Posts in the category Talks
Here are the slides with speaker notes for the talk What is an explicit bijection which I gave at the 31st International Conference on Formal Power Series and Algebraic Combinatorics (FPSAC 2019). It was the "outsider" talk, where they invite someone to tell them something outside of their area.
So how does one sell homotopy type theory to people who are interested in combinatorics? That is a tough sell. I used my MathOverflow question "What is an explicit bijection?" to give a stand-up comedy introduction, after which I plunged into type theory. I am told I plunged a little too hard. For instance, people asked "why are we doing this" because I did not make it clear enough that we are trying to make a distinction between "abstractly exists" and "concretely constructed". Oh well, it’s difficult to explain homotopy type theory in 50 minutes. Anyhow, I hope you can get something useful from the slides.
Download slides: what-is-an-explicit-bijection.pdf
Video recording of the lecture is now available.→ continue reading (2 comments)
I was purging the disk on my laptop of large files and found a video lecture which I forgot to publish. Here it is with some delay. I lectured on how to implement type theory at the School and Workshop on Univalent Mathematics in December 2017, at the University of Birmingham (UK).continue reading (1 comment)
I have had the honor to lecture at the Oregon Programming Language Summer School 2018 on the topic of algebraic effects and handlers. The notes, materials and the lectures are available online:
- the GitHub repository with the course material
- the OPLSS lecture materials, including notes and video recordings of the lectures
I gave four lectures which started with the mathematics of algebraic theories, explained how they can be used to model computational effects, how we make a programming language out of them, and how to program with handlers.→ continue reading (3 comments)
The slides from the talk “Spartan type theory”, given at the School and Workshop on Univalent Mathematics.
Download slides with speaker notes: Spartan Type Theory [PDF]→ continue reading (7 comments)
I am about to give an invited talk at the Workshop on Categorical Logic and Univalent Foundations 2016 in Leeds, UK. It’s a charming workshop that I am enjoing a great deal. Here are the slides of my talk, with speaker notes, as well as the Andromeda examples that I am planning to cover.continue reading (30 comments)
I am about to give an invited talk at the Computability and Complexity in Analysis 2016 conference (yes, I am in the south of Portugal, surrounded by loud English tourists, but we are working here, in a basement no less). Here are the slides, with extensive speaker notes, comment and questions are welcome.
Slides: hott-reals-cca2016.pdf→ continue reading (6 comments)
Here are the slides of my TYPES 2015 talk “The troublesome reflection rule” with fairly detailed presenter notes. The meeting is taking place in Tallinn, Estonia – a very cool country in many senses (it’s not quite spring yet even though we’re in the second half of May, and it’s the country that gave us Skype).
Download slides: The troublesome reflection rule (TYPES 2015) [PDF].→ continue reading (2 comments)
I spoke at TEDx University of Ljubljana. The topic was how programming influences various aspects of life. I showed the audence how a bit of simple programming can reveal the beauty of mathematics. Taking John Baez’s The Bauty of Roots as an inspiration, I drew a very large image (20000 by 17500 pixels) of all roots of all polynomials of degree at most 26 whose coefficients are $-1$ or $1$. That’s 268.435.452 polynomials and 6.979.321.752 roots. It is two degrees more than Sam Derbyshire’s image, so consider the race to be on! Who can give me 30 degrees?→ continue reading (6 comments)
Here are the slides from my Logic Coloquium 2014 talk in Vienna. This is joint work with Kazuto Yoshimura from Japan Advanced Institute for Science and Technology.
Abstract: In constructive mathematics we often consider implications between non-constructive reasoning principles. For instance, it is well known that the Limited principle of omniscience implies that equality of real numbers is decidable. Most such reductions proceed by reducing an instance of the consequent to an instance of the antecedent. We may therefore define a notion of instance reducibility, which turns out to have a very rich structure. Even better, under Kleene’s function realizability interpretation instance reducibility corresponds to Weihrauch reducibility, while Kleene’s number realizability relates it to truth-table reducibility. We may also ask about a constructive treatment of other reducibilities in computability theory. I shall discuss how one can tackle Turing reducibility constructively via Kleene’s number realizability.
Slides with talk notes: lc2014-slides-notes.pdf→ continue reading
I just gave a talk at “Semantics of proofs and certified mathematics”. I spoke about a new proof checker Chris Stone and I are working on. The interesting feature is that it has both kinds of equality, the “paths” and the “strict” ones. It is based on a homotopy type system proposed by Vladimir Voevodsky. The slides contain talk notes and explain why it is “Brazilian”.
Abstract: Proof assistants verify that inputs are correct up to judgmental equality. Proofs are easier and smaller if equalities without computational content are verified by an oracle, because proof terms for these equations can be omitted. In order to keep judgmental equality decidable, though, typical proof assistants use a limited definition implemented by a fixed equivalence algorithm. While other equalities can be expressed using propositional identity types and explicit equality proofs and coercions, in some situations these create prohibitive levels of overhead in the proof.
