Alphabeta Math
Session-authored (Fable 5 assisted)
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

8 results · all verified · 3 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 5 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Algebraic and Spectral Graph Theory — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

These examples check the page's standard spectral computations on small named graphs and record two false converses that the main theorems do not justify: cospectrality does not force isomorphism, and positive algebraic connectivity detects connectedness rather than 2-connectedness.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The cycle C4 has adjacency spectrum {2,0,0,2}

Example

The cycle graph C4 has adjacency spectrum {2,0,0,2}.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The cycle graph C4.

[L1]

The cycle graph Cn has adjacency eigenvalues 2cos(2πj/n) for 0j<n (The cycle graph Cn has adjacency spectrum {2cos(2πj/n):0j<n}).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Applying [L1] with n=4 gives the eigenvalues 2cos(0)=2, 2cos(π/2)=0, 2cos(π)=2, and 2cos(3π/2)=0.

L1algebra
2.1

Reordering these values from largest to smallest yields {2,0,0,2}.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-28Open item page →

A disconnected graph has a Laplacian kernel spanned by its component indicators

Example

Let G have vertex set {1,2,3,4} and edge set {{1,2},{3,4}}. Then

kerL(G)=span{(1,1,0,0)T,(0,0,1,1)T}.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The graph G with components {1,2} and {3,4}.

[L1]

The Laplacian kernel is spanned by the indicator vectors of the connected components (The multiplicity of the Laplacian eigenvalue 0 equals the number of connected components).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

The graph G has exactly two connected components, namely {1,2} and {3,4}. Their indicator vectors are (1,1,0,0)T and (0,0,1,1)T.

given
2.1

By [L1], those two indicator vectors span the Laplacian kernel. They are linearly independent, so this displayed span is exactly kerL(G).

step 1.1L1
ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-28Open item page →

Kirchhoff's formula gives τ(K4)=16

Example

The complete graph K4 has exactly 16 spanning trees.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The complete graph K4.

[L1]

For a regular graph, τ(G)=1V(G)j=2V(G)(dλj) (The matrix-tree theorem becomes an eigenvalue product formula).

[L2]

The adjacency eigenvalues of K4 are 3,1,1,1 (The complete graph Kn has adjacency spectrum {n1,(1)n1}).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

The graph K4 is 3-regular and has four vertices, so [L1] and [L2] give τ(K4)=14(3(1))3=1443=16.

L1L2algebra
2.1

Therefore Kirchhoff's product formula recovers the count τ(K4)=16.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The graph K3,3 has adjacency spectrum {3,0,0,0,0,3}

Example

The complete bipartite graph K3,3 has adjacency spectrum {3,0,0,0,0,3}.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The graph K3,3.

[L1]

The graph Km,n has adjacency spectrum {mn,0m+n2,mn} (The complete bipartite graph Km,n has adjacency spectrum {mn,0m+n2,mn}).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Applying [L1] with m=n=3 gives the eigenvalues 9=3, 03+32=04, and 9=3.

L1algebra
2.1

So the ordered spectrum is {3,0,0,0,0,3}.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The two-subset model reproduces the Petersen spectrum

Example

The Petersen graph, realised on the two-element subsets of a five-element set, has adjacency spectrum {3,15,(2)4}.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Petersen graph on [Ω]2 for a five-element set Ω.

[F1]

This graph is the Petersen graph exactly when adjacency means disjointness of the two-element subsets (The Petersen graph on the two-element subsets of a five-element set, adjacent when disjoint).

[L1]

The Petersen graph has adjacency spectrum {3,15,(2)4} (The Petersen graph has adjacency spectrum {3,15,(2)4}).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

By [F1], the displayed two-subset construction is precisely the Petersen graph, not merely an isomorphic copy under a different naming convention.

F1
2.1

Therefore [L1] applies directly and yields the spectrum {3,15,(2)4}.

step 1.1L1
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-28Open item page →

Two cospectral graphs need not be isomorphic

Statement refuted

If two finite simple graphs are cospectral, then they are isomorphic.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The star K1,4 and the disjoint union C4K1.

[L2]
[L3]

Isomorphic graphs have the same spectrum (The adjacency spectrum is an isomorphism invariant).

[F1]

Cospectral graphs are those with the same adjacency spectrum (Adjacency spectrum, spectral radius, and cospectral graphs).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

By [L1], the star K1,4 has spectrum {2,0,0,0,2}. By [L2], the cycle C4 has spectrum {2,0,0,2}, so adjoining an isolated vertex contributes one more zero eigenvalue and gives the same spectrum for C4K1. Hence the two graphs are cospectral by [F1].

L1L2F1
2.1

The graphs are not isomorphic, because K1,4 is connected while C4K1 is not. Therefore the converse of [L3] fails.

step 1.1L3
3.1

So cospectral graphs need not be isomorphic.

step 1.1step 2.1
False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-28Open item page →

FALSE: positive second Laplacian eigenvalue characterises 2-connectivity

Statement

False claim. A finite simple graph has positive second Laplacian eigenvalue if and only if it is 2-connected.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The path graph P3 on vertices 123.

[L1]

A graph with positive algebraic connectivity is connected, and conversely (A finite simple graph is connected if and only if its algebraic connectivity is positive).

[F1]

The algebraic connectivity is the second-smallest Laplacian eigenvalue (The algebraic connectivity of a finite simple graph).

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1

The path P3 is connected, so [L1] and [F1] show that its second Laplacian eigenvalue is positive.

L1F1
1.2

Deleting the middle vertex of P3 leaves two isolated vertices, which is disconnected. Therefore [F2] shows that P3 is not 2-connected.

F2
2.1

So P3 has positive second Laplacian eigenvalue but is not 2-connected, refuting the claim.

step 1.1step 1.2
False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-28Open item page →

FALSE: the matrix-tree theorem works only for one distinguished cofactor

Statement

False claim. The matrix-tree theorem computes the spanning-tree count from only one special cofactor of the Laplacian; deleting a different row and column can change the answer.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite simple graph G.

[L1]

Every principal cofactor of the Laplacian equals τ(G) (Kirchhoff's matrix-tree theorem).

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1

By [L1], for every vertex index i the principal cofactor obtained by deleting row i and column i has determinant τ(G). So the value does not depend on a distinguished choice of index.

L1
2.1

This is exactly the negation of the false claim, so the claim is refuted.

step 1.1

Sources