  It is commonly agreed that the success of future proof assistants will rely
on their ability to incorporate computations within deduction in order to mimic
the mathematician when replacing the proof of a proposition P by the proof of
an equivalent proposition P' obtained from P thanks to possibly complex
calculations. In this paper, we investigate a new version of the calculus of
inductive constructions which incorporates arbitrary decision procedures into
deduction via the conversion rule of the calculus. The novelty of the problem
in the context of the calculus of inductive constructions lies in the fact that
the computation mechanism varies along proof-checking: goals are sent to the
decision procedure together with the set of user hypotheses available from the
current context. Our main result shows that this extension of the calculus of
constructions does not compromise its main properties: confluence, subject
reduction, strong normalization and consistency are all preserved.
