satisfy the following 3 conditions:
can be added to predicative intensional Martin-Löf type theory, so $\Pi$, $\Sigma$, equality type, with W-types, ...
- 517
5
votes
0
answers
208
views
Proof-theoretic strength of HOL compared to predicative dependent types
By HOL I mean something like inference rules of HOL Light with the 3 axioms of infinity, extensionality and choice ($\varepsilon$ operator).
By predicative dependent types, I am thinking of MLTT + W-...
- 517
1
vote
2
answers
162
views
Does quantification over functions (STLC) increase strength beyond first order logic?
Does quantification over functions (STLC) increase strength beyond first order logic?
I want to add support for binders in my little constructive first order logic formalism I'm working on but I'm ...
- 2,768
9
votes
2
answers
761
views
Construction of inductive types "the hard way"
Most theorem provers simply axiomize inductive types (or equivalently W types) in the abstract which is fine.
But I'm curious about explicit constructions of inductive types within the theory.
I ...
- 2,768
16
votes
3
answers
989
views
Do you need a Hilbert style Epsilon operator for definitions in set theory?
I've started to play with mechanizing some set theory stuff. I'm not sure if I want a constructive flavor or not yet.
Anyhow you can do stuff like axiomize the empty set
$$ \top \vdash \exists P. \...
- 2,768
13
votes
0
answers
331
views
Unintentionally proven false theorem with type-in-type outside logic and foundations?
We are all familiar with Russell's paradox, and it is known that Per Martin-Löf proved that type-in-type is normalizing and consistent (which is false), by accidentally using an assumption in his meta-...
- 485
11
votes
1
answer
592
views
What is the role of impredicativity in program extraction?
Is impredicativity useful for program extraction in Coq? For example is there some kind of realizability argument that depends on impredicativity?
Of course it doesn't seem to be necessary for program ...
- 2,171
21
votes
1
answer
1k
views
Proof-theoretic comparison table?
I read this CSTheory SE post, which suggests that it is often not clear what variant of MLTT or CIC is being referred to. But I would like to know the proof-theoretic strengths of the various ...
- 485
9
votes
1
answer
170
views
Generating valid statements without a proof goal
Given some initial list of assumptions, I'd like to generate some true statements which follow from them without seeking a specific proof goal. I only need a small number of consequences from those ...
- 519
18
votes
2
answers
495
views
What is the trade-off to accepting impredicative propositions?
Impredicativity greatly increases the logical strength of a formal system, and impredicative propositions are also a consequence of various axioms including LEM and Zorn's Lemma. An impredicative sort ...
- 1,015
4
votes
2
answers
183
views
Can a proof engine be built based on graphs?
One of the more common ways to do proofs is using a deductive system.
Can proofs instead be done using graphs?
I am seeking papers that outline from the ground up how such a system works. If example ...
- 2,826
15
votes
2
answers
325
views
Are Logics Based on Dependent Types Stronger Than Ones Without?
There have been several times during I came across statements like Isabelle/HOL's logic is not rich enough to formalize X on various places online and in during personal discussions. Or similar ...
- 1,098
14
votes
2
answers
272
views
Tools for checking the consistency of a type theory
My question is twofold:
How do you define consistency (analogously to the concept in first-order logic) in the context of a type theory?
Are there any tools that can check consistency?
I have seen a ...
- 2,711
8
votes
2
answers
204
views
What is the computational complexity of theorem proving?
I heard theorem proving is a hard problem, hard enough that it contributed to an early AI winter. But how hard?
While reading about proof assistants, I have come to realize that there are many types ...
- 1,772
12
votes
1
answer
176
views
Integration of proof assistants and Wikipedia-like websites?
I noticed that some of the Wikipedia.org entries that describe proofs of theorems also contain links to proofs of these theorems formalized in the Mizar proof assistant (example). There was one ...
8
votes
2
answers
237
views
Can the development of proof assistants make mathematicians switch their framework?
The Stack Exchange bot reminded me that I had committed myself to asking some questions, but please allow a possibly naive question, possibly of a philosophical nature rather than mathematical/...
- 233
13
votes
1
answer
142
views
Attempts to accommodate theories of different consistency strength in single assistant
TL;DR: How / where to formalize results concerning the logical strength of systems? Are proof assistants having a weak base theory but also enough infrastructure to make it feasible?
I'll start by ...
9
votes
3
answers
190
views
Generic proof assistants/modularity of the proof assistants?
One notable feature of Isabelle is that it allows for the definition and in-built integrated support of alternative object logics via the interface of Isabelle/Pure in combination with Isabelle/Isar. ...
37
votes
3
answers
1k
views
What is predicativity?
Type systems, and the proof assistants based on them, are frequently divided into predicative and impredicative.
What exactly does this mean? I've heard the slogan "impredicativity means you can'...
- 2,711
32
votes
3
answers
1k
views
What are the bases for different Proof Assistants?
From the Wikipedia article on Proof Assistant it shows some Proof Assistants are based on Higher Order Logic, (HOL Light) and some are based on Dependent Types, (Coq).
Are there any other means upon ...
- 2,826