We are not able to resolve this OAI Identifier to the repository landing page. If you are the repository manager for this record, please head to the Dashboard and adjust the settings.
In a dependent type theory satisfying the propositions as
types correspondence together with the proofs-as-programs paradigm,
the validity of the unique choice rule or even more of the choice rule says
that the extraction of a computable witness from an existential statement
under hypothesis can be performed within the same theory.
Here we show that the unique choice rule, and hence the choice rule,
are not valid both in Coquand’s Calculus of Constructions with indexed
sum types, list types and binary disjoint sums and in its predicative
version implemented in the intensional level of the Minimalist Founda-
tion. This means that in these theories the extraction of computational
witnesses from existential statements must be performed in a more ex-
pressive proofs-as-programs theory
Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.