Per is MLTT/CIC tactical theorem prover implemented in OCaml, constitutes a minimal core for a dependently-typed lambda calculus,
constrained to exclude pattern matching, let-bindings, implicit arguments, modules, namespaces, and function extensionality.
It encompasses universes, dependent products Pi
, dependent pairs Sigma
, identity types Id
, and Inductive
types with strict positivity enforcement.
Recent refinements ensure totality for user-defined lambda terms via a positive occurrence check.
Its mathematical properties, focusing on correctness, soundness, totality, canonicity, decidability and related
attributes relevant to formal mathematics are being analyzed.
The type checker operates over a term syntax comprising:
Universe i
: Type universes with leveli ∈ ℕ
.Pi (x, A, B)
: Dependent function, whereA : Universe i
andB : Universe j
underx : A
.Lam (x, A, t)
: Lambda abstraction with totality enforced.App (f, a)
: Function application.Sigma (x, A, B)
: Dependent pair types.Pair (a, b)
,Fst p
,Snd p
construction and projections.Id (A, a, b)
: Identity type, withRefl
a andJ
eliminator.Inductive d
: Inductive types with introsConstr
and eliminatorInd
.
The typing judgment Γ ⊢ t : T
is defined via infer
and check
functions,
with definitional equality Γ ⊢ t = t'
implemented via equal
.
type term =
| Var of name | Universe of level
| Pi of name * term * term | Lam of name * term * term | App of term * term
| Sigma of name * term * term | Pair of term * term | Fst of term | Snd of term
| Id of term * term * term | Refl of term
| J of term * term * term * term * term * term (* J A a b C d p *)
| Inductive of inductive | Constr of int * inductive * term list
| Elim of inductive * term * term list * term
Structural equality of terms under an environment and context.
The function implements judgmental equality with substitution to handle bound variables, avoiding explicit α-conversion by assuming fresh names (a simplification over full de Bruijn indices [3]). The recursive descent ensures congruence, but lacks normalization, making it weaker than CIC’s definitional equality, which includes β-reduction.
- Terminal Cases: Variables
Var x
are equal if names match; universesUniverse i
if levels are identical. - Resursive Cases:
App (f, arg)
requires equality of function and argument.Pi (x, a, b)
compares domains and codomains, adjusting for variable renaming via substitution.Inductive d
checks name, level, and parameters.Constr
andElim
compare indices, definitions, and arguments/cases. - Default: Returns false for mismatched constructors.
Theorem. Equality is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive modulo
α-equivalence (cf. [1], Section 2). For Pi (x, a, b)
and Pi (y, a', b')
,
equality holds if a = a'
and b[x := Var x] = b'[y := Var x]
,
ensuring capture-avoiding substitution preserves meaning.
Retrieve a variable’s type from the context. Context are the objects in the Substitutions categories.
- Searches
ctx
for(x, ty)
usingList.assoc
. - Returns
Some ty
if found,None
otherwise.
Theorem: Context lookup is well-defined under uniqueness
of names (cf. [1], Section 3). If ctx = Γ, x : A, Δ
,
then lookup_var ctx x = Some A
.
Substitute term s
for variable x
in term t
.
Substitutions are morphisms in Substitution categorties.
The capture-avoiding check if x = y
prevents variable capture
but assumes distinct bound names, a simplification over full
renaming or de Bruijn indices. For Elim, substituting in the
motive and cases ensures recursive definitions remain sound,
aligning with CIC’s eliminator semantics.
Var
: Replacesx
withs
, leaves others unchanged.Pi/Lam
: Skips substitution if bound variable shadowsx
, else recurses on domain and body.App/Constr/Elim
: Recurses on subterms.Inductive
: No substitution (assumes no free variables).
Theorem. Substitution preserves typing (cf. [13], Lemma 2.1).
If Γ ⊢ t : T
and Γ ⊢ s : A
, then Γ ⊢ t[x := s] : T[x := s]
under suitable conditions on x.
Instantiate an inductive type’s constructors with parameters, used only in infer_Ind
.
This function ensures type-level parametricity, critical for polymorphic inductives like List A. The fold-based substitution avoids explicit recursion, leveraging OCaml’s functional style, but assumes args are well-typed, deferring validation to infer.
- Validates argument count against d.params.
- Substitutes each parameter into constructor types using subst_param.
Theorem: Parameter application preserves inductiveness (cf. [4], Section 4).
If D
is an inductive type with parameters P
, then D[P]
is
well-formed with substituted constructors.
Validate constructor arguments against its type.
This function implements the dependent application rule for constructors,
ensuring each argument satisfies the constructor’s domain type in sequence.
The recursive descent mirrors the structure of Pi
types, where ty
is peeled
layer by the layer, and subst x arg b
updates the type for the next argument.
- Recursively matches
ty
(a Pi chain) withargs
, checking each argument and substituting. - Returns the final type when all arguments are consumed.
Theorem. Constructor typing is preserved (cf. [1], Section 4, Application Rule; [1], Section 4.3).
If ctx ⊢ c : Π (x:A), B
and ctx ⊢ a : A
, then ctx ⊢ c a : B[x := a]
.
Type-check an dependent elimination (induction principle) over inductive type d
.
This function implements the dependent elimination rule of CIC,
generalizing both computation (e.g., plus : Nat → Nat → Nat
)
and proof (e.g., nat_elim : Πx:Nat.Type0
). The check equal env ctx t_ty a
ensures the motive’s domain aligns with the target, while compute_case_type
constructs the induction principle by injecting App (p, var)
as the hypothesis type for recursive occurrences, mirroring the
fixpoint-style eliminators of CIC [1]. The flexibility in result_ty
avoids hardcoding it to D, supporting higher-type motives (e.g., Type0).
Theorem. Elimination preserves typing (cf. [1], Section 4.5; Elimination Rule for Inductive Types). For an inductive type D
with constructors c_j
, if ctx ⊢ t : D
and ctx ⊢ P : D → Type_i
,
and each case case_j has type Πx:A_j.P(c_j x)
where A_j
are
the argument types of c_j
(including recursive hypotheses), then ctx ⊢ Ind(D, P, cases, t) : P t
.
Ensuring J (ty, a, b, c, d, p)
has type c a b p by
validating the motive,
base case, and path against CIC’s equality elimination rule.
The infer_J
function implements the dependent elimination rule for identity
types in the Calculus of Inductive Constructions (CIC), enabling proofs and
computations over equality (e.g., symmetry : Π a b : ty, Π p : Id (ty, a, b), Id(ty, b, a)
).
It type-checks the term J (ty, a, b, c, d, p)
by ensuring
ty : Universe 0
is the underlying type, a : ty
and b : ty
are endpoints,
c : Π (x:ty), Π (y:ty), Π (p: Id(ty, x, y)), Type0
is a motive over all paths,
d : Π (x:ty), c x x (Refl x)
handles the reflexive case,
and p : Id(ty, a, b)
is the path being eliminated.
The function constructs fresh variables to define the motive
and base case types, checks each component, and returns c a b p
(normalized),
reflecting the result of applying the motive to the specific path.
Theorem. For an environment env
and context ctx
, given a type A : Type_i
,
terms a : A
, b : A
, a motive C : Π (x:A), Π (y:A), Π(p:Id(A, x, y)),Type_j
,
a base case d : Π(x:A), C x x (Refl x)
, and a path p : Id(A, a, b)
, the
term J (A, a, b, C, d, p)
is well-typed with type C a b p
. (Reference:
CIC [1], Section 4.5; Identity Type Elimination Rule).
Infer the type of term t
in context ctx
and environment env
.
For Pi
and Lam
, universe levels ensure consistency
(e.g., Type i : Type (i + 1)
), while Elim
handles induction,
critical for dependent elimination. Note that lambda agrument should be typed
for easier type synthesis [13].
Ensure t
is a universe, returning its level.
Infers type of t
, expects Universe i
.
This auxiliary enforces universe hierarchy, preventing paradoxes (e.g., Type : Type). It relies on infer, assuming its correctness, and throws errors for non-universe types, aligning with ITT’s stratification.
Theorem: Universe checking is decidable (cf. [13]).
If ctx ⊢ t : Universe i
, then check_universe env ctx t = i
.
Check that t
has type ty
.
