Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homology homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory kan lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
  1. starting stub on path types

    Anonymous

    v1, current

  2. adding a reference

    Anonymous

    diff, v2, current

  3. added rules for path types

    Anonymous

    diff, v3, current

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorGuest
    • CommentTimeSep 3rd 2022

    The rules for path types currently do not include any coercion or composition rules. Do the path types actually behave like paths/identity types without such coercion and composition rules?

    Also, I think the given rules are for Cartesian cubical type theories. Are the rules the same for other flavors of cubical type theories such as De Morgan cubical type theory and the BCH model?

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorGuest
    • CommentTimeSep 3rd 2022

    This page should be renamed to “cubical path type”, since path type is also used as another name for Martin-Löf’s identity types.

  4. path type -> cubical path type, identity type -> Martin-Löf identity type

    Anonymous

    diff, v4, current

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeSep 4th 2022

    Re 4: Yes, you need the coercion/composition rules to complete the definition. Those are the ones that depend on the flavor of cubical type theory: I think the ones written on the page so far are the same in all cases.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeSep 4th 2022

    I’m a little confused by what is written in the “regularity” section at the moment. Could whoever wrote it please provide a reference?

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorjonsterling
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2022

    Hi Mike, I didn’t write this, but the regularity rule appears to be an equivalent reformulation of the usual regularity rule — these are two ways to make A constant. Does this make sense?

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorjonsterling
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2022

    I think that section is a little weird, though, since if you don’t have coercion at all, there’s no chance of having J and regularity won’t be the problem. Indeed, you need heterogeneous composition, I think just coercion wouldn’t be enough.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorGuest
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2022

    The coercion and regularity rules seem to be lifted from the second XTT article listed in the references but whoever wrote that section on regularity seems to have forgotten that defining the J-eliminator requires composition, which was explicitly stated in that XTT article

    Example 2.10 (Identity type). Using composition, we may define a combinator with the same type as Martin-Löf’s J eliminator for the identity type.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeSep 6th 2022

    One thing that confuses me is that I wouldn’t expect “adding regularity” to entail adding new operations, only new axioms satisfied by the existing operations. Is that similar to what you’re saying?

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorjonsterling
    • CommentTimeSep 7th 2022

    Yes, I think the changes to this section could be:

    1) Remove the comment about adding coercion, keep the regularity rule 2) If coercion shall be discussed, discuss it elsewhere in the context of composition.

    Adding regularity does not add any new operation. (Though, tangentially, I suppose one way to add regularity is to add a new “cofibration-former” that corresponds to the reflexivity map.)

  5. moving coercion to Rules section

    Anonymous

    diff, v6, current

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)