Nicolai Kraus 2012. This is adapted to our TypeTopology development by Martin Escardo, but we keep Nicolai's original proof. The main result is that the type of fixed-points of a weakly constant endomap is a proposition, in pure MLTT without HoTT/UF extensions. We also add some consequences obtained in joint work with Martin Escardo, Thierry Coquand, and Thorsten Altenkirch. \begin{code} {-# OPTIONS --without-K --exact-split --safe --auto-inline #-} module UF.KrausLemma where open import MLTT.Spartan open import UF.Base open import UF.Subsingletons fix : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → (f : X → X) → 𝓤 ̇ fix f = Σ x ꞉ domain f , x = f x key-lemma : {X Y : 𝓤 ̇ } (f : X → Y) (g : wconstant f) {x y : X} (p : x = y) → ap f p = (g x x)⁻¹ ∙ g x y key-lemma f g {x} refl = sym-is-inverse (g x x) key-insight : {X Y : 𝓤 ̇ } (f : X → Y) → wconstant f → {x : X} (p : x = x) → ap f p = refl key-insight f g p = key-lemma f g p ∙ (sym-is-inverse (g _ _))⁻¹ transport-ids-along-ids : {X Y : 𝓤 ̇ } {x y : X} (p : x = y) (h k : X → Y) (q : h x = k x) → transport (λ - → h - = k -) p q = (ap h p)⁻¹ ∙ q ∙ ap k p transport-ids-along-ids refl h k q = refl-left-neutral ⁻¹ transport-ids-along-ids' : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } {x : X} (p : x = x) (f : X → X) (q : x = f x) → transport (λ - → - = f -) p q = (p ⁻¹ ∙ q) ∙ ap f p transport-ids-along-ids' {𝓤} {X} {x} p f q = γ where g : x = x → x = f x g r = r ⁻¹ ∙ q ∙ (ap f p) γ : transport (λ - → - = f -) p q = p ⁻¹ ∙ q ∙ ap f p γ = transport-ids-along-ids p id f q ∙ ap g ((ap-id-is-id' p)⁻¹) \end{code} The following is what we refer to as Kraus Lemma: \begin{code} fix-is-prop : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → (f : X → X) → wconstant f → is-prop (fix f) fix-is-prop {𝓤} {X} f g (x , p) (y , q) = (x , p) =⟨ to-Σ-= (r , refl) ⟩ (y , p') =⟨ to-Σ-= (s , t) ⟩ (y , q) ∎ where r : x = y r = x =⟨ p ⟩ f x =⟨ g x y ⟩ f y =⟨ q ⁻¹ ⟩ y ∎ p' : y = f y p' = transport (λ - → - = f -) r p s : y = y s = y =⟨ p' ⟩ f y =⟨ q ⁻¹ ⟩ y ∎ q' : y = f y q' = transport (λ - → - = f -) s p' t : q' = q t = q' =⟨ transport-ids-along-ids' s f p' ⟩ (s ⁻¹ ∙ p') ∙ ap f s =⟨ ∙assoc (s ⁻¹) p' (ap f s) ⟩ s ⁻¹ ∙ (p' ∙ ap f s) =⟨ ap (λ - → s ⁻¹ ∙ (p' ∙ -)) (key-insight f g s) ⟩ s ⁻¹ ∙ (p' ∙ refl) =⟨ ap (λ - → s ⁻¹ ∙ -) ((refl-right-neutral p')⁻¹) ⟩ s ⁻¹ ∙ p' =⟨ refl ⟩ (p' ∙ (q ⁻¹))⁻¹ ∙ p' =⟨ ap (λ - → - ∙ p') ((⁻¹-contravariant p' (q ⁻¹))⁻¹) ⟩ ((q ⁻¹)⁻¹ ∙ (p' ⁻¹)) ∙ p' =⟨ ap (λ - → (- ∙ (p' ⁻¹)) ∙ p') (⁻¹-involutive q) ⟩ (q ∙ (p' ⁻¹)) ∙ p' =⟨ ∙assoc q (p' ⁻¹) p' ⟩ q ∙ ((p' ⁻¹) ∙ p') =⟨ ap (λ - → q ∙ -) ((sym-is-inverse p')⁻¹) ⟩ q ∙ refl =⟨ (refl-right-neutral q)⁻¹ ⟩ q ∎ \end{code} A main application is to show that, in pure spartan MLTT, if a type has a wconstant endfunction then it has a propositional truncation. \begin{code} from-fix : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } (f : X → X) → fix f → X from-fix f = pr₁ to-fix : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } (f : X → X) → wconstant f → X → fix f to-fix f g x = (f x , g x (f x)) from-to-fix : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } (f : X → X) (κ : wconstant f) → from-fix f ∘ to-fix f κ ∼ f from-to-fix f κ w = refl to-from-fix : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } (f : X → X) (κ : wconstant f) → to-fix f κ ∘ from-fix f ∼ id to-from-fix f κ _ = fix-is-prop f κ _ _ has-split-support' : 𝓤 ̇ → 𝓤 ⁺ ̇ has-split-support' {𝓤} X = Σ P ꞉ 𝓤 ̇ , is-prop P × (X ⇔ P) fix-has-split-support' : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → collapsible X → has-split-support' X fix-has-split-support' {𝓤} {X} (f , κ) = fix f , fix-is-prop f κ , to-fix f κ , from-fix f has-prop-truncation : (𝓥 : Universe) → 𝓤 ̇ → (𝓤 ⊔ 𝓥)⁺ ̇ has-prop-truncation {𝓤} 𝓥 X = Σ X' ꞉ 𝓤 ̇ , is-prop X' × (X → X') × ((P : 𝓥 ̇ ) → is-prop P → (X → P) → X' → P) split-truncation : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → has-split-support' X → ∀ 𝓥 → has-prop-truncation 𝓥 X split-truncation {𝓤} {X} (X' , i , f , g) V = X' , i , f , λ P j h x' → h (g x') collapsible-has-prop-truncation : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → collapsible X → ∀ 𝓥 → has-prop-truncation 𝓥 X collapsible-has-prop-truncation {𝓤} {X} c = split-truncation (fix-has-split-support' c) open import UF.PropTrunc module split-support-and-collapsibility (pe : propositional-truncations-exist) where open PropositionalTruncation pe has-split-support : 𝓤 ̇ → 𝓤 ̇ has-split-support X = ∥ X ∥ → X has-split-support→ : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → has-split-support X → has-split-support' X has-split-support→ {𝓤} {X} f = ∥ X ∥ , ∥∥-is-prop , (λ x → ∣ x ∣) , f has-split-support← : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → has-split-support' X → has-split-support X has-split-support← {𝓤} {X} (P , P-is-prop , g , f) = f ∘ ∥∥-rec P-is-prop g \end{code} TODO: Are the above two functions mutually inverse and hence we get an equivalence? \begin{code} collapsible-gives-split-support : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → collapsible X → has-split-support X collapsible-gives-split-support {𝓤} {X} (f , κ) s = x where g : ∥ X ∥ → fix f g = ∥∥-rec (fix-is-prop f κ) (to-fix f κ) x : X x = from-fix f (g s) split-support-gives-collapsible : {X : 𝓤 ̇ } → has-split-support X → collapsible X split-support-gives-collapsible {𝓤} {X} g = γ where f : X → X f x = g ∣ x ∣ κ : (x y : X) → f x = f y κ x y = ap g (∥∥-is-prop ∣ x ∣ ∣ y ∣) γ : collapsible X γ = f , κ \end{code}