Not signed in

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

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

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 homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology 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 stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft type type-theory universal variational-calculus

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeOct 12th 2016
   • (edited Oct 12th 2016)
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexI didn't notice this paper before * Valeria de Paiva, Eike Ritter, _Fibrational Modal Type Theory_, [pdf](http://vcvpaiva.github.io/includes/pubs/fibrational-modal.pdf) > This paper describes a fibrational categorical semantics for the modal necessity-only fragment of constructive modal type theory, both with and without dependent types. When do we expect Rijke-Spitters-Shulman’s “Modalities in homotopy type theory” to appear?

   I didn’t notice this paper before

   • Valeria de Paiva, Eike Ritter, Fibrational Modal Type Theory, pdf

   This paper describes a fibrational categorical semantics for the modal necessity-only fragment of constructive modal type theory, both with and without dependent types.

   When do we expect Rijke-Spitters-Shulman’s “Modalities in homotopy type theory” to appear?

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeOct 12th 2016
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexI couldn't presume to guess. (-:O

   I couldn’t presume to guess. (-:O

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeOct 12th 2016
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexOn the other hand, even with Rijke-Spitters-Shulman still in the making (I am looking forward to it), there are already various publications precursing it. The discussion of modal operators in the HoTT-book, the article [arXiv:1408.0054](https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.0054) and the article [arXiv:1509.07584](https://arxiv.org/abs/1509.07584). Does it make sense to feel that some of these would have deserved a citation by dePaiva-Ritter?

   On the other hand, even with Rijke-Spitters-Shulman still in the making (I am looking forward to it), there are already various publications precursing it. The discussion of modal operators in the HoTT-book, the article arXiv:1408.0054 and the article arXiv:1509.07584.

   Does it make sense to feel that some of these would have deserved a citation by dePaiva-Ritter?

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeOct 14th 2016
   • (edited Oct 14th 2016)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI have added the reference by dePaiva, as well as various other missing references, to _[[modal type theory]]_.

   I have added the reference by dePaiva, as well as various other missing references, to modal type theory.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeOct 15th 2016
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexWell, obviously we're biased, but yes, I think even objectively it would have made sense for them to cite our papers, especially since they mention HoTT in the abstract, and Pfenning-Davies later on, which was the direct inspiration for the type theory of BFP in RCoHoTT. I doubt they intentionally slighted us, though; the HoTT book is at least in their bibliography, and it seems most likely that they just weren't aware of the other two papers.

   Well, obviously we’re biased, but yes, I think even objectively it would have made sense for them to cite our papers, especially since they mention HoTT in the abstract, and Pfenning-Davies later on, which was the direct inspiration for the type theory of BFP in RCoHoTT. I doubt they intentionally slighted us, though; the HoTT book is at least in their bibliography, and it seems most likely that they just weren’t aware of the other two papers.