You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
Reynold's abstraction theorem is now a well-established result for a large class of type systems. We propose here a definition of relational parametricity and a proof of the abstraction theorem in the Calculus of Inductive Constructions (CIC), the underlying formal language of Coq, in which parametricity relations' codomain is the impredicative sort of propositions. To proceed, we need to refine this calculus by splitting the sort hierarchy to separate informative terms from non-informative terms. This refinement is very close to CIC, but with the property that typing judgments can distinguish informative terms. Among many applications, this natural encoding of parametricity inside CIC serves both theoretical purposes (proving the independence of propositions with respect to the logical system) as well as practical aspirations (proving properties of finite algebraic structures). We finally discuss how we can simply build, on top of our calculus, a new reflexive Coq tactic that constructs proof terms by parametricity.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: Propositions that express type equality are a frequent ingredient of modern functional programming – they can encode generic functions, dynamic types, and GADTs. Via the Curry–Howard correspondence, these propositions are ordinary types inhabited by proof terms, computed using runtime type representations. In this paper we show that two examples of type equality propositions actually do reflect type equality; they are only inhabited when their arguments are equal and their proofs are unique (up to equivalence.) We show this result in the context of a strongly normalizing language with higher-order polymorphism and primitive recursion over runtime-type representations by proving Reynolds's abstraction theorem. We then use this theorem to derive “free” theorems about equality types.

[2]: We describe a systematic method to build a logic from any programming language described as a Pure Type System (PTS). The formulas of this logic express properties about programs. We define a parametricity theory about programs and a realizability theory for the logic. The logic is expressive enough to internalize both theories. Thanks to the PTS setting, we abstract most idiosyncrasies specific to particular type theories. This confers generality to the results, and reveals parallels between parametricity and realizability.

[3]: Reynolds' abstraction theorem shows how a typing judgement in System F can be translated into a relational statement (in second order predicate logic) about inhabitants of the type. We (in second order predicate logic) about inhabitants of the type. We obtain a similar result for a single lambda calculus (a pure type system), in which terms, types and their relations are expressed. Working within a single system dispenses with the need for an interpretation layer, allowing for an unusually simple presentation. While the unification puts some constraints on the type system (which we spell out), the result applies to many interesting cases, including dependently-typed ones.

[4]: 

[5]: From the type of a polymorphic function we can derive a theorem that it satisfies. Every function of the same type satisfies the same theorem. This provides a free source of useful theorems, courtesy of Reynolds’ abstraction theorem for the polymorphic lambda calculus.
Since the introduction of parametricity for system F [4] [5] , it has been extended to many logical systems based on Type Theory. Among others, we can cite system @math by Vytiniotis and Weirich [1] and a large subset of PTSs by Bernardy [3] [2] . In all these presentations, no sort is impredicative, and parametricity relations live either in a meta-logic or in a different sort than propositions. To our knowledge, this is the first time parametricity relations live in an impredicative sort representing propositions, making them more usable in a system like .