Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26
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 nonzero holomorphic function on C2 whose zero set is an unbounded hyperplane

Statement refuted

That a nonzero holomorphic function on a domain in Cm has isolated zeros.

Counterexample

Take f:C2C given by f(z0,z1)=z0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The function f(z0,z1)=z0 on C2.

[L1]

Holomorphic functions on open subsets of Cm are those of Holomorphic functions on an open subset of Cm, and they are continuous and separately holomorphic (A holomorphic function of several variables is continuous and separately holomorphic).

[L2]

A holomorphic function vanishing on a nonempty open subset of a connected open set in Cm vanishes identically (A holomorphic function vanishing on a nonempty open subset of a domain vanishes identically).

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1

The function f(z0,z1)=z0 is holomorphic on C2 and is not identically zero, since f(1,0)=1.

givenL1
1.2

Its zero set is exactly {(z0,z1)C2:z0=0}={0}×C.

givenalgebra
2.1

This zero set is unbounded, because (0,t) belongs to it for every complex t, and no point of it is isolated in it: if (0,w) is a zero and ε>0, then (0,w+ε/2) is a different zero within Euclidean distance ε/2.

step 1.2
3.1

The zero set has empty interior, so this witness does not contradict [L2]; it shows instead that in several variables a nonzero holomorphic function can vanish on a whole positive-dimensional complex hyperplane. Therefore the refuted claim fails.

step 1.1step 2.1L2

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

36 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