KASUMI: Difference between revisions
en>ZéroBot m r2.7.1) (Robot: Adding uk:KASUMI |
en>Bender235 m →Cryptanalysis: more specific. In ten years, no one will know what a modest computer in 2010 looked like. |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Expert-subject|Computer science|date=November 2008}} | |||
The '''Calculus of Constructions''' ('''CoC''') is a significant [[type theory]] created by [[Thierry Coquand]]. It can serve as both a typed programming language and as [[Constructivism (mathematics)|constructive]] [[Foundations of mathematics|foundation for mathematics]]. For this second reason, the CoC and its derivatives have been the basis for [[Coq]] and other [[proof assistant]]s. | |||
Its derivatives include: | |||
* Calculus of Inductive Constructions ("CiC") - added [[Intuitionistic_type_theory#Inductive_types|inductive types]] | |||
* Calculus of (Co)Inductive Constructions (also "CiC"?) - added [[Coinduction]] | |||
* predicative Calculus of Inductive Constructions ("pCiC") - removed some [[impredicativity]] | |||
==General traits== | |||
The CoC is a higher-order [[typed lambda calculus]], initially developed by [[Thierry Coquand]]. It is well known for being at the top of [[Henk Barendregt|Barendregt]]'s [[lambda cube]]. It is possible within CoC to define functions from, say, integers to types, types to types as well as functions from integers to integers. | |||
The CoC is [[normalization property (lambda-calculus)|strongly normalizing]], although, by [[Gödel's incompleteness theorem]], it is impossible to prove this property within the CoC since it implies consistency. | |||
== Usage == | |||
The CoC has developed alongside the [[Coq]] [[proof assistant]]. As features were added (or possible liabilities removed) to the theory, they became available in Coq. | |||
Derivatives of the CoC are used in other proof assistants, such as [[Matita]]. | |||
==The basics of the calculus of constructions== | |||
The Calculus of Constructions can be considered an extension of the [[Curry–Howard isomorphism]]. The Curry–Howard isomorphism associates a term in the [[Typed lambda calculus|simply typed lambda calculus]] with each natural-deduction proof in [[intuitionistic logic|intuitionistic propositional logic]]. The Calculus of Constructions extends this isomorphism to proofs in the full intuitionistic predicate calculus, which includes proofs of quantified statements (which we will also call "propositions"). | |||
===Terms=== | |||
A ''term'' in the calculus of constructions is constructed using the following rules: | |||
* '''T''' is a term (also called ''Type'') | |||
* '''P''' is a term (also called ''Prop'', the type of all propositions) | |||
* Variables (''x'', ''y'', ...) are terms | |||
* If <math>A</math> and <math>B</math> are terms, then so are | |||
** <math>( A~B )</math> | |||
** <math>(\mathbf{\lambda}x:A . B)</math> | |||
** <math>(\forall x:A . B)</math> | |||
The calculus of constructions has five kinds of objects: | |||
# ''proofs'', which are terms whose types are ''propositions'' | |||
# ''propositions'', which are also known as ''small types'' | |||
# ''predicates'', which are functions that return propositions | |||
# ''large types'', which are the types of predicates. ('''P''' is an example of a large type) | |||
# '''T''' itself, which is the type of large types. | |||
===Judgments=== | |||
The calculus of constructions allows proving '''typing judgments''': | |||
:<math> x_1:A_1, x_2:A_2, \ldots \vdash t:B</math> | |||
Which can be read as the implication | |||
: If variables <math>x_1, x_2, \ldots</math> have types <math>A_1, A_2, \ldots</math>, then term <math>t</math> has type <math>B</math>. | |||
The valid judgments for the calculus of constructions are derivable from a set of inference rules. In the following, we use <math>\Gamma</math> to mean a sequence of type assignments | |||
<math> x_1:A_1, x_2:A_2, \ldots </math>, and we use '''K''' to mean either '''P''' or '''T'''. We shall write <math> A : B :C</math> to mean "<math>A</math> has type | |||
<math>B</math>, and <math>B</math> has type <math>C</math>". We shall write <math>B(x:=N)</math> to mean the result of substituting the term | |||
<math>N</math> for the variable <math>x</math> in | |||
the term <math>B</math>. | |||
An inference rule is written in the form | |||
:<math> {\Gamma \vdash A:B} \over {\Gamma' \vdash C:D} </math> | |||
which means | |||
: If <math> \Gamma \vdash A:B </math> is a valid judgment, then so is <math> \Gamma' \vdash C:D </math> | |||
===Inference rules for the calculus of constructions=== | |||
'''1'''. <math> {{} \over {} \Gamma \vdash P : T} </math> | |||
'''2'''. <math> {\Gamma \vdash A : K \over | |||
{\Gamma, x:A \vdash x : A}} </math> | |||
'''3'''. <math> {\Gamma, x:A \vdash t : B : K \over | |||
{\Gamma \vdash (\lambda x:A . t) : (\forall x:A . B) : K}} </math> | |||
'''4'''. <math> {\Gamma \vdash M : (\forall x:A . B)\qquad\qquad\Gamma | |||
\vdash N : A \over | |||
{\Gamma \vdash M N : B(x := N)}} </math> | |||
'''5'''. <math> {\Gamma \vdash M : A \qquad \qquad A =_\beta B \qquad \qquad B : K | |||
\over {\Gamma \vdash M : B}} </math> | |||
===Defining logical operators=== | |||
The calculus of constructions has very few basic operators: the only logical operator for forming propositions is <math>\forall</math>. However, this one operator is sufficient to define all the other logical operators: | |||
: <math> | |||
\begin{matrix} | |||
A \Rightarrow B & \equiv & \forall x:A . B & (x \notin B) \\ | |||
A \wedge B & \equiv & \forall C:P . (A \Rightarrow B \Rightarrow C) \Rightarrow C & \\ | |||
A \vee B & \equiv & \forall C:P . (A \Rightarrow C) \Rightarrow (B \Rightarrow C) \Rightarrow C & \\ | |||
\neg A & \equiv & \forall C:P . (A \Rightarrow C) & \\ | |||
\exists x:A.B & \equiv & \forall C:P . (\forall x:A.(B \Rightarrow C)) \Rightarrow C & | |||
\end{matrix} | |||
</math> | |||
===Defining data types=== | |||
The basic data types used in computer science can be defined | |||
within the Calculus of Constructions: | |||
; Booleans : <math>\forall A: P . A \Rightarrow A \Rightarrow A</math> | |||
; Naturals : <math>\forall A:P . | |||
(A \Rightarrow A) \Rightarrow (A \Rightarrow A)</math> | |||
; Product <math>A \times B</math> : <math>A \wedge B</math> | |||
; Disjoint union <math>A + B</math> : <math>A \vee B</math> | |||
Note that Booleans and Naturals are defined in the same way as in [[Church encoding]]. However additional problems raise from propositional extensionality and proof irrelevance [http://coq.inria.fr/stdlib/Coq.Logic.ClassicalFacts.html]. | |||
==See also== | |||
* [[Lambda calculus]] | |||
* [[Typed lambda calculus]] | |||
* [[Lambda cube]] | |||
* [[System F]] | |||
* [[Curry–Howard isomorphism]] | |||
* [[Intuitionistic logic]] | |||
* [[Intuitionistic type theory]] | |||
* [[Homotopy type theory]] | |||
===Theorists=== | |||
* [[Thierry Coquand|Coquand, Thierry]] | |||
* [[Jean-Yves Girard|Girard, Jean-Yves]] | |||
== References == | |||
* Thierry Coquand and Gérard Huet: The Calculus of Constructions. Information and Computation, Vol. 76, Issue 2-3, 1988. | |||
* For a source freely accessible online, see Coquand and Huet: [http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00076024/en/ The calculus of constructions]. Technical Report 530, INRIA, Centre de Rocquencourt, 1986. Note terminology is rather different. For instance, (<math>\forall x:A . B</math>) is written [''x'' : ''A''] ''B''. | |||
* M. W. Bunder and Jonathan P. Seldin: [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.88.9497 Variants of the Basic Calculus of Constructions]. 2004. | |||
* Maria João Frade (2009) [http://www3.di.uminho.pt/~mjf/pub/SFV-CIC-2up.pdf Calculus of Inductive Constructions (talk)]. | |||
[[Category:Dependently typed programming]] | |||
[[Category:Lambda calculus]] | |||
[[Category:Type theory]] |
Revision as of 17:24, 13 January 2014
The Calculus of Constructions (CoC) is a significant type theory created by Thierry Coquand. It can serve as both a typed programming language and as constructive foundation for mathematics. For this second reason, the CoC and its derivatives have been the basis for Coq and other proof assistants.
