The main result of this paper is the equivalence of several definition schemas of bar recursion occurring in the literature on functionals of finite type. We present the theory of functionals of finite type, in [T] denoted byqf-WE-HA ω, which is necessary for giving the equivalence proofs. Moreover we prove two results on this theory that cannot be found in the literature, namely the deduction theorem and a derivation of Spector's rule of extensionality from [S]: ifP→T 1=T 2 and Q[X∶≡T1], (...) then P→Q[X∶≡ T2], from the at first sight weaker rule obtained by omitting “P→”. (shrink)

We present a possible computational content of the negative translation of classical analysis with the Axiom of (countable) Choice. Interestingly, this interpretation uses a refinement of the realizability semantics of the absurdity proposition, which is not interpreted as the empty type here. We also show how to compute witnesses from proofs in classical analysis of ∃-statements and how to extract algorithms from proofs of ∀∃-statements. Our interpretation seems computationally more direct than the one based on Godel's Dialectica interpretation.

We show that Spector's “restricted” form of bar recursion is sufficient (over system T) to define Spector's search functional. This new result is then used to show that Spector's restricted form of bar recursion is in fact as general as the supposedly more general form of bar recursion. Given that these two forms of bar recursion correspond to the (explicitly controlled) iterated products of selection function and quantifiers, it follows that this iterated product of selection functions is T‐equivalent to the (...) corresponding iterated product of quantifiers. (shrink)

This article generalises the refined A-translation method for extracting programs from classical proofs [U. Berger,W. Buchholz, H. Schwichtenberg, Refined program extraction from classical proofs, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 114 3–25] to the scenario where additional assumptions such as choice principles are involved. In the case of choice principles, this is done by adding computational content to the ‘translated’ assumptions, an idea which goes back to [S. Berardi, M. Bezem, T. Coquand, On the computational content of the axiom of (...) choice, JSL 63 600–622] and has been further elaborated in [U. Berger, P. Oliva, Modified bar recursion and classical dependent choice, in: M. Baaz, S.D. Friedman, J. Kraijcek , Logic Colloquium ’01, in: Lecture Notes in Logic, vol. 20, Springer, Berlin, 2005, pp. 89–107]. We further investigate the applicability of this extension by means of a small but non-trivial example, and discuss the formalisation as well as some optimisations necessary in order to extract terminating programs. Both formalisation and term extraction have been implemented in the interactive proof assistant Minlog. (shrink)