Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-24
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 reflexive coequalizer of sets not preserved by Set(N,−)

Statement refuted

The covariant representable functor Set(N,−) need not preserve reflexive coequalizers. There is a reflexive coequalizer of sets whose image under this functor is not a coequalizer.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The successor map σ(n)=n+1 on N and the coproduct N⨿N with injections i0,i1.

[L1]

A reflexive pair has a common section r satisfying fr=gr=1 (Reflexive parallel pairs and reflexive coequalizers).

[L2]

A coequalizer universally identifies the two maps of a parallel pair (Equalizers and coequalizers as limits and colimits of a parallel pair).

[L3]

The functions A→B form the set BA (The set BA of all functions A→B).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1constructL1

Define f=[σ,1] and g=[1,1]:N⨿N⇉N. The second injection i1 is a common section because fi1=gi1=1N, so the pair is reflexive by [L1].

2.1step 1.1L2

The unique map q:N→1 is the coequalizer: the relation f(i0(n))=n+1∼n=g(i0(n)) connects every natural to 0, and any map coequalizing f,g is therefore constant and factors uniquely through q.

2.2step 1.1L3

Applying Set(N,−) gives a pair (N⨿N)N⇉NN. For a function h:N→N⨿N, the two resulting sequences f∘h and g∘h differ at each coordinate by either 0 or 1.

3.1step 2.2algebra

Every finite zigzag generated by pairs from step 2.2 has a uniform coordinatewise difference bound, namely its number of zigzag edges, by repeated use of the triangle inequality on natural-number differences.

4.1step 3.1construct

The zero sequence z(n)=0 and identity sequence d(n)=n have unbounded coordinatewise difference, so step 3.1 shows that no finite zigzag identifies them.

5.1step 2.1step 4.1L2∎

Both sequences map under qN to the unique element of 1N, yet they remain distinct in the coequalizer of the image pair. Therefore qN is not the coequalizer required by [L2], and Set(N,−) does not preserve this reflexive coequalizer.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

20 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources