Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
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.

✓ 5 results · all verified · 0 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full by a delegated reviewing agent on the owner's instruction; 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.

Schur Multipliers and Universal Central Extensions — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

The examples distinguish a universal central extension, which requires a perfect base, from finite Schur covers, which need not be unique.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-09-24 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

Multiplier of a cyclic group

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice and supplied projective-resolution data for group homology. Then M(C)=0 for every cyclic group C.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The stated choice and resolution hypotheses and a cyclic group C.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1given

Multiplier of a cyclic group applies to every finite or infinite cyclic group and gives M(C)=0.

2.1step 1.1∎

This is exactly the claimed cyclic-group calculation.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-09-24 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

Multiplier of a finite abelian group

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice and supplied projective-resolution data for group homology. For A≅Cn1×⋯×Cnr, M(A)≅⨁1≤i<j≤rCgcd⁡(ni,nj).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The stated choice and resolution hypotheses and the invariant-factor decomposition of A.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1givenalgebra

For two abelian groups B,C, the alternating universal property gives ⋀2(B⊕C)≅⋀2B⊕(B⊗C)⊕⋀2C: an alternating pairing on the direct sum is exactly a pairing on each summand plus an arbitrary bilinear cross-pairing. Iterate over the finite summands. Each cyclic summand has zero exterior square, while Cm⊗Cn≅Cgcd⁡(m,n) by the relations m(1⊗1)=n(1⊗1)=0.

2.1step 1.1algebra∎

Applying Multiplier of an abelian group gives the displayed formula, including the empty sum 0 when r≤1.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-09-24 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

Binary icosahedral cover of A5

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice and supplied projective-resolution data for group homology. The central quotient SL⁡2(F5)→PSL⁡2(F5)≅A5 is the binary-icosahedral universal central extension.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The stated choice and resolution hypotheses. Weibel, §6.9, Example 6.9.1, explicitly identifies PSL⁡2(F5)≅A5. The proof below calculates the multiplier and the universal property; it does not use Weibel's assertion of universality as a proof premise.

[L1]

If P is a Sylow subgroup of a finite group G, the transfer identity gives i∗Tr⁡=[G:P] on M(G) (Corestriction after transfer multiplies by the index). Choice and the supplied-resolution convention give this identity in the canonical homology groups.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1givenalgebra

A5 has order 60. Its nonidentity conjugacy classes have sizes 20 (three-cycles), 15 (products of two disjoint transpositions), and 12,12 (the two classes of five-cycles). No proper union of these classes with the identity has order dividing 60, so A5 is simple. It is nonabelian, hence its commutator subgroup is all of A5: A5 is perfect. Its Sylow-2 subgroup has order 4 and cannot be cyclic, since a permutation of order 4 in S5 is odd; it is V=C2×C2. Its Sylow-3 and Sylow-5 subgroups are cyclic.

1.2givenalgebra

The quotient SL⁡2(F5)→PSL⁡2(F5)≅A5 has central kernel {±I}≅C2. The group SL⁡2(F5) is perfect. Indeed, elementary row reduction shows it is generated by the elementary matrices e12(a),e21(a). For d=diag⁡(2,3), conjugation multiplies the upper parameter by 22=4 and the lower parameter by 2−2=4. Thus [d,eij(a)]=eij(3a) for i≠j; since 3 is a unit in F5, every elementary generator is a commutator.

2.1L1step 1.1algebra

The multiplier M(A5) is finite and annihilated by 60. For each prime p∣60, [L1] says that its p-primary part is the image of M(P): multiplication by the index [A5:P], prime to p, is an automorphism on the p-primary part. The cyclic-group calculation gives M(P)=0 for p=3,5. For p=2, the abelian-multiplier theorem gives M(V)≅⋀2V≅C2. Consequently M(A5) is either 0 or C2.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1step 1.2algebra

Choose a free presentation of the perfect group A5. Under Choice, Free-presentation construction is universal gives its universal central extension u:U→A5, and the kernel corollary identifies ker⁡u with M(A5). If this multiplier were zero, universality would give a homomorphic section A5→SL⁡2(F5) of the central quotient. The latter group would then be C2×A5, contradicting its perfectness from step 1.2. Hence M(A5)≅C2 by step 2.1.

4.1step 1.2step 3.1algebra∎

Universality gives a map U→SL⁡2(F5) over A5. Its image, together with the central kernel C2, generates SL⁡2(F5). Because that group is perfect, its commutator subgroup lies in the image, so the map is surjective. Both U and SL⁡2(F5) have order 2⋅60=120, so it is an isomorphism over A5. This proves the asserted universal central extension.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedverified 2026-09-26 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

Hopf formula from a one-relator presentation

Example

For ⟨x | x^n⟩, Hopf’s quotient is trivial.

Verification

Given: Take F=⟨x⟩ and R=⟨xn⟩ in the Hopf quotient of Hopf-formula quotient.

1.1given

As F is cyclic, [F,F]=1 and R∩[F,F]=1.

2.1step 1.1algebra∎

Thus Hopf’s quotient is trivial.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-09-24 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

A stem extension that is not universal

Example

The central extension C2→D8→C2×C2 is stem but not universal because its base is not perfect.

Verification

Given: The center and commutator subgroup of D8 are both ⟨r2⟩.

1.1given

Thus C2→D8→C2×C2 is stem.

2.1step 1.1algebra∎

Let V=C2×C2 be its base. If the displayed stem extension u:D8↠V were universal, the maps x↦(u(x),0) and x↦(u(x),u(x)) from D8 to the split central extension V×V→V would have to be equal. They are distinct because u is surjective and V≠0. Thus this stem extension is not universal, using only the choice-free uniqueness condition in the definition.

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-09-24 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

Nonuniqueness of Schur covers

Statement refuted

Every finite group has a unique Schur covering group up to isomorphism.

Counterexample

Assume the Axiom of Choice and supplied projective-resolution data for group homology. The groups D8 and Q8 are nonisomorphic Schur covers of C2×C2.

Given: The stated choice and resolution hypotheses. Both D8 and Q8 have central commutator subgroup of order two and quotient C2×C2.

1.1given

The exterior-square calculation gives M(C2×C2)≅C2, so both are Schur covers.

2.1step 1.1algebra∎

D8 has five involutions while Q8 has one, hence they are not isomorphic.

Sources