Abstract We present a domain-specific type theory for constructions and proofs in category theory. The type theory axiomatizes notions of category, functor, profunctor and a generalized form of natural transformations. The type theory imposes an ordered linear restriction on standard predicate logic, which guarantees that all functions between categories are functorial, all relations are profunctorial, and all transformations are natural by construction, with no separate proofs necessary. Important category-theoretic proofs such as the Yoneda lemma and Co-yoneda lemma become simple type-theoretic proofs about the relationship between unit, tensor and (ordered) function types, and can be seen to be ordered refinements of theorems in predicate logic. The type theory is sound and complete for a categorical model in virtual equipments , which model both internal and enriched category theory. While the proofs in our type theory look like standard set-based arguments, the syntactic discipline ensure that all proofs and constructions carry over to enriched and internal settings as well.

This special issue collects papers on homotopy type theory and univalent foundations. This research area studies topics at the intersection of type theory, category theory, and homotopy theory. For example, homotopical and higher categorical ideas have led to new extensions of dependent type theory and new dependent type theories, and these type theories have been used in proof assistants to formalize mathematics. In

We present a gradually typed language, GrEff, with effects and handlers that supports migration from unchecked to checked effect typing. This serves as a simple model of the integration of an effect typing discipline with an existing effectful typed language that does not track fine-grained effect information. Our language supports a simple module system to model the programming model of gradual migration from unchecked to checked effect typing in the style of Typed Racket. The surface language GrEff is given semantics by elaboration to a core language Core GrEff. We equip Core GrEff with an inequational theory for reasoning about the semantic error ordering and desired program equivalences for programming with effects and handlers. We derive an operational semantics for the language from the equations provable in the theory. We then show that the theory is sound by constructing an operational logical relations model to prove the graduality theorem. This extends prior work on embedding-projection pair models of gradual typing to handle effect typing and subtyping.

Abstract A standard informal method for analyzing the asymptotic complexity of a program is to extract a recurrence that describes its cost in terms of the size of its input and then to compute a closed-form upper bound on that recurrence. We give a formal account of that method for functional programs in a higher order language with $\mathtt{let}$ -polymorphism. The method consists of two phases. In the first phase, a monadic translation is performed to extract a cost-annotated version of the original program. In the second phase, the extracted program is interpreted in a model. The key feature of this second phase is that different models describe different notions of size. This plays out in several ways. For example, when analyzing functions that take arguments of inductive types, different notions of size may be appropriate depending on the analysis. When analyzing polymorphic functions, our approach shows that one can formally describe the notion of size of an argument in terms of the data that is common to the notions of size for each type instance of the domain type. We give several examples of different models that formally justify various informal cost analyses to show the applicability of our approach.

Abstract Gradually typed languages are designed to support both dynamically typed and statically typed programming styles while preserving the benefits of each. Sound gradually typed languages dynamically check types at runtime at the boundary between statically typed and dynamically typed modules. However, there is much disagreement in the gradual typing literature over how to enforce complex types such as tuples, lists, functions and objects. In this paper, we propose a new perspective on the design of runtime gradual type enforcement: runtime type casts exist precisely to ensure the correctness of certain type-based refactorings and optimizations. For instance, for simple types, a language designer might desire that beta-eta equality is valid. We show that this perspective is useful by demonstrating that a cast semantics can be derived from beta-eta equality. We do this by providing an axiomatic account program equivalence in a gradual cast calculus in a logic we call gradual type theory (GTT). Based on Levy’s call-by-push-value, GTT allows us to axiomatize both call-by-value and call-by-name gradual languages. We then show that we can derive the behavior of casts for simple types from the corresponding eta equality principle and the assumption that the language satisfies a property called graduality , also known as the dynamic gradual guarantee. Since we can derive the semantics from the assumption of eta equality, we also receive a useful contrapositive: any observably different cast semantics that satisfies graduality must violate the eta equality. We show the consistency and applicability of our axiomatic theory by proving that a contract-based implementation using the lazy cast semantics gives a logical relations model of our type theory, where equivalence in GTT implies contextual equivalence of the programs. Since GTT also axiomatizes the dynamic gradual guarantee, our model also establishes this central theorem of gradual typing. The model is parameterized by the implementation of the dynamic types, and so gives a family of implementations that validate type-based optimization and the gradual guarantee.