Voevodsky has proposed a type theory with two identity types, one propositional and one judgmental. This lets us hypothesize new judgmental equalities for use during type checking, but generally renders the equational theory undecidable without help from the user.
Rather than reimpose the full overhead of term-level coercions for judgmental equality, we propose algebraic effect handlers as a general mechanism to provide local extensions to the proof assistant’s algorithms. As a special case, we retain a simple form of handlers even in the final proof terms, small proof-specific hints that extend the trusted verifier in sound ways.→ continue reading (5 comments)
On December 6th 2011 I gave a talk about homotopy equivalences in the context of homotopy type theory at our seminar for foundations of mathematics and theoretical computer science. I discuss the differences and relations between isomorphism (in the sense of type theory), an adjoint equivalence, and a homotopy equivalence. Even though the talk itself was not super-well prepared, I hope the recording will be interesting to some people. I was going fairly slowly, so it should be possible to follow the talk. I apologize for such a long video, but I really did not see how to chop it up into smaller pieces. Also, I need to figure out why I cannot fast forward the video beyond what has been downloaded.→ continue reading (5 comments)
- 06 December 2011
A talk given at “Mathematics, Algorithms and Proofs 2011” at the Lorentz Center in Leiden, the Netherlands. I explain how to use computational effects to speed up Martin Escardo’s impossible functionals.→ continue reading (4 comments)
A talk given at “Computation with Infinite Data: Logical and Topological Foundations” Dagstuhl seminar 11411. I describe a realizability model based on infinite-time Turing machines in which it is possible to embed the Baire space (infinite sequences of numbers) into the space of numbers.
Also see the post Constructive gem: an injection from Baire space to natural numbers for written notes on this topic.→ continue reading
[UPDATE 2012-03-08: since this post was written eff has changed considerably. For updated information, please visit the eff page.]
I just returned from Paris where I was visiting the INRIA ?r² team. It was a great visit, everyone was very hospitable, the food was great, and the weather was nice. I spoke at their seminar where I presented a new programming language eff which is based on the idea that computational effects are algebras. The language has been designed and implemented jointly by Matija Pretnar and myself. Eff is far from being finished, but I think it is ready to be shown to the world. What follows is an extended transcript of the talk I gave in Paris. It is divided into two posts. The present one reviews the basic theory of algebras for a signature and how they are related to computational effects. The impatient readers can skip ahead to the second part, which is about the programming language.
A side remark: I have updated the blog to WordPress to 3.0 and switched to MathJax for displaying mathematics. Now I need to go through 70 old posts and convert the old ASCIIMathML notation to MathJax, as well as fix characters which got garbled during the update. Oh well, it is an investment for the future.→ continue reading (18 comments)
These are the slides and the extended abstract from my MSFP 2008 talk. Apparently, I forgot to publish them online. There is a discussion on the Agda mailing list to which the talk is somewhat relevant, so I am publishing now.
Abstract: Realizability is an interpretation of intuitionistic logic which subsumes the Curry-Howard interpretation of propositions as types, because it allows the realizers to use computational effects such as non-termination, store and exceptions. Therefore, we can use realizability as a framework for program development and extraction which allows any style of programming, not just the purely functional one that is supported by the Curry-Howard correspondence. In joint work with Christopher A. Stone we developed RZ, a tool which uses realizability to translate specifications written in constructive logic into interface code annotated with logical assertions. RZ does not extract code from proofs, but allows any implementation method, from handwritten code to code extracted from proofs by other tools. In our experience, RZ is useful for specification of non-trivial theories. While the use of computational effects does improve efficiency it also makes it difficult to reason about programs and prove their correctness. We demonstrate this fact by considering non-purely functional realizers for a Brouwerian continuity principle.continue reading (2 comments)
Joint work with Paul Taylor.
Abstract: Cauchy’s construction of reals as sequences of rational approximations is the theoretical basis for a number of implementations of exact real numbers, while Dedekind’s construction of reals as cuts has inspired fewer useful computational ideas. Nevertheless, we can see the computational content of Dedekind reals by constructing them within Abstract Stone Duality (ASD), a computationally meaningful calculus for topology. This provides the theoretical background for a novel way of computing with real numbers in the style of logic programming. Real numbers are defined in terms of (lower and upper) Dedekind cuts, while programs are expressed as statements about real numbers in the language of ASD. By adapting Newton’s method to interval arithmetic we can make the computations as efficient as those based on Cauchy reals.continue reading
With Iztok Kavkler.
Abstract: The interval domain was proposed by Dana Scott as a domain-theoretic model for real numbers. It is a successful theoretical idea which also inspired a number of computational models for real numbers. However, current state-of-the-art implementations of real numbers, e.g., Mueller’s iRRAM and Lambov’s RealLib, do not seem to be based on the interval domain. In fact, their authors have observed that domain-theoretic concepts such as monotonicity of functions hinder efficiency of computation.
