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.

Integer Partitions and the Twelvefold Way — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The eleven partitions of 6

Example

The partitions of 6, grouped by largest part, are

6,

5+1,

4+2, 4+1+1,

3+3, 3+2+1, 3+1+1+1,

2+2+2, 2+2+1+1, 2+1+1+1+1,

1+1+1+1+1+1.

So p(6)=11.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

Conjugation pairs the partitions of 6 by swapping length and largest part

Example

For the partitions of 6, conjugation gives the pairings

61+1+1+1+1+1,

5+12+1+1+1+1,

4+22+2+1+1,

4+1+13+1+1+1,

3+32+2+2,

and

3+2+13+2+1.

The fixed partition 3+2+1 is self-conjugate.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

A self-conjugate partition produces distinct odd diagonal hooks

Example

The partition

λ=(5,3,3,1,1)

is self-conjugate. Its diagonal cells are (1,1), (2,2), and (3,3), and their hook lengths are

9, 3, 1.

Thus the diagonal-hook construction sends λ to the distinct odd partition

9+3+1.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

Glaisher's bijection on an odd-part partition

Example

Start with the odd-part partition

5+5+3+1+1.

Its multiplicities are

2=21 for the part 5,1=20 for the part 3,2=21 for the part 1.

Glaisher's rule therefore replaces the two 5's by one 10, keeps the 3, and replaces the two 1's by one 2. The image is the distinct-part partition

10+3+2.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The partition (5,3,3,2,1) decomposes by its Durfee square

Example

For

λ=(5,3,3,2,1),

the Durfee length is 3, so the upper-left 3×3 square is the Durfee square.

The cells to the right of that square form the partition

α=(2),

and the cells below it form the partition

β=(2,1).

Thus λ is rebuilt from the 3×3 square together with one partition having at most 3 parts and one partition with parts at most 3.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

Euler's pentagonal recurrence computes p(10)=42

Example

The generalized pentagonal offsets not exceeding 10 are

1, 2, 5, 7.

So the recurrence gives

p(10)=p(9)+p(8)p(5)p(3).

Using

p(9)=30,p(8)=22,p(5)=7,p(3)=3,

one gets

p(10)=30+2273=42.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The labelled-to-labelled cells of the twelvefold way at n=3 and k=2

Example

For n=3 labelled balls and k=2 labelled boxes:

  • arbitrary maps: 23=8;
  • injective maps: 0, because 3>2;
  • surjective maps: 2!S(3,2)=23=6.

So the labelled-to-labelled row is (8,0,6).

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The unlabelled-domain to labelled-codomain cells at n=3 and k=2

Example

For 3 indistinguishable balls and 2 labelled boxes, the occupancy vectors are:

  • arbitrary: (3,0), (2,1), (1,2), (0,3), so the count is 4;
  • injective: none, because a 0-1 vector of length 2 cannot sum to 3;
  • surjective: (2,1) and (1,2), so the count is 2.

Thus the unlabelled-to-labelled row is (4,0,2).

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The labelled-domain to unlabelled-codomain cells at n=3 and k=2

Example

For 3 labelled balls and 2 unlabelled boxes:

  • arbitrary placements are set partitions of {1,2,3} into at most two blocks, namely one one-block partition and three two-block partitions, so the count is 4;
  • injective placements do not exist, because three singleton fibres would use three boxes but only two are available;
  • surjective placements are exactly the three two-block set partitions.

So the labelled-to-unlabelled row is (4,0,3).

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The unlabelled-to-unlabelled cells at n=3 and k=2

Example

For 3 indistinguishable balls and 2 indistinguishable boxes:

  • arbitrary placements correspond to the partitions 3 and 2+1, so the count is 2;
  • injective placements do not exist because 3>2;
  • surjective placements correspond only to 2+1, so the count is 1.

Thus the unlabelled-to-unlabelled row is (2,0,1).

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The recurrence gives p_3(5)=2

Example

Applying the recurrence once gives

p3(5)=p2(4)+p3(2)=2+0=2.

The two partitions are

3+1+1,2+2+1.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: Not suppliedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The partitions of 7 into distinct parts and into odd parts match

Example

The partitions of 7 into distinct parts are

7, 6+1, 5+2, 4+3, 4+2+1.

The partitions of 7 into odd parts are

7, 5+1+1, 3+3+1, 3+1+1+1+1, 1+1+1+1+1+1+1.

Glaisher's map pairs them as

77,5+1+15+2,3+3+16+1,

3+1+1+1+14+3,1+1+1+1+1+1+14+2+1.

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

The partition (4,2,1) is not self-conjugate

Statement refuted

The partition

(4,2,1)

is self-conjugate.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the partition λ=(4,2,1).

[F1]

Conjugation transposes the Ferrers diagram, so the conjugate partition has column lengths equal to the row lengths of the transposed diagram (Ferrers and Young diagrams, conjugate partitions, self-conjugacy, and the Durfee square).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

The Ferrers diagram of λ has column lengths 3,2,1,1, so [F1] gives λ=(3,2,1,1).

F1
2.1

Since (3,2,1,1)(4,2,1), the partition λ is not self-conjugate. Therefore the displayed claim is false.

step 1.1
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28Open item page →

Conjugating (4,2,1) does not produce an odd-part partition

Statement refuted

Conjugating the distinct-part partition

(4,2,1)

produces a partition into odd parts.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the distinct-part partition λ=(4,2,1).

[L1]

Conjugation of partitions is the transpose of the Ferrers diagram (Conjugating a partition twice returns the original partition).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

The columns of the Ferrers diagram of λ have lengths 3,2,1,1, so [L1] gives λ=(3,2,1,1).

L1
2.1

The conjugate partition has an even part, namely 2, so it is not a partition into odd parts. Therefore the displayed claim is false.

step 1.1
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedaudited 2026-08-28Open item page →

Ignoring summability in the Euler product leads to illegal coefficient manipulations

Statement refuted

One may compute the coefficient of x3 in the Euler product by the naive rule

[x3]m1(1xm)1=m1[x3](1+xm+x2m+).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the formal factors (1xm)1=1+xm+x2m+.

[F1]

The coefficient of x3 in the true Euler product counts partitions of 3, so it is 3.

[L1]

A locally finite product may be rearranged only by genuine regrouping of the same summable family; the infinite product is defined by stabilization of its finite partial products modulo each xN (Summable formal families may be regrouped and rearranged, distribute over multiplication, and have well-defined locally finite products).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

On the right-hand side, only the m=1 and m=3 summands contribute a nonzero x3 coefficient, so the naive calculation gives 1+1=2.

givenalgebra
2.1

But [F1] gives the true coefficient as 3, corresponding to the partitions 3, 2+1, and 1+1+1. The naive rule loses the mixed contribution xx2 coming from two different factors, so it is not a genuine regrouping of the locally finite product expansion licensed by [L1]. Therefore the displayed identity is false, and the missing summability control is exactly what permits the legal coefficientwise product.

step 1.1F1L1

Sources