Should Type Theory replace Set Theory as the Foundation of Mathematics
We discuss why Type Theory is preferable as foundation of Mathematics compared to set theory.
Discover
Workspaces
Network
Opportunities
Account
Researcher profile
Thorsten Altenkirch contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.
Trust snapshot
Actions
Identity and collaboration
Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.
Log in to claimDirect collaboration
Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.
Research graph
Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
We discuss why Type Theory is preferable as foundation of Mathematics compared to set theory.
Given a type A in homotopy type theory (HoTT), we can define the free infinity-group on A as the loop space of the suspension of A+1. Equivalently, this free higher group can be defined as a higher inductive type F(A) with constructors unit : F(A), cons : A -> F(A) -> F(A), and conditions saying that every cons(a) is an auto-equivalence on F(A). Assuming that A is a set (i.e. satisfies the principle of unique identity proofs), we are interested in the question whether F(A) is a set as well, which is very much related to an open problem in the HoTT book. We show an approximation to the question, namely that the fundamental groups of F(A) are trivial, i.e. that the 1-truncation of F(A) is a set.
We consider the problem of defining the integers in Homotopy Type Theory (HoTT). We can define the type of integers as signed natural numbers (i.e., using a coproduct), but its induction principle is very inconvenient to work with, since it leads to an explosion of cases. An alternative is to use set-quotients, but here we need to use set-truncation to avoid non-trivial higher equalities. This results in a recursion principle that only allows us to define function into sets (types satisfying UIP). In this paper we consider higher inductive types using either a small universe or bi-invertible maps. These types represent integers without explicit set-truncation that are equivalent to the usual coproduct representation. This is an interesting example since it shows how some coherence problems can be handled in HoTT. We discuss some open questions triggered by this work. The proofs have been formally verified using cubical Agda.