I will review the data structures and algorithms that are used in modern implementations of exact real arithmetic. They provide important insights, but some questions remain about what theoretical models support them, and how we can show them to be correct. It turns out that the correctness is not always clear, and that the good old interval domain still has a few tricks to offer.
Download slides: domains8-slides.pdf→ continue reading (5 comments)
A tutorial presented at the Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics XXIII Tutorial Day.→ continue reading (5 comments)
With Davorin Lešnik.
Abstract: We investigate the relationship between constructive theory of metric spaces and synthetic topology. Connections between these are established by requiring a relationship to exist between the intrinsic and the metric topology of a space. We propose a non-classical axiom which has several desirable consequences, e.g., that all maps between separable metric spaces are continuous in the sense of metrics, and that, up to topological equivalence, a set can be equipped with at most one metric which makes it complete and separable.
Presented at: 3rd Workshop on Formal Topology
Download slides: 3wft.pdf→ continue reading
With Iztok Kavkler.
Abstract: RZ is a tool which translates axiomatizations of mathematical structures to program speciï¬cations using the realizability interpretation of logic. This helps programmers correctly implement data structures for computable mathematics. RZ does not prescribe a particular method of implementation, but allows programmers to write efficient code by hand, or to extract trusted code from formal proofs, if they so desire. We used this methodology to axiomatize real numbers and implemented the speciï¬cation computed by RZ. The axiomatization is the standard domain-theoretic construction of reals as the maximal elements of the interval domain, while the implementation closely follows current state-of-the-art implementations of exact real arithmetic. Our results shows not only that the theory and practice of computable mathematics can coexist, but also that they work together harmoniously.
Presented at Computability and Complexity in Analysis 2007.
Download paper: rzreals.pdf
Download slides: cca2007-slides.pdf→ continue reading
With Chris Stone.
Realizability theory is not only a fundamental tool in logic and computability, but also has direct application to the design and implementation of programs: it can produce interfaces for the data structure corresponding to a mathematical theory. Our tool, called RZ, serves as a bridge between the worlds of constructive mathematics and programming. By using the realizability interpretation of constructive mathematics, RZ translates specifications in constructive logic into annotated interface code in Objective Caml. The system supports a rich input language allowing descriptions of complex mathematical structures. RZ does not extract code from proofs, but allows any implementation method, from handwritten code to code extracted from proofs by other tools.
Presented at Computablity in Europe 2007.
Download slides: cie2007-slides.pdf
Download source code from RZ web page.→ continue reading (3 comments)
With Alex Simpson.
Abstract: We present a constructive meta-theorem about sequential continuity which allows us to conclude from a constructive proof of existence of a function between complete metric spaces satisfying a given system of (functional) equations that there also exists a sequentially continuous function satisfying the system.
Presented at: Trends in Constructive mathematics, Frauenwörth am Chimsee, Germany, June 2006.
Download slides: continuity_begets_continuity_bavaria_slides.pdf→ continue reading
With Chris Stone.
Presented at: Reliable Implementation of Real Number Algorithms: Theory and Practice, Dagstuhl Seminar 06021.
Abstract: see “Specifications via Realizability (CLASE)”.
Talk notes: rz-dagstuhl.pdf (handwritten notes of the talk with examples of how RZ works)→ continue reading
At the EST training workshop in Fischbachau, Germany, I gave two lectures on syntehtic computability theory. This version of the talk contains material on recursive analysis which is not found in the MFPS XXI version of a similar talk.
Computability theory, which investigates computable functions and computable sets, lies at the foundation of logic and computer science. Its classical presentations usually involve a fair amount of Goedel encodings. Consequently, there have been a number of presentations of computability theory that aimed to present the subject in an abstract and conceptually pleasing way. We build on two such approaches, Hyland’s effective topos and Richman’s formulation in Bishop-style constructive mathematics, and develop basic computability theory, starting from a few simple axioms. Because we want a theory that resembles ordinary mathematics as much as possible, we never speak of Turing machines and Goedel encodings, but rather use familiar concepts from set theory and
Download slides: est.pdf→ continue reading (8 comments)
Abstract: Computability theory, which investigates computable functions and computable sets, lies at the foundation of computer science. Its classical presentations usually involve a fair amount of Gödel encodings which sometime obscure ingenious arguments. Consequently, there have been a number of presentations of computability theory that aimed to present the subject in an abstract and conceptually pleasing way. We build on two such approaches, Hyland’s effective topos and Richman’s formulation in Bishop-style constructive mathematics, and develop basic computability theory, starting from a few simple axioms. Because we want a theory that resembles ordinary mathematics as much as possible, we never speak of Turing machines and Gödel encodings, but rather use familiar concepts from set theory and topology.
Presented at: Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics XXI, Birmingham, 2004 (invited talk).
Download slides: synthetic-slides.pdf→ continue reading (1 comment)