Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-30‡ rests on unproved material (inherited)
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.

‡ Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are ‡ Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, ‡ Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and ‡ The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

A snake configuration whose kernel row is not short exact

Statement refuted

In every snake configuration, the induced kernel row is already short exact.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The multiplication-by-two snake configuration from The kernel row of a morphism of short exact sequences need not be short exact.

[L1]

That published example already shows the kernel row can fail to be short exact (The kernel row of a morphism of short exact sequences need not be short exact).

[L2]

The snake lemma repairs the failure by adding the connecting morphism (Snake lemma in an abelian category).

Counterexample

1.1

By [L1], the chosen diagram is a valid snake configuration in Ab whose kernel row is 0→0→0→Z/2, and that row is not short exact.

L1
2.1

Nevertheless [L2] adds the connecting morphism Z/2→Z/2, after which the full snake sequence is exact. So the kernel row alone is not the whole story.

L2step 1.1∎

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

16 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