Alphabeta Math
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.

✓ 7 results · all verified · 0 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 7 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Noether Normalisation and Nullstellensatz - Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

These examples keep the theory concrete: a small transcendence-basis calculation, explicit infinite-field and finite-field normalisation moves, a denominator obstruction inside k(t), the real-field failure of point-form weak Nullstellensatz, a nonradical ideal whose zero locus sees only its radical, and a fully written Rabinowitsch identity.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-30Open item page →

A transcendence basis of k(s, t, sqrt(s+t)) over k

Example

Let K=k(s,t,s+t), where s and t are algebraically independent over k. Then {s,t} is a transcendence basis of K over k.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A field k, algebraically independent elements s,t over k, and u=s+t.

[L1]

An algebraically independent set is a transcendence basis once the ambient field is algebraic over the generated field (A maximal algebraically independent set is a transcendence basis).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1given

The set {s,t} is algebraically independent over k by construction, so k(s,t) is a rational function field in two variables.

2.1step 1.1given

The remaining generator u satisfies the polynomial X2−(s+t)∈k(s,t)[X], so u is algebraic over k(s,t). Since K=k(s,t,u), the whole field K is algebraic over k(s,t).

3.1L1step 2.1∎

Therefore [L1] shows that {s,t} is a transcendence basis of K over k.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-30Open item page →

A triangular change makes a bivariate relation monic

Example

Let k be an infinite field of characteristic not equal to 2, and let A=k[x,y](x2+y2). Put u=x−y. Then the triangular change x=u+y makes the defining relation monic in y, and A is module-finite over the polynomial subring k[uˉ].

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An infinite field k with 2≠0 and the quotient A=k[x,y]/(x2+y2).

[L1]

Over an infinite field, a triangular change can make a nonzero polynomial monic in one variable (Over an infinite field, a triangular change makes a nonzero polynomial monic).

[L2]

A monic relation makes the last generator integral over the subalgebra on the earlier generators (A monic relation makes the last generator integral over the earlier ones).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1L1given

Introduce the triangular coordinate u=x−y, so x=u+y. Then (u+y)2+y2=u2+2uy+2y2. Multiplying by 2−1 gives the monic polynomial y2+uy+12u2 in the variable y. This is the concrete instance of [L1].

2.1L2step 1.1∎

In the quotient algebra, uˉ=xˉ−yˉ and the class yˉ satisfies yˉ2+uˉyˉ+12uˉ2=0 over k[uˉ]. By [L2], yˉ is integral over k[uˉ]. Since A=k[uˉ,yˉ], the algebra A is module-finite over k[uˉ].

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-30Open item page →

Finite-field normalization needs the weight trick

Example

Let k=Fq and f(x,y)=xqy−xyq. Then no substitution x↦x+ay with a∈Fq makes f monic in y, but the weight substitution x↦x+yN with N>q does.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The finite field Fq and the polynomial f(x,y)=xqy−xyq.

[L1]

Rapidly increasing exponent substitutions isolate a unique highest xn-term (Rapidly increasing power substitutions isolate one highest x_n-term).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1given

The highest homogeneous part of f is f itself. For any a∈Fq, f(a,1)=aq−a=0, so the infinite-field linear-change argument cannot choose a scalar a∈Fq with nonzero leading coefficient.

2.1L1step 1.1∎

Now substitute x↦x+yN with N>q. Because q is a power of the characteristic of Fq, the Frobenius identity gives (x+yN)q=xq+yNq. Hence f(x+yN,y)=xqy+yNq+1−xyq−yN+q. Because Nq+1>N+q, the term yNq+1 is the unique highest power of y. Therefore the transformed polynomial is already monic in y, exactly as [L1] predicts.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: Literature-sourcedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-30Open item page →

A new irreducible denominator stays outside a finitely generated subalgebra of k(t)

Example

In the subalgebra B=k[t,1/t]⊆k(t), the element 1/(t−1) does not belong to B.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A field k, the rational function field k(t), and the subalgebra B=k[t,1/t].