Abstract We present a cubical type theory based on the Cartesian cube category (faces, degeneracies, symmetries, diagonals, but no connections or reversal) with univalent universes, each containing Π, Σ, path, identity, natural number, boolean, suspension, and glue (equivalence extension) types. The type theory includes a syntactic description of a uniform Kan operation, along with judgmental equality rules defining the Kan operation on each type. The Kan operation uses both a different set of generating trivial cofibrations and a different set of generating cofibrations than the Cohen, Coquand, Huber, and Mörtberg (CCHM) model. Next, we describe a constructive model of this type theory in Cartesian cubical sets. We give a mechanized proof, using Agda as the internal language of cubical sets in the style introduced by Orton and Pitts, that glue, Π, Σ, path, identity, boolean, natural number, suspension types, and the universe itself are Kan in this model, and that the universe is univalent. An advantage of this formal approach is that our construction can also be interpreted in a range of other models, including cubical sets on the connections cube category and the De Morgan cube category, as used in the CCHM model, and bicubical sets, as used in directed type theory.

This special issue collects papers on homotopy type theory and univalent foundations.This research area studies topics at the intersection of type theory, category theory, and homotopy theory.For example, homotopical and higher categorical ideas have led to new extensions of dependent type theory and new dependent type theories, and these type theories have been used in proof assistants to formalize mathematics.In August 2019, the International Conference on Homotopy Type Theory (HoTT 2019) was held in at Carnegie Mellon University, with scientific organization by

Directed type theory is an analogue of homotopy type theory where types represent categories, generalizing groupoids. A bisimplicial approach to directed type theory, developed by Riehl and Shulman, is based on equipping each type with both a notion of path and a separate notion of directed morphism. In this setting, a directed analogue of the univalence axiom asserts that there is a universe of covariant discrete fibrations whose directed morphisms correspond to functions---a higher-categorical analogue of the category of sets and functions. In this paper, we give a constructive model of a directed type theory with directed univalence in bicubical, rather than bisimplicial, sets. We formalize much of this model using Agda as the internal language of a 1-topos, following Orton and Pitts. First, building on the cubical techniques used to give computational models of homotopy type theory, we show that there is a universe of covariant discrete fibrations, with a partial directed univalence principle asserting that functions are a retract of morphisms in this universe. To complete this retraction into an equivalence, we refine the universe of covariant fibrations using the constructive sheaf models by Coquand and Ruch.

We present gradual type theory, a logic and type theory for call-by-name gradual typing. We define the central constructions of gradual typing (the dynamic type, type casts and type error) in a novel way, by universal properties relative to new judgments for gradual type and term dynamism, which were developed in blame calculi and to state the "gradual guarantee" theorem of gradual typing. Combined with the ordinary extensionality ($\eta$) principles that type theory provides, we show that most of the standard operational behavior of casts is uniquely determined by the gradual guarantee. This provides a semantic justification for the definitions of casts, and shows that non-standard definitions of casts must violate these principles. Our type theory is the internal language of a certain class of preorder categories called equipments. We give a general construction of an equipment interpreting gradual type theory from a 2-category representing non-gradual types and programs, which is a semantic analogue of Findler and Felleisen's definitions of contracts, and use it to build some concrete domain-theoretic models of gradual typing.

A typical way of analyzing the time complexity of functional programs is to extract a recurrence expressing the running time of the program in terms of the size of its input, and then to solve the recurrence to obtain a big-O bound. For recurrence extraction to be compositional, it is also necessary to extract recurrences for the size of outputs of helper functions. Previous work has developed techniques for using logical relations to state a formal correctness theorem for a general recurrence extraction translation: a program is bounded by a recurrence when the operational cost is bounded by the extracted cost, and the output value is bounded, according to a value bounding relation defined by induction on types, by the extracted size. This previous work supports higher-order functions by viewing recurrences as programs in a lambda-calculus, or as mathematical entities in a denotational semantics thereof. In this paper, we extend these techniques to support amortized analysis, where costs are rearranged from one portion of a program to another to achieve more precise bounds. We give an intermediate language in which programs can be annotated according to the banker's method of amortized analysis; this language has an affine type system to ensure credits are not spent more than once. We give a recurrence extraction translation of this language into a recurrence language, a simply-typed lambda-calculus with a cost type, and state and prove a bounding logical relation expressing the correctness of this translation. The recurrence language has a denotational semantics in preorders, and we use this semantics to solve recurrences, e.g analyzing binary counters and splay trees.

