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 tangent intersection whose set-theoretic intersection is not of the expected dimension
Statement refuted
False claim: even without transversality, tangent intersections still have the expected dimension.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: In , the embedded submanifolds .
Intersecting submanifolds need not be transverse (Intersecting submanifolds need not be transverse).
Counterexample
The intersection is the whole -axis, so it is -dimensional.
Each of and has codimension in , so a transverse intersection would have expected codimension and thus expected dimension . Step 1.1 shows the actual intersection dimension is larger. This is precisely the nontransverse situation highlighted in [L1].
Therefore tangent intersections need not have the expected set-theoretic dimension.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
5 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
- Marco Gualtieri, Topology I: Smooth Manifolds, cumulative notes (standard reference, not scraped)