Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Saturate negative conversion rules with inversions #56

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Sep 27, 2023

Conversation

ppedrot
Copy link
Contributor

@ppedrot ppedrot commented Sep 27, 2023

We dive into paranoïa for the side-conditions of η-rules for functions and pairs. That is, we saturate the isWfFun and isWfPair with everything we have at hand about the considered subterms. This is done by semantizing the corresponding predicates in the logical relation, introducing the semantic counterparts isLRFun and isLRPair.

  • Functions could even be a tad more paranoid (asking for inversions on the codomain type) but it would require more work and it's already better now.
  • Some self-convertibility hypotheses in prod / sigma term reducibility are probably redundant now since the semantic predicates imply them once we have escape, I didn't look into that.

@MevenBertrand MevenBertrand merged commit e6330aa into master Sep 27, 2023
2 checks passed
@MevenBertrand MevenBertrand deleted the strenghten-negative-inversion-conversion branch September 27, 2023 09:10
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants