4
$\begingroup$

Are there any models of Martin-Löf's intensional type theory in which univalence or function extensionality fails?

In the HoTT book, axioms like $\mathsf{LEM}_{\infty}$ (in Section 3.4) are proved to be inconsistent with univalence. I suppose that there might be some models in which univalence fails and such axioms hold, which is interesting.

Thanks.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I don't understand. As far as I know, univalence is sort of the definition of what HoTT is..? $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 4, 2016 at 11:59

1 Answer 1

13
$\begingroup$

“HoTT” isn’t generally currently considered as referring to a single specific formal system — it’s a similar situation to, say, “constructive mathematics”, for which there are various different more or less well-studied formal systems.

The core of most systems currently used for HoTT is Martin-Löf’s intensional type theory, ITT, usually also with funext. This is agnostic on homotopical questions: it has both the simplicial set model, where univalence holds, and the good old-fashioned set model, where UIP holds (“uniqueness of identity proofs” — in HoTT terminology, the statement/scheme asserting that every type is a set), and (at least as long as you’re working with ZFC or similar as your background foundation) LEM∞ holds as well. So in this case, LEM∞ certainly can hold — but it’s not what one would usually call a model of HoTT.

On the other hand, you might mean a stronger system — ITT augmented with some homotopical axioms, like univalence. In this case, because of the results you mention, there can’t be any model where LEM∞ holds.

One reasonable in-between thing one might mean by “models of HoTT” would be: models of ITT in which UIP doesn’t hold, i.e. models which are “homotopically non-trivial”. For this sense, the answer to your question is no, LEM∞ can’t hold in such models, since Hedberg’s Theorem shows that LEM∞ implies UIP, so any model of ITT + LEM∞ is homotopically trivial.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ However, there are also models in which UIP and univalence, and even function extensionality, all fail. For instance, the projective model in Z/2-groupoids in arxiv.org/abs/1512.04083 . A less esoteric possibility is the strict $\infty$-groupoid model in mawarren.net/papers/crmp1295.pdf, though I don't recall whether it's been checked that univalence fails there (though IIRC we don't expect it to). $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 4, 2016 at 15:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks, Peter and @mike-shulman. I mean models of ITT without univalence or funext, and "good old-fashioned set model" in Peter's answer and ones in Mike's answer are what I want. I shouldn't have used the word "HoTT". $\endgroup$
    – H Koba
    Commented Sep 5, 2016 at 15:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .