Skip to main content

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Philosophy ((BRIEFSPHILOSOPH))

  • 510 Accesses

Abstract

Within Per Martin-Löf’s Constructive Type Theory (CTT for short) the logical constants are interpreted through the Curry-Howard correspondence between propositions and sets. A proposition is interpreted as a set whose elements represent the proofs of the proposition. It is also possible to view a set as a problem description in a way similar to Kolmogorov’s explanation of the intuitionistic propositional calculus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Cf. Nordström et al. (1990) and Granström (2011).

  2. 2.

    For a thorough discussion on this issue, see Sundholm (1997, 2001).

  3. 3.

    For a thorough discussion see Granström (2011, pp. 54–76).

  4. 4.

    Martin-Löf used the sign “\(\in \)” in order to indicate that something, say a, is of some type, say B. He even suggests to understand it as a the copula ‘is’. Nordström et al. (1990) also uses this notation while other authors such as Ranta (1994) use the colon. Granström (2011) distinguishes the colon from the epsilon, where the first applies to non-canonical elements and the latter to canonical ones. We will use the colon.

  5. 5.

    Cf. Granström (2011, pp. 111–112).

  6. 6.

    Cf. Ranta (1991, Sect. 3).

References

  • Granström, J. 2011. Treatise on Intuitionistic Type Theory. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Löf, P. 1984. Intuitionistic Type Theory. Naples: Bibliopolis. Notes by Giovanni Sambin of a series of lectures given in Padua, June 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordström, B., K. Petersson, and J.M. Smith. 1990. Programming in Martin-Löf’s Type Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranta, A. 1991. Constructing possible worlds. Theoria 57(1–2): 77–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranta, A. 1994. Type-Theoretical Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundholm, G. 1997. Implicit epistemic aspects of constructive logic. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 6(2): 191–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundholm, G. 2001. A plea for logical atavism. In The Logica Yearbook 2000, ed. O. Majer, 151–162. Prague: Filosofia.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Clerbout .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Clerbout, N., Rahman, S. (2015). Brief Reminder of Constructive Type Theory. In: Linking Game-Theoretical Approaches with Constructive Type Theory. SpringerBriefs in Philosophy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19063-1_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics