nLab
canonical form

Context

Type theory

natural deduction metalanguage, practical foundations

  1. type formation rule
  2. term introduction rule
  3. term elimination rule
  4. computation rule

type theory (dependent, intensional, observational type theory, homotopy type theory)

syntax object language

computational trinitarianism = propositions as types +programs as proofs +relation type theory/category theory

logiccategory theorytype theory
trueterminal object/(-2)-truncated objecth-level 0-type/unit type
falseinitial objectempty type
proposition(-1)-truncated objecth-proposition, mere proposition
proofgeneralized elementprogram
cut rulecomposition of classifying morphisms / pullback of display mapssubstitution
cut elimination? for implicationcounit for hom-tensor adjunctionbeta reduction
introduction rule for implicationunit for hom-tensor adjunctioneta conversion
conjunctionproductproduct type
disjunctioncoproduct ((-1)-truncation of)sum type (bracket type of)
implicationinternal homfunction type
negationinternal hom into initial objectfunction type into empty type
universal quantificationdependent productdependent product type
existential quantificationdependent sum ((-1)-truncation of)dependent sum type (bracket type of)
equivalencepath space objectidentity type
equivalence classquotientquotient type
inductioncolimitinductive type, W-type, M-type
higher inductionhigher colimithigher inductive type
completely presented setdiscrete object/0-truncated objecth-level 2-type/preset/h-set
setinternal 0-groupoidBishop set/setoid
universeobject classifiertype of types
modalityclosure operator, (idemponent) monadmodal type theory, monad (in computer science)
linear logic(symmetric, closed) monoidal categorylinear type theory/quantum computation
proof netstring diagramquantum circuit
(absence of) contraction rule(absence of) diagonalno-cloning theorem
synthetic mathematicsdomain specific embedded programming language

homotopy levels

semantics

Constructivism, Realizability, Computability

Contents

Idea

Systems of formal logic, such as type theory, try to transform expressions into a canonical form which then serves as the end result of the given computation or deduction. A formal system is said to enjoy canonicity if every expression reduced to canonical form.

More precisely, in type theory, a term belonging to some type is said to be of canonical form if it is explicitly built up using the constructors of that type. A canonical form is in particular a normal form? (one not admitting any reductions), but the converse need not hold.

For example, the terms of type \mathbb{N} (a natural numbers type) of canonical form are the numerals

S(S(S((0)))). S(S(S(\cdots (0)\cdots ))).

A type theory is said to enjoy canonicity if every term computes to a canonical form. This is held to be an important meta-theoretic property of type theory, especially considered as a programming language or as a computational foundation for mathematics.

Canonicity vs axioms

Adding axioms? to type theory, such as the principle of excluded middle or the usual version of the univalence axiom, can destroy canonicity. The axioms result in “stuck terms” which are not of canonical form, yet neither can they be “computed” any further.

For instance, if we assume the law of excluded middle, then we can build a term case(LEM(Goldbach),0,1):case(LEM(Goldbach),0,1) \colon \mathbb{N} which is 00 or 11 according as the Goldbach conjecture is true or false. Clearly this term doesn’t “compute”, but neither is it of canonical form (a numeral).

Similarly, using the univalence axiom, we can obtain a term p:(=)p : (\mathbb{N}=\mathbb{N}) corresponding to the automorphism of \mathbb{N} which adds one to every even number and subtracts one from every odd number. Then the term transport(p,0)transport(p,0) also has type \mathbb{N}, but doesn’t “compute” because the computer gets “stuck” on the univalence term.

It is conjectured that univalence, unlike excluded middle, can be given a “computational” interpretation while preserving canonicity. Some partial progress towards this can be found here.

References

Discussion of canonicity in homotopy type theory with univalence is discussed in

Revised on March 1, 2014 04:54:12 by Urs Schreiber (89.204.135.214)