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.
A complete locally small category with no small coseparating set
Counterexample
An object of is a function whose domain is a set of ordinals and whose value at each is a set that is not a singleton. Read as the ordinal-indexed family so that is the family's support and each such family has exactly one code. Objects are recorded as codes because an object must be a set: a function whose domain is the whole class of ordinals is not one, and a class is a formula rather than an entity here (Class-sized category theory in ZFC: definable-class schemas, small and locally small categories, and why is not formed).
A morphism is a family of functions . Outside the set both coordinates are and is the unique map between them, so a morphism is determined by its restriction to that set and is recorded as that restriction — again a set. Composition and identities are coordinatewise.
Then is complete and locally small but has no small coseparating set.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The category defined above.
A coseparating set detects distinct parallel arrows by postcomposition with a map into one of its members (Separating and coseparating sets of objects).
Completeness means existence of limits for all small diagrams (Finite, small, and large limits and colimits; complete and cocomplete categories).
The ordinals form a proper class, not a set (FALSE: the ordinals form a set).
Verification
A morphism is by construction a set-indexed family of functions on the set , so the morphisms form a subset of the product of the function sets over that index set. That product is a set, so every hom-collection is a set and is locally small.
Let be a small diagram in and let be the union of the supports of its set of objects, itself a set. Form the limit coordinatewise in : at take the limit of the diagram of coordinates, and at every coordinate is , so the diagram there is constant at a one-element set and its limit is a one-element set. The code with domain and value there is an object of , and its cone legs are the coordinatewise limit projections, the unique map being taken outside . A cone over in is exactly a coordinatewise cone, and the mediating map is coordinatewise unique, so this is a limit of . The empty diagram has and gives the code with empty domain. Every small diagram therefore has a limit, so [L2] makes complete.
Let be any small set of objects of . The union is a set of ordinals. Were every ordinal a member of the ordinals would be a set, contradicting [L3], so some ordinal lies outside ; let be the least one, which is definable from and involves no selection.
Let be the code with empty domain, so for every , and let be the code with domain and . The two families that send the single element of to and to respectively, and take the unique map at every other coordinate, are distinct morphisms. For every and every , the coordinate is because , so ; the two composites agree at every other coordinate as well, so .
Therefore does not detect the pair and is not coseparating by [L1]. Since the argument applies to every small , has no small coseparating set.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 27 results over 11 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.