Abstract

This paper is a comparative study of a number of (intensional-semantically distinct) least and greatest fixed point operators that natural-deduction proof systems for intuitionistic logics can be extended with in a proof-theoretically defendable way. Eight pairs of such operators are analysed. The exposition is centred around a cube-shaped classification where each node stands for an axiomatization of one pair of operators as logical constants by intended proof and reduction rules and each arc for a proof- and reduction-preserving encoding of one pair in terms of another. The three dimensions of the cube reflect three orthogonal binary options: conventional-style vs. Mendler-style, basic (“[co]iterative”) vs. enhanced (“primitive–[co]recursive”), simple vs. course-of-value [co]induction. Some of the axiomatizations and encodings are well known; others, however, are novel; the classification into a cube is also new. The differences between the least fixed point operators considered are illustrated on the example of the corresponding natural number types.

Author Keywords: Least and greatest fixed points; Natural deduction; (Co)Inductive types; Typed lambda calculi; Coding styles; Schemes of (total) (co)recursion