The real projective spaces in homotopy type theory

Homotopy type theory is a version of Martin-L\"of type theory taking advantage of its homotopical models. In particular, we can use and construct objects of homotopy theory and reason about them using higher inductive types. In this article, we construct the real projective spaces, key players in homotopy theory, as certain higher inductive types in homotopy type theory. The classical definition of RP(n), as the quotient space identifying antipodal points of the n-sphere, does not translate directly to homotopy type theory. Instead, we define RP(n) by induction on n simultaneously with its tautological bundle of 2-element sets. As the base case, we take RP(-1) to be the empty type. In the inductive step, we take RP(n+1) to be the mapping cone of the projection map of the tautological bundle of RP(n), and we use its universal property and the univalence axiom to define the tautological bundle on RP(n+1). By showing that the total space of the tautological bundle of RP(n) is the n-sphere, we retrieve the classical description of RP(n+1) as RP(n) with an (n+1)-cell attached to it. The infinite dimensional real projective space, defined as the sequential colimit of the RP(n) with the canonical inclusion maps, is equivalent to the Eilenberg-MacLane space K(Z/2Z,1), which here arises as the subtype of the universe consisting of 2-element types. Indeed, the infinite dimensional projective space classifies the 0-sphere bundles, which one can think of as synthetic line bundles. These constructions in homotopy type theory further illustrate the utility of homotopy type theory, including the interplay of type theoretic and homotopy theoretic ideas.Comment: 8 pages, to appear in proceedings of LICS 201

Sets in homotopy type theory

Homotopy Type Theory may be seen as an internal language for the $\infty$-category of weak $\infty$-groupoids which in particular models the univalence axiom. Voevodsky proposes this language for weak $\infty$-groupoids as a new foundation for mathematics called the Univalent Foundations of Mathematics. It includes the sets as weak $\infty$-groupoids with contractible connected components, and thereby it includes (much of) the traditional set theoretical foundations as a special case. We thus wonder whether those `discrete' groupoids do in fact form a (predicative) topos. More generally, homotopy type theory is conjectured to be the internal language of `elementary' $\infty$-toposes. We prove that sets in homotopy type theory form a $\Pi W$-pretopos. This is similar to the fact that the $0$-truncation of an $\infty$-topos is a topos. We show that both a subobject classifier and a $0$-object classifier are available for the type theoretical universe of sets. However, both of these are large and moreover, the $0$-object classifier for sets is a function between $1$-types (i.e. groupoids) rather than between sets. Assuming an impredicative propositional resizing rule we may render the subobject classifier small and then we actually obtain a topos of sets

Modalities in homotopy type theory

Univalent homotopy type theory (HoTT) may be seen as a language for the category of $\infty$-groupoids. It is being developed as a new foundation for mathematics and as an internal language for (elementary) higher toposes. We develop the theory of factorization systems, reflective subuniverses, and modalities in homotopy type theory, including their construction using a "localization" higher inductive type. This produces in particular the ($n$-connected, $n$-truncated) factorization system as well as internal presentations of subtoposes, through lex modalities. We also develop the semantics of these constructions

B-systems and C-systems are equivalent

C-systems were defined by Cartmell as models of generalized algebraic theories. B-systems were defined by Voevodsky in his quest to formulate and prove an initiality conjecture for type theories. They play a crucial role in Voevodsky's construction of a syntactic C-system from a term monad. In this work, we construct an equivalence between the category of C-systems and the category of B-systems, thus proving a conjecture by Voevodsky