The main way of analysing the complexity of a program is that of extracting and solving a recurrence that expresses its running time in terms of the size of its input. We develop a method that automatically extracts such recurrences from the syntax of higher-order recursive functional programs. The resulting recurrences, which are programs in a call-by-name language with recursion, explicitly compute the running time in terms of the size of the input. In order to achieve this in a uniform way that covers both call-by-name and call-by-value evaluation strategies, we use Call-by-Push-Value (CBPV) as an intermediate language. Finally, we use domain theory to develop a denotational cost semantics for the resulting recurrences.

Gradually typed languages are designed to support both dynamically typed and statically typed programming styles while preserving the benefits of each. While existing gradual type soundness theorems for these languages aim to show that type-based reasoning is preserved when moving from the fully static setting to a gradual one, these theorems do not imply that correctness of type-based refactorings and optimizations is preserved. Establishing correctness of program transformations is technically difficult, because it requires reasoning about program equivalence, and is often neglected in the metatheory of gradual languages. In this paper, we propose an axiomatic account of program equivalence in a gradual cast calculus, which we formalize in a logic we call gradual type theory (GTT). Based on Levy’s call-by-push-value, GTT gives an axiomatic account of both call-by-value and call-by-name gradual languages. Based on our axiomatic account we prove many theorems that justify optimizations and refactorings in gradually typed languages. For example, uniqueness principles for gradual type connectives show that if the βη laws hold for a connective, then casts between that connective must be equivalent to the so-called “lazy” cast semantics. Contrapositively, this shows that “eager” cast semantics violates the extensionality of function types. As another example, we show that gradual upcasts are pure functions and, dually, gradual downcasts are strict functions. We show the consistency and applicability of our axiomatic theory by proving that a contract-based implementation using the lazy cast semantics gives a logical relations model of our type theory, where equivalence in GTT implies contextual equivalence of the programs. Since GTT also axiomatizes the dynamic gradual guarantee, our model also establishes this central theorem of gradual typing. The model is parametrized by the implementation of the dynamic types, and so gives a family of implementations that validate type-based optimization and the gradual guarantee.

Dependent type theories are functional programming languages with types rich enough to do computer-checked mathematics and software verification. Homotopy type theory is a recent area of work that connects dependent type theory to the mathematical disciplines of homotopy theory and higher-dimensional category theory. From a programming point of view, these connections have revealed that all types in dependent type theory support a certain generic program that had not previously been exploited. Specifically, each type can be equipped with computationally relevant witnesses of equality of elements of that type, and all types support a generic program that transports elements along these equalities. One mechanism for equipping types with non-trivial witnesses of equality is Voevodsky’s univalence axiom, which implies that equality of types themselves is witnessed by type isomorphism. Another is higher inductive types, an extended datatype schema that allows identifications between different datatype constructors. While these new mechanisms were originally formulated as axiomatic extensions of type theory, recent work has investigated their computational meaning, leading to the development of new programming languages that better support them. In this talk, I will illustrate what univalence and higher inductive types mean in programming terms. I will also discuss how studying some related semantic settings can reveal additional structure on types; for example, moving from groupoids (categories where all maps are invertible) to general categories yields an account of coercions instead of equalities. Overall, I hope to convey some of the beauty and richness of these connections between disciplines, which we are just beginning to understand.

This paper contributes to recent investigations of the use of homotopy type theory to give machine-checked proofs of constructions from homotopy theory. We present a mechanized proof of a result called the Blakers-Massey connectivity theorem, which relates the higher-dimensional loop structures of two spaces sharing a common part (represented by a pushout type, which is a generalization of a disjoint sum type) to those of the common part itself. This theorem gives important information about the pushout type, and has a number of useful corollaries, including the Freudenthal suspension theorem, which was used in previous formalizations. The proof is more direct than existing ones that apply in general category-theoretic settings for homotopy theory, and its mechanization is concise and high-level, due to novel combinations of ideas from homotopy theory and from type theory.