[L1]

The one-variable denominator obstruction says that finitely many allowed denominator factors cannot generate all of k(t) over k[t] (The rational function field k(t) is not finite over k[t]).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1given

Every element of B can be written as h/tm with h∈k[t] and m≥0. Thus only powers of t occur in the denominator.

2.1L1step 1.1∎

If 1/(t−1) belonged to B, then 1/(t−1)=h/tm for some h∈k[t]. Cross-multiplication would give tm=h(t−1), so t−1 would divide tm. But substituting t=1 gives 1=0, impossible. This is the concrete obstruction behind [L1].

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: Literature-sourcedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-30Open item page →

Over R, not every maximal ideal is an evaluation ideal

Example

In R[x], the ideal (x2+1) is maximal but is not an evaluation ideal (x−a) for any a∈R.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The polynomial ring R[x].

[L1]

Evaluation at a∈R has kernel (x−a) (Evaluation at a point has kernel (x_1-a_1, ..., x_n-a_n)).

[L2]

A maximal ideal of a finite-type algebra has finite residue field over the base field (A maximal ideal of an affine algebra has finite residue field over the base field).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1L2given

The quotient R[x]/(x2+1) is isomorphic to C by sending the class of x to i. Since C is a field, (x2+1) is maximal.

2.1L1L2step 1.1∎

For every a∈R, [L1] says the evaluation ideal at a is (x−a), and no such ideal equals (x2+1) because x2+1 has no real root. So weak Nullstellensatz fails in point form over R. The residue field extension here is C/R, which is finite of degree 2, as [L2] allows.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-30Open item page →

I(V(x^2, xy)) keeps only the radical information

Example

Let k be algebraically closed and let I=(x2,xy)⊆k[x,y]. Then I(V(I))=(x)=I, so the zero locus forgets the nilpotent multiplicity in x2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An algebraically closed field k and the ideal I=(x2,xy)⊆k[x,y].

[L1]

An ideal and its radical have the same zero locus (An ideal and its radical have the same zero locus).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1given

A point (a,b)∈k2 lies in V(I) exactly when a2=0 and ab=0. Since k is a field, this means a=0 and b is arbitrary. Hence V(I)={(0,b):b∈k}.

2.1L1step 1.1∎

The vanishing ideal of the y-axis is (x). Also I=(x) because x2∈I and every element of I is divisible by x. Therefore I(V(I))=(x)=I, in agreement with [L1].

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-30Open item page →

A small Rabinowitsch identity written out completely

Example

Let I=(x,y)⊆k[x,y] and let f=x+y. Then the auxiliary ideal I+(1−u(x+y))⊆k[x,y,u] contains the explicit identity 1=ux+uy+(1−u(x+y)), and clearing denominators after u=1/(x+y) shows x+y∈I.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A field k, the ideal I=(x,y)⊆k[x,y], and the polynomial f=x+y.

[L1]

If f vanishes on V(I), then the auxiliary ideal has empty zero locus (The Rabinowitsch auxiliary ideal has no common zero).

[L3]

Substituting the inverse of f and clearing denominators yields a power of f in I (Substituting y = 1/f and clearing denominators yields a power of f in I).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1L1given

The zero locus of I=(x,y) is the single point (0,0), and f(0,0)=0. So the Rabinowitsch hypothesis holds. The displayed formula is already an explicit unit-ideal identity in the auxiliary ideal.

2.1L3step 1.1∎

In the localization where x+y is invertible, substitute u=1/(x+y) into 1=ux+uy+(1−u(x+y)) to get 1=xx+y+yx+y. The zero-denominator case is excluded precisely because this localization inverts x+y. Multiplying by x+y yields x+y=x+y∈I. This is the denominator-clearing step of [L3] with N=1.

Sources