Lam
: Ensures the domain is a type, extends the context, and checks the body against the codomain.Constr
: Infers the constructor’s type and matches it to the expected inductive type.Elim
: Computes the elimination type via check_elim and verifies it equals ty.- Default: Infers t’s type, normalizes ty, and checks equality.
The function leverages bidirectional typing: specific cases (e.g., Lam
)
check directly, while the default case synthesizes via infer and compares
with a normalized ty, ensuring definitional equality (β-reduction).
Completeness hinges on normalize terminating (ITT’s strong normalization)
and equal capturing judgmental equality.
Theorem. Type checking is complete (cf. [1], Normalization).
If ctx ⊢ t : T
in the type theory, then check env ctx t T
succeeds,
assuming normalization and sound inference.
Apply a case branch to constructor arguments, used only in reduce
.
This function realizes CIC’s ι-reduction for inductive eliminators [1], where
a case branch is applied to constructor arguments, including recursive hypotheses.
For Nat’s succ in plus, ty = Πn:Nat.Nat
, case = λk.λih.succ ih
, and args = [n]
.
The recursive check a = Inductive d
triggers for n : Nat
, computing ih = Elim(Nat, Π_:Nat.Nat, [m; λk.λih.succ ih], n)
,
ensuring succ ih : Nat
. The nested apply_term handles multi-argument lambdas
(e.g., k and ih), avoiding explicit uncurrying, while substitution preserves
typing per CIC’s rules.
Theorem. Case application is sound (cf. [1] Elimination Typing).
If case : Πx:A.P(c x)
and args
match A
, then apply_case env ctx d p cases case ty args
yields a term of type P(c args)
.
Perform one-step β-reduction or inductive elimination.
The function implements a one-step reduction strategy combining ITT’s β-reduction
with CIC’s ι-reduction for inductives. The App (Lam, arg)
case directly applies
substitution, while Elim (Constr)
uses apply_case
to handle induction,
ensuring recursive calls preserve typing via the motive p. The Pi
case,
though unconventional, supports type-level computation, consistent with CIC’s flexibility.
App (Lam, arg)
: Substitutes arg into the lambda body (β-reduction).App (Pi, arg)
: Substitutes arg into the codomain (type-level β-reduction).App (f, arg)
: Reduces f, then arg if f is unchanged.Elim (d, p, cases, Constr)
: Applies the appropriate case to constructor arguments, computing recursive calls (ι-reduction).Elim (d, p, cases, t')
: Reduces the targett'
.Constr
: Reduces arguments.- Default: Returns unchanged.
Theorem. Reduction preserves typing (cf. [8], Normalization Lemma, Subject Reduction).
If ctx ⊢ t : T
and t → t'
via β-reduction or inductive elimination, then ctx ⊢ t' : T
.
This function fully reduces a term t to its normal form by iteratively applying one-step reductions via reduce until no further changes occur, ensuring termination for well-typed terms.
This function implements strong normalization, a cornerstone of MLTT [9]
and CIC [1], where all reduction sequences terminate. The fixpoint
iteration relies on reduce’s one-step reductions (β for lambdas, ι
for inductives), with equal acting as the termination oracle.
For plus 2 2
, it steps to succ succ succ succ zero
, terminating at a constructor form.
Theorem. Normalization terminates (cf. [1]. Strong Normalization via CIC). Every well-typed term in the system has a ormal form under β- and ι-reductions.
Per’s elegance rests on firm theoretical ground. Here, we reflect on key meta-theorems for Classical MLTT with General Inductive Types, drawing from CIC’s lineage:
- Soundness and Completeness: Per’s type checker is sound—every term it accepts has a type under MLTT’s rules [Paulin-Mohring, 1996]. This ensures that every term accepted by Per is typable in the underlying theory. Relative to the bidirectional type checking algorithm, context is appropriately managed [Harper & Licata, 2007]. The interplay of inference and checking modes guarantees this property.
