Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Typechecking expressions / Translating to foundations #14

Open
Jazzpirate opened this issue Mar 2, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Typechecking expressions / Translating to foundations #14

Jazzpirate opened this issue Mar 2, 2021 · 0 comments

Comments

@Jazzpirate
Copy link
Collaborator

Jazzpirate commented Mar 2, 2021

Question: Can we typecheck FLaTeX expressions based on weak type annotations directly or do we need to translate them to a foundation?

Obviously, translation to e.g. MitM allows for type checking, but also requires decent alignment coverage.

Additionally/Alternatively: Maybe we can use realms (see #12) for this?
E.g. both a module for set theory and a module for type theory could provide pillars for an interface theory for implication, the former instantiates it with a set of pairs, the latter by a primitive constructor with inference rules. Then an expression containing only symbols for which pillars in type theory (or symbols which have definitions <- recurse) exist could be trivially translated to LF/MitM/LATIN2. "Type theory modules" in FLaTeX/FLOMDoc could be trivially aligned with LF/LATIN2/MitM concepts.

Similarly, a module for natural numbers could have a pillar for the Von Neumann construction, indicating how to translate it to ZF (or a weaker set theory - we only need infinity, extensionality and restricted comprehension, I think?), whereas the peano-axiomatic face-theory naturally yields a "type theoretic" pillar.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant