Thorsten Altenkirch, A. Kaposi, Artjoms Šinkarovs, Tamás Végh
{"title":"组合逻辑和微积分在代数上是相等的","authors":"Thorsten Altenkirch, A. Kaposi, Artjoms Šinkarovs, Tamás Végh","doi":"10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2023.24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is well-known that extensional lambda calculus is equivalent to extensional combinatory logic. In this paper we describe a formalisation of this fact in Cubical Agda. The distinguishing features of our formalisation are the following: (i) Both languages are defined as generalised algebraic theories, the syntaxes are intrinsically typed and quotiented by conversion; we never mention preterms or break the quotients in our construction. (ii) Typing is a parameter, thus the un(i)typed and simply typed variants are special cases of the same proof. (iii) We define syntaxes as quotient inductive-inductive types (QIITs) in Cubical Agda; we prove the equivalence and (via univalence) the equality of these QIITs; we do not rely on any axioms, the conversion functions all compute and can be experimented with","PeriodicalId":284975,"journal":{"name":"International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combinatory Logic and Lambda Calculus Are Equal, Algebraically\",\"authors\":\"Thorsten Altenkirch, A. Kaposi, Artjoms Šinkarovs, Tamás Végh\",\"doi\":\"10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2023.24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is well-known that extensional lambda calculus is equivalent to extensional combinatory logic. In this paper we describe a formalisation of this fact in Cubical Agda. The distinguishing features of our formalisation are the following: (i) Both languages are defined as generalised algebraic theories, the syntaxes are intrinsically typed and quotiented by conversion; we never mention preterms or break the quotients in our construction. (ii) Typing is a parameter, thus the un(i)typed and simply typed variants are special cases of the same proof. (iii) We define syntaxes as quotient inductive-inductive types (QIITs) in Cubical Agda; we prove the equivalence and (via univalence) the equality of these QIITs; we do not rely on any axioms, the conversion functions all compute and can be experimented with\",\"PeriodicalId\":284975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2023.24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Conference on Formal Structures for Computation and Deduction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FSCD.2023.24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Combinatory Logic and Lambda Calculus Are Equal, Algebraically
It is well-known that extensional lambda calculus is equivalent to extensional combinatory logic. In this paper we describe a formalisation of this fact in Cubical Agda. The distinguishing features of our formalisation are the following: (i) Both languages are defined as generalised algebraic theories, the syntaxes are intrinsically typed and quotiented by conversion; we never mention preterms or break the quotients in our construction. (ii) Typing is a parameter, thus the un(i)typed and simply typed variants are special cases of the same proof. (iii) We define syntaxes as quotient inductive-inductive types (QIITs) in Cubical Agda; we prove the equivalence and (via univalence) the equality of these QIITs; we do not rely on any axioms, the conversion functions all compute and can be experimented with