Abstract Homotopy type theory is an extension of Martin-Löf type theory, based on a correspondence with homotopy theory and higher category theory. In homotopy type theory, the propositional equality type is proof-relevant, and corresponds to paths in a space. This allows for a new class of datatypes, called higher inductive types, which are specified by constructors not only for points but also for paths. In this paper, we consider a programming application of higher inductive types. Version control systems such as Darcs are based on the notion of patches—syntactic representations of edits to a repository. We show how patch theory can be developed in homotopy type theory. Our formulation separates formal theories of patches from their interpretation as edits to repositories. A patch theory is presented as a higher inductive type. Models of a patch theory are given by maps out of that type, which, being functors, automatically preserve the structure of patches. Several standard tools of homotopy theory come into play, demonstrating the use of these methods in a practical programming context.

A central method for analyzing the asymptotic complexity of a functional program is to extract and then solve a recurrence that expresses evaluation cost in terms of input size. The relevant notion of input size is often specific to a datatype, with measures including the length of a list, the maximum element in a list, and the height of a tree. In this work, we give a formal account of the extraction of cost and size recurrences from higher-order functional programs over inductive datatypes. Our approach allows a wide range of programmer-specified notions of size, and ensures that the extracted recurrences correctly predict evaluation cost. To extract a recurrence from a program, we first make costs explicit by applying a monadic translation from the source language to a complexity language, and then abstract datatype values as sizes. Size abstraction can be done semantically, working in models of the complexity language, or syntactically, by adding rules to a preorder judgement. We give several different models of the complexity language, which support different notions of size. Additionally, we prove by a logical relations argument that recurrences extracted by this process are upper bounds for evaluation cost; the proof is entirely syntactic and therefore applies to all of the models we consider.

Homotopy theory can be developed synthetically in homotopy type theory, using types to describe spaces, the identity type to describe paths in a space, and iterated identity types to describe higher-dimensional paths. While some aspects of homotopy theory have been developed synthetically and formalized in proof assistants, some seemingly easy examples have proved difficult because the required manipulations of paths becomes complicated. In this paper, we describe a cubical approach to developing homotopy theory within type theory. The identity type is complemented with higher-dimensional cube types, such as a type of squares, dependent on four points and four lines, and a type of three-dimensional cubes, dependent on the boundary of a cube. Path-over-a-path types and higher generalizations are used to describe cubes in a fibration over a cube in the base. These higher-dimensional cube and path-over types can be defined from the usual identity type, but isolating them as independent conceptual abstractions has allowed for the formalization of some previously difficult examples.

Homotopy type theory is an extension of Martin-Löf type theory, based on a correspondence with homotopy theory and higher category theory. In homotopy type theory, the propositional equality type becomes proof-relevant, and corresponds to paths in a space. This allows for a new class of datatypes, called higher inductive types, which are specified by constructors not only for points but also for paths. In this paper, we consider a programming application of higher inductive types. Version control systems such as Darcs are based on the notion of patches - syntactic representations of edits to a repository. We show how patch theory can be developed in homotopy type theory. Our formulation separates formal theories of patches from their interpretation as edits to repositories. A patch theory is presented as a higher inductive type. Models of a patch theory are given by maps out of that type, which, being functors, automatically preserve the structure of patches. Several standard tools of homotopy theory come into play, demonstrating the use of these methods in a practical programming context.

Recent work on homotopy type theory exploits an exciting new correspondence between Martin-Lof's dependent type theory and the mathematical disciplines of category theory and homotopy theory. The mathematics suggests new principles to add to type theory, while the type theory can be used in novel ways to do computer-checked proofs in a proof assistant. In this paper, we formalize a basic result in algebraic topology, that the fundamental group of the circle is the integers. Our proof illustrates the new features of homotopy type theory, such as higher inductive types and Voevodsky's univalence axiom. It also introduces a new method for calculating the path space of a type, which has proved useful in many other examples.

Higher-dimensional dependent type theory enriches conventional one-dimensional dependent type theory with additional structure expressing equivalence of elements of a type. This structure may be employed in a variety of ways to capture rather coarse identifications of elements, such as a universe of sets considered modulo isomorphism. Equivalence must be respected by all families of types and terms, as witnessed computationally by a type-generic program. Higher-dimensional type theory has applications to code reuse for dependently typed programming, and to the formalization of mathematics. In this paper, we develop a novel judgemental formulation of a two-dimensional type theory, which enjoys a canonicity property: a closed term of boolean type is definitionally equal to true or false. Canonicity is a necessary condition for a computational interpretation of type theory as a programming language, and does not hold for existing axiomatic presentations of higher-dimensional type theory. The method of proof is a generalization of the NuPRL semantics, interpreting types as syntactic groupoids rather than equivalence relations.

