Coq without Type Casts: A Complete Proof of Coq Modulo Theory

Incorporating extensional equality into a dependent intensional type system such as the Calculus of Constructions provides with stronger type-checking capabilities and makes the proof development closer to intuition. Since strong forms of extensionality lead to undecidable type-checking, a good trade-off is to extend intensional equality with a decidable first-order theory T , as done in CoqMT, which uses matching modulo T for the weak and strong elimination rules, we call these rules T -elimination. So far, type-checking in CoqMT is known to be decidable in presence of a cumulative hierarchy of universes and weak T -elimination. Further, it has been shown by Wang with a formal proof in Coq that consistency is preserved in presence of weak and strong elimination rules, which actually implies consistency in presence of weak and strong T -elimination rules since T is already present in the conversion rule of the calculus. We justify here CoqMT’s type-checking algorithm by showing strong normalization as well as the Church-Rosser property of β-reductions augmented with CoqMT’s weak and strong T -elimination rules. This therefore concludes successfully the meta-theoretical study of CoqMT. Acknowledgments: to the referees for their careful reading.

[1]  Thorsten Altenkirch,et al.  Proving Strong Normalization of CC by Modifying Realizability Semantics , 1994, TYPES.

[2]  Jean-Pierre Jouannaud,et al.  CoQMTU: A Higher-Order Type Theory with a Predicative Hierarchy of Universes Parametrized by a Decidable First-Order Theory , 2011, 2011 IEEE 26th Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[3]  Pierre-Yves Strub,et al.  Coq Modulo Theory , 2010, CSL.

[4]  Frédéric Blanqui,et al.  Inductive types in the Calculus of Algebraic Constructions , 2003, Fundam. Informaticae.

[5]  Nicolas Oury Extensionality in the Calculus of Constructions , 2005, TPHOLs.

[6]  Ali Assaf,et al.  A Calculus of Constructions with Explicit Subtyping , 2014, TYPES.

[7]  Thierry Coquand,et al.  The Calculus of Constructions , 1988, Inf. Comput..

[8]  Gérard P. Huet,et al.  Confluent Reductions: Abstract Properties and Applications to Term Rewriting Systems , 1980, J. ACM.

[9]  Mark-Oliver Stehr,et al.  The Open Calculus of Constructions (Part II): An Equational Type Theory with Dependent Types for Programming, Specification, and Interactive Theorem Proving , 2005, Fundam. Informaticae.

[10]  Jean-Pierre Jouannaud,et al.  From Formal Proofs to Mathematical Proofs: A Safe, Incremental Way for Building in First-order Decision Procedures , 2008, IFIP TCS.

[11]  Zhaohui Luo,et al.  ECC, an extended calculus of constructions , 1989, [1989] Proceedings. Fourth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science.

[12]  Benjamin Werner,et al.  Sets in Types, Types in Sets , 1997, TACS.

[13]  Bruno Barras,et al.  Sets in Coq, Coq in Sets , 2010, J. Formaliz. Reason..

[14]  Hélène Kirchner,et al.  Completion of a Set of Rules Modulo a Set of Equations , 1986, SIAM J. Comput..

[15]  Jean-Pierre Jouannaud,et al.  Church-Rosser Properties of Normal Rewriting , 2012, CSL.

[16]  Christine Paulin-Mohring,et al.  Inductive Definitions in the system Coq - Rules and Properties , 1993, TLCA.

[17]  Adel Bouhoula SPIKE: a System for Sufficient Completeness and Parameterized Inductive Proofs , 1994, CADE.

[18]  Qian Wang,et al.  Semantics of Intensional Type Theory extended with Decidable Equational Theories , 2013, CSL.