Paper detail

An extensional Kleene realizability semantics for the Minimalist Foundation

We build a Kleene realizability semantics for the two-level Minimalist Foundation MF, ideated by Maietti and Sambin in 2005 and completed by Maietti in 2009. Thanks to this semantics we prove that both levels of MF are consistent with the (Extended) formal Church Thesis CT. MF consists of two levels, an intensional one, called mTT and an extensional one, called emTT, based on versions of Martin-Löf's type theory. Thanks to the link between the two levels, it is enough to build a semantics for the intensional level to get one also for the extensional level. Hence here we just build a realizability semantics for the intensional level mTT. Such a semantics is a modification of the realizability semantics in Beeson 1985 for extensional first order Martin-Löf's type theory with one universe. So it is formalised in Feferman's classical arithmetic theory of inductive definitions. It is called extensional Kleene realizability semantics since it validates extensional equality of type-theoretic functions extFun, as in Beeson 1985. The main modification we perform on Beeson's semantics is to interpret propositions, which are defined primitively in MF, in a proof-irrelevant way. As a consequence, we gain the validity of CT. Recalling that extFun+ CT+ AC are inconsistent over arithmetics with finite types, we conclude that our semantics does not validate the full Axiom of Choice AC. On the contrary, Beeson's semantics does validate AC, being this a theorem of Martin-Löf's theory, but it does not validate CT. The semantics we present here appears to be the best Kleene realizability semantics for the extensional level emTT of MF. Indeed Beeson's semantics is not an option for emTT since the full AC added to it entails the excluded middle.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.