- Canonicity, Normalization, and Totality: Canonicity guarantees that every closed term of type
Nat
normalizes tozero
orsucc n
[Martin-Löf, 1984]. Per’s normalize achieves strong normalization—every term reduces to a unique normal form—thanks to CIC’s strict positivity [Coquand & Paulin-Mohring, 1990]. Totality follows: all well-typed functions terminate, as seen in list_length reducing tosucc (succ zero)
. - Consistency and Decidability: Consistency ensures no proof of ⊥ exists, upheld by normalization and the absence of paradoxes like Girard’s [Girard, 1972]. Type checking is decidable in Per, as our algorithm terminates for well-formed inputs, leveraging CIC’s decidable equality [Asperti et al., 2009].
- Conservativity and Initiality: Per is conservative over simpler systems like System F, adding dependent types without altering propositional truths [Pfenning & Paulin-Mohring, 1989]. Inductive types like Nat satisfy initiality—every algebra morphism from Nat to another structure is uniquely defined—ensuring categorical universality [Dybjer, 1997].
- Definition: Type preservation and logical consistency hold.
- Formal Statement: 1) If
Γ ⊢ t : T
andinfer t = t'
, thenΓ ⊢ t' : T
; 2) Not
exists such thatΓ ⊢ t : Id (Universe 0, Universe 0, Universe 1)
. - Proof: Preservation via terminating reduce; consistency via positivity and intensionality.
- Status: Sound, inforced by rejecting non-total lambdas.
- Definition: The type checker captures all well-typed terms of MLTT within its bidirectional framework.
- Formal Statement: If
Γ ⊢ 𝑡 : T
, theninfer Δ Γ 𝑡 = T
orcheck Δ Γ 𝑡 T
holds under suitableΔ
. - Status: Complete relative to the implemented algorithm.
- Definition: Reduction reaches a normal form; equality is decidable.
- Formal Statement:
equal Δ Γ t t'
terminates, reflecting normalize’s partial eta and beta reductions innormnalize
. - Status: Satisfied within the scope of implemented reductions.
- Definition: All well-typed constructs terminate under reduction.
- Formal Statement: 1) For
Inductive d : Universe i
, eachConstr (j, d, args)
is total; 2) Fort : T
withInd
orJ
,reduce t
terminates; 3) ForLam (x, A, t) : Pi (x, A, B)
,reduce (App (Lam (x, A, t), a))
terminates for alla : A
; 4)normalize Δ Γ t
terminates.
The system is logically consistent, meaning no term t
exists such that Γ ⊢ t : ⊥
.
This is upheld by normalization and the absence of paradoxes such as Girard's [Girard, 1972].
- Definition: Type checking and equality are computable.
- Formal Statement:
infer
andcheck
terminate with a type orTypeError
. - Status: Decidable, enhanced by termination checks on lambda expressions.
https://per.groupoid.space/
🧊 MLTT/CIC Theorem Prover version 0.5 (c) 2025 Groupoїd Infinity
For help type `help`.
Starting proof for: Π(n : Nat).Nat
Goal 1:
Context: []
⊢ Π(n : Nat).Nat
1 goals remaining
>
[1]. Coquand, T., & Paulin-Mohring, C. Inductively defined types. 1990.
[2]. Christine Paulin-Mohring. Inductive Definitions in the System Coq. Rules and Properties. 1992.
[3]. Christine Paulin-Mohring. Introduction to the Calculus of Inductive Constructions. 2014.
[4]. Frank Pfenning, Christine Paulin-Mohring. Inductively Defined Types in the Calculus of Construction 1989.
[5]. A. Asperti, W. Ricciotti, C. Sacerdoti Coen, E. Tassi. A compact kernel for the calculus of inductive constructions.
[6]. P.Dybjer. Inductive families. 1997.
[7]. R.Harper, D.Licata. Mechanizing metatheory in a logical framework. 2007.
[8]. M.Bezem, T.Coquand, P.Dybjer, M.Escardó. Type Theory with Explicit Universe Polymorphism 2024.
[9]. Martin-Löf, P. Intuitionistic Type Theory. 1980.
[10]. Thierry Coquand. An Algorithm for Type-Checking Dependent Types. 1996.
[11]. N. G. de Bruijn. Lambda Calculus Notation with Nameless Dummies. 1972.
[12]. J.-Y. Girard. Interprétation fonctionnelle et élimination des coupures. 1972.
[13]. Thierry Coquand, Gerard Huet. The Calculus of Constructions. 1988.
Namdak Tonpa