Abstract. Several recent security-typed programming languages allow programmers to express and enforce authorization policies governing access to controlled resources. Policies are expressed as propositions in an authorization logic, and enforced by a type system that requires each access to a sensitive resource to be accompanied by a proof. The securitytyped languages described in the literature, such as Aura and PCML5, have been presented as new, stand-alone language designs. In this paper, we instead show how to embed a security-typed programming language within an existing dependently typed programming language, Agda. This language-design strategy allows us to inherit both the metatheoretic results, such as type safety, and the implementation of the host language. Our embedding consists of the following ingredients: First, we represent the syntax and proofs of an authorization logic, Garg and Pfenning’s BL0, using dependent types. Second, we implement a proof search procedure, based on a focused sequent calculus, to ease the burden of constructing proofs. Third, we define an indexed monad of computations on behalf of a principal, with proof-carrying primitive operations. Our work shows that a dependently typed language can be used to prototype a security-typed language, and contributes to the growing body of literature on using dependently typed languages to construct domain-specific type systems. 1

We construct a logical framework supporting datatypes that mix binding and computation, implemented as a universe in the dependently typed programming language Agda 2. We represent binding pronominally, using well-scoped de Bruijn indices, so that types can be used to reason about the scoping of variables. We equip our universe with datatype-generic implementations of weakening, substitution, exchange, contraction, and subordination-based strengthening, so that programmers need not reimplement these operations for each individual language they define. In our mixed, pronominal setting, weakening and substitution hold only under some conditions on types, but we show that these conditions can be discharged automatically in many cases. Finally, we program a variety of standard difficult test cases from the literature, such as normalization-by-evaluation for the untyped lambda-calculus, demonstrating that we can express detailed invariants about variable usage in a program's type while still writing clean and clear code.

Variable binding is a prevalent feature of the syntax and proof theory of many logical systems. In this paper, we define a programming language that provides intrinsic support for both representing and computing with binding. This language is extracted as the Curry-Howard interpretation of a focused sequent calculus with two kinds of implication, of opposite polarity. The representational arrow extends systems of definitional reflection with a notion of scoped inference rules, which are used to represent binding. On the other hand, the usual computational arrow classifies recursive functions defined by pattern-matching. Unlike many previous approaches, both kinds of implication are connectives in a single logic, which serves as a rich logical framework capable of representing inference rules that mix binding and computation.

Abstract The LF logical framework codifies a methodology for representing deductive systems, such as programming languages and logics, within a dependently typed λ-calculus. In this methodology, the syntactic and deductive apparatus of a system is encoded as the canonical forms of associated LF types; an encoding is correct ( adequate ) if and only if it defines a compositional bijection between the apparatus of the deductive system and the associated canonical forms. Given an adequate encoding, one may establish metatheoretic properties of a deductive system by reasoning about the associated LF representation. The Twelf implementation of the LF logical framework is a convenient and powerful tool for putting this methodology into practice. Twelf supports both the representation of a deductive system and the mechanical verification of proofs of metatheorems about it. The purpose of this article is to provide an up-to-date overview of the LF λ-calculus, the LF methodology for adequate representation, and the Twelf methodology for mechanizing metatheory. We begin by defining a variant of the original LF language, called Canonical LF , in which only canonical forms (long βη-normal forms) are permitted. This variant is parameterized by a subordination relation , which enables modular reasoning about LF representations. We then give an adequate representation of a simply typed λ-calculus in Canonical LF, both to illustrate adequacy and to serve as an object of analysis. Using this representation, we formalize and verify the proofs of some metatheoretic results, including preservation, determinacy, and strengthening. Each example illustrates a significant aspect of using LF and Twelf for formalized metatheory.

As programs evolve, their code increasingly becomes tangled by programmers and requirements. This mosaic quality complicated program comprehension and maintenance. Many of these activities can benefit from viewing the program as a collection of features. We introduce an inexpensive and easily comprehensible summary of program changes called the feature signature and investigate its properties. We find a remarkable similarity in the nature of feature signatures across multiple nontrivial programs, developers and magnitude changes. This indicates that feature signatures are a meaningful notion worth studying. We then show numerous applications of feature signatures to software evolution, establishing their utility.