Its derivatives include:
- Calculus of Inductive Constructions ("CiC") - added inductive types
- Calculus of (Co)Inductive Constructions (also "CiC"?) - added Coinduction
- predicative Calculus of Inductive Constructions ("pCiC") - removed some impredicativity
General traits
The CoC is a higher-order typed lambda calculus, initially developed by Thierry Coquand. It is well known for being at the top of Barendregt's lambda cube. It is possible within CoC to define functions from, say, integers to types, types to types as well as functions from integers to integers.
The CoC is strongly normalizing, although, by Gödel's incompleteness theorem, it is impossible to prove this property within the CoC since it implies consistency.
Usage
The CoC has developed alongside the Coq proof assistant. As features were added (or possible liabilities removed) to the theory, they became available in Coq.
Derivatives of the CoC are used in other proof assistants, such as Matita.
The basics of the calculus of constructions
The Calculus of Constructions can be considered an extension of the Curry–Howard isomorphism. The Curry–Howard isomorphism associates a term in the simply typed lambda calculus with each natural-deduction proof in intuitionistic propositional logic. The Calculus of Constructions extends this isomorphism to proofs in the full intuitionistic predicate calculus, which includes proofs of quantified statements (which we will also call "propositions").
Terms
A term in the calculus of constructions is constructed using the following rules:
- T is a term (also called Type)
- P is a term (also called Prop, the type of all propositions)
- Variables (x, y, ...) are terms
- If and are terms, then so are
The calculus of constructions has five kinds of objects:
- proofs, which are terms whose types are propositions
- propositions, which are also known as small types
- predicates, which are functions that return propositions
- large types, which are the types of predicates. (P is an example of a large type)
- T itself, which is the type of large types.
Judgments
The calculus of constructions allows proving typing judgments:
Which can be read as the implication
The valid judgments for the calculus of constructions are derivable from a set of inference rules. In the following, we use to mean a sequence of type assignments , and we use K to mean either P or T. We shall write to mean " has type , and has type ". We shall write to mean the result of substituting the term for the variable in the term .
An inference rule is written in the form
which means
Inference rules for the calculus of constructions
Defining logical operators
The calculus of constructions has very few basic operators: the only logical operator for forming propositions is . However, this one operator is sufficient to define all the other logical operators:
Defining data types
The basic data types used in computer science can be defined within the Calculus of Constructions:
Note that Booleans and Naturals are defined in the same way as in Church encoding. However additional problems raise from propositional extensionality and proof irrelevance [1].
See also
- Lambda calculus
- Typed lambda calculus
- Lambda cube
- System F
- Curry–Howard isomorphism
- Intuitionistic logic
- Intuitionistic type theory
- Homotopy type theory
Theorists
References
- Thierry Coquand and Gérard Huet: The Calculus of Constructions. Information and Computation, Vol. 76, Issue 2-3, 1988.
- For a source freely accessible online, see Coquand and Huet: The calculus of constructions. Technical Report 530, INRIA, Centre de Rocquencourt, 1986. Note terminology is rather different. For instance, () is written [x : A] B.
- M. W. Bunder and Jonathan P. Seldin: Variants of the Basic Calculus of Constructions. 2004.
- Maria João Frade (2009) Calculus of Inductive Constructions (talk).