2012
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-32347-8_11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bag Equivalence via a Proof-Relevant Membership Relation

Abstract: Abstract. Two lists are bag equivalent if they are permutations of each other, i.e. if they contain the same elements, with the same multiplicity, but perhaps not in the same order. This paper describes how one can define bag equivalence as the presence of bijections between sets of membership proofs. This definition has some desirable properties:-Many bag equivalences can be proved using a flexible form of equational reasoning. -The definition generalises easily to arbitrary unary containers, including types … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The simplest encoding of finite multisets is lists up to permutation of their elements. In this context, the relation of Definition 6.10 using automorphisms on finite cardinals as permutations has been considered by Altenkirch et al [1] and Nuo [41]; while Danielsson [20] has considered a similar relation for bag equivalence of lists. Multisets in type theory have also been studied by Gylterud [31] from the point of view of constructive foundations, considering how to generalise set-theoretic axioms from sets to multisets.…”
Section: Finite Multisetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The simplest encoding of finite multisets is lists up to permutation of their elements. In this context, the relation of Definition 6.10 using automorphisms on finite cardinals as permutations has been considered by Altenkirch et al [1] and Nuo [41]; while Danielsson [20] has considered a similar relation for bag equivalence of lists. Multisets in type theory have also been studied by Gylterud [31] from the point of view of constructive foundations, considering how to generalise set-theoretic axioms from sets to multisets.…”
Section: Finite Multisetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These transports are done in an ad-hoc way that can be done more elegantly with the SIP. Prior to HoTT/UF, Danielsson [2012] formalized finite multisets as a setoid of lists modulo "bag equivalence, " which is exactly the relation R that we use to quotient lists in Example 5.5.…”
Section: Related and Future Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other definiitons of finite multisets in type theory have been considered before, for instance using setoids [15,26,4]. None of these encodings prove the universal property of free commutative monoids and most results use the assumption of decidable equality.…”
Section: Multiset Equalitymentioning
confidence: 99%