Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Changing the line-bundle sign changes the Borel-Weil section space

Statement refuted

The false statement is that the two sign conventions Lλ=G×BC−λ and L~λ=G×BC+λ give the same Borel-Weil answer, so that replacing C−λ by C+λ in the construction of the line bundle is harmless.

Counterexample

Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice). Let G=SL2(C) and consider the two bundles attached to mω1∈X∗(T): the library convention Lmω1=G×BC−mω1≅O(m) of The equivariant line bundle associated to a Borel character and the opposite convention L~mω1=G×BC+mω1≅L−mω1≅O(−m). For m>0 the reader who silently replaces C−λ by C+λ gets H0(X,L~mω1)=H0(X,O(−m))=0instead ofH0(X,Lmω1)≅L(mω1)∗≠0, so the opposite convention gives zero sections where the library convention gives a nonzero irreducible module. The line bundle is dualized by the sign change, but its space of sections is not obtained by dualizing the original space of sections. The two conventions are not interchangeable.

Given: The Axiom of Choice, G=SL2(C) with upper triangular Borel and flag variety X=G/B≅P1, an integer m>0, the fundamental weight ω1, the library bundles Lmω1=G×BC−mω1, and the opposite bundles L~mω1=G×BC+mω1.

1.1givenalgebra

By definition of the sign convention, G×BC+λ is G×BC−(−λ)=L−λ; hence L~mω1=L−mω1, and for SL2 the fibre is all of X with the restriction of L−mω1 isomorphic to O(−m) by the degree computation for the minimal parabolic fibre under the fixed identification of X with P1.

2.1step 1.1algebra

For m>0 the twist O(−m) has negative degree, so it has no nonzero global sections by the projective-space cohomology computation Cohomology of O(d) on projective space; in particular H0(X,L~mω1)=0.

3.1givenstep 2.1∎

On the other hand mω1 is dominant integral, so the Borel-Weil theorem The Borel-Weil theorem gives H0(X,Lmω1)≅L(mω1)∗, which is nonzero because an irreducible representation has a nonzero highest weight vector. Thus the two conventions answer differently: the sign change replaces the dual irreducible representation by zero, and the two constructions are not interchangeable.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

82 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