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.
Chain Complexes and Homology — Examples
1 · Prerequisites
- Abelian Categories
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Cardinal Arithmetic, Cofinality and the Alephs
- Categories, Functors and Natural Transformations
- Chain Complexes and Homology
- Chain Conditions, Semisimple Modules and the Wedderburn–Artin Theorem
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Determinants of Matrices over a Commutative Ring
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Divisibility, Greatest Common Divisors and Bézout's Identity
- Exactness and the Member Calculus
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Free Modules, Exact Sequences, Projective and Injective Modules
- Group Actions, Orbits, Stabilisers and Cayley's Theorem
- Group Homomorphisms and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Limits and Colimits
- Modules over a Principal Ideal Domain and the Canonical Forms
- Modules, Submodules, Quotient Modules and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Ordinal Arithmetic and the First Uncountable Ordinal
- Ordinals, Cardinals, and Transfinite Recursion
- Preadditive and Additive Categories and Biproducts
- Reflective Subcategories and the Adjoint Functor Theorems
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Set Theory Beyond Choice: Recorded, Not Proved Here
- Suprema and Infima
- Symmetric Groups, Cycle Decomposition and the Sign Homomorphism
- Tensor Products of Modules
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
2 · Summary
These examples specialise the categorical constructions on the main page to abelian groups and modules, where kernels, images, quotients, and induced maps can be computed explicitly. They also supply the promised counterexamples to the two false converses kept on the A page: a quasi-isomorphism need not be an isomorphism of complexes, and homology does not determine a chain map.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
None yet.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
A zero-differential complex has homology equal to each term
Example
Let be a chain complex whose every differential is zero. Then for every .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A chain complex with for all .
The zero complex and zero differentials are legitimate chain-complex data (Zero complex and stalk complex).
Homology is the quotient (Homology object of a chain complex).
The identity of an object is a kernel of the zero map out of it, and also is a cokernel of the zero map into it (The cokernel of the zero map out of the zero object is the target, and dually for kernels).
Verification
Since , [L3] identifies the cycle inclusion with , so . Likewise the image of is the zero object, so the boundary object is .
Substituting those identities into [L2] gives
A two-term complex has kernel and cokernel homology
Example
Let be a ring and let be a homomorphism. Regard as a chain complex with in degree and in degree . Then and all other homology objects are zero.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A module homomorphism .
Module categories are abelian (Modules over a ring form an abelian category).
Cycles, boundaries, and homology are defined by kernels, images, and the quotient (Cycle and boundary subobjects of a complex, Homology object of a chain complex).
Verification
In degree , the outgoing differential is , so and . In degree , the incoming differential is and the outgoing one is , so and . Every other term is zero.
Therefore [L2] gives and for .
The multiplication-by-m complex computes a cyclic group
Example
For a nonzero integer , the two-term complex has and .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A nonzero integer .
The two-term homology computation is and (A two-term complex has kernel and cokernel homology).
is an abelian category (Abelian groups form an abelian category).
Verification
Multiplication by a nonzero integer on has zero kernel, because forces . Its cokernel is the quotient group .
Applying [L1] to yields
An exact short sequence as an acyclic three-term complex
Example
The short exact sequence becomes an acyclic three-term chain complex when placed in degrees , , and .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The short exact sequence
is an abelian category (Modules over a ring form an abelian category).
An exact sequence is a chain complex, and its exactness agrees with the earlier exact-sequence notion (An exact sequence is a complex, and its exactness agrees with the earlier notion).
Verification
The displayed sequence is exact in : multiplication by is injective, the quotient map onto is surjective, and its kernel is the even subgroup.
By [L2], placing this exact sequence in consecutive degrees gives a chain complex that is exact at every nonzero term. Hence its homology vanishes in every degree, so it is acyclic.
A split exact complex contracts degree by degree
Example
Consider the split short exact sequence where and . As a three-term chain complex in degrees , , and , it admits explicit maps satisfying
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The maps and .
Split short exact sequences are the ones equipped with compatible section and retraction data (Split short exact sequence in an abelian category, Splitting lemma in an abelian category).
is an abelian category (Modules over a ring form an abelian category).
Verification
The sequence is split: is a retraction of , and is a section of . This is exactly the structure in [L1].
With and , one computes So the identity on this complex is written degreewise as , which is the promised contraction formula.
A chain map computed on cycles, boundaries, and homology
Example
Let be the two-term complex and let be The maps and define a chain map . It induces the zero map on and the inclusion on .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The complexes and the family , .
is an abelian category (Abelian groups form an abelian category).
A chain map induces a well-defined homology map (A chain map induces a well-defined map on homology).
Verification
The chain condition holds because . Also , , and . Hence , , and .
By [L2], the induced homology map comes from the degree- map on cycles. It sends the boundary subgroup into , so on quotients it is In degree the homology groups are zero, so the induced map there is zero.
A quasi-isomorphism that is not an isomorphism of complexes
Statement refuted
Every quasi-isomorphism of complexes is an isomorphism of complexes.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The inclusion of the zero complex into
is an abelian category (Abelian groups form an abelian category).
The A-page false statement is indeed false (FALSE: every quasi-isomorphism is an isomorphism of complexes).
Counterexample
The target complex is acyclic, because both the kernel and cokernel of are zero. The source zero complex is acyclic as well, so the inclusion induces isomorphisms on all homology groups.
The target complex is nonzero while the source is zero, so the inclusion is not invertible. Thus this is a concrete counterexample, as asserted by [L2].
Two distinct chain maps inducing the same homology map
Statement refuted
Two chain maps with the same induced maps on homology must be equal.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The complex and its two endomorphisms and .
is an abelian category (Abelian groups form an abelian category).
The corresponding A-page false statement is false (FALSE: a chain map is determined by its maps on homology).
Counterexample
The complex is acyclic, so every homology group is zero. The maps and are distinct because their degree- components are and .
Since all homology groups vanish, both induced homology maps are zero in every degree. Therefore but they induce the same homology map, as claimed in [L2].
A subcomplex and its quotient complex
Example
Let be the two-term complex and let be the subcomplex with and . Then the quotient complex is
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The complexes and just displayed.
A subcomplex is a degreewise subobject stable under the differentials (Subcomplex).
A quotient complex is obtained by quotienting degreewise and descending the differential (Quotient complex).
is an abelian category (Modules over a ring form an abelian category).
Verification
The family is a subcomplex: the only nontrivial check is that lands in . Thus [L1] applies.
By [L2], the quotient has terms and . The descended differential is zero because lies in for every representative , so changing representatives does not change the class. Hence the quotient complex is as displayed.
Euler-Poincare for a finite complex
Example
Consider the split exact three-term complex with and . Then
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The split exact complex just displayed.
is an abelian category (Abelian groups form an abelian category).
The Euler-Poincare formula holds for bounded complexes of finite-rank free abelian groups with finite-rank free homology (Euler-Poincare formula for finite free complexes).
Verification
The complex is split exact, hence acyclic, so every homology group is zero. Its chain groups have ranks , , and . Therefore while the alternating sum of homology ranks is also .
This agrees with the theorem [L2], so the example is a direct Euler-Poincare computation in a finite free complex.