Paper detail

A general definition of dependent type theories

We define a general class of dependent type theories, encompassing Martin-Löf's intuitionistic type theories and variants and extensions. The primary aim is pragmatic: to unify and organise their study, allowing results and constructions to be given in reasonable generality, rather than just for specific theories. Compared to other approaches, our definition stays closer to the direct or naive reading of syntax, yielding the traditional presentations of specific theories as closely as possible. Specifically, we give three main definitions: raw type theories, a minimal setup for discussing dependently typed derivability; acceptable type theories, including extra conditions ensuring well-behavedness; and well-presented type theories, generalising how in traditional presentations, the well-behavedness of a type theory is established step by step as the type theory is built up. Following these, we show that various fundamental fitness-for-purpose metatheorems hold in this generality. Much of the present work has been formalised in the proof assistant Coq.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.