Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
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.

Leray–Hirsch fails without a global restricting fiber basis

Statement refuted

Assume AC. It is false that free constant-rank fiber cohomology alone, without global classes restricting to a fiber basis, gives the Leray–Hirsch module isomorphism. For the Klein-bottle bundle

S1⟶K=Tr⟶S1;r(z)=z‾,

reflection monodromy prevents a global integral fiber generator and H1(K;Z)≅Z, not the rank-two group predicted by treating the fiber basis as constant.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC, integral coefficients, the counterclockwise orientation of S1, and the displayed reflection mapping torus.

[F1]

A global fiber basis trivializes Serre monodromy says that global classes restricting to a fiber basis force cohomological fiber transport to fix that named basis.

[F2]

Degree of identity constant reflection and antipodal sphere maps says a circle reflection has degree −1.

[F3]

Wang sequence for a fibration over the circle gives the integral homology sequence with maps 1−Tq.

[F4]

Homology of spheres gives H0(S1;Z)=H1(S1;Z)=Z and zero homology in higher degrees.

[F5]

Topological universal coefficient short exact sequence for cohomology gives the integral cohomology evaluation sequence under AC.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice is used exactly in [F1] and [F5].

Counterexample

technique · calculate the reflection monodromy, then compare the actual and falsely untwisted degree-one groups
1.1F2F4

Write K=(S1×[0,1])/(z,1)∼(r(z),0). Product charts away from the seam and charts changing fiber coordinate by r=r−1 across the seam make K→S1 a fiber bundle. Positive-loop transport is r, so [F2] and [F4] give T1=−1 on H1(S1;Z)=Z and T0=1 on H0(S1;Z)=Z.

2.1F1F5step 1.1

Cohomological transport on H1(S1;Z) is likewise multiplication by −1, since evaluation on the homology generator changes by the degree in step 1.1. It fixes no generator. The contrapositive of [F1] therefore says that no global class on K can restrict to an integral basis of H∗(S1;Z).

2.2F3F4step 1.1

The degree-one part of [F3], using step 1.1, gives 0→Z/2→H1(K;Z)→Z→0. The fixed point 1∈S1 defines the section [t]↦[(1,t)], so the projection onto the last Z splits and H1(K;Z)≅Z⊕Z/2. The same explicit mapping-torus model is path connected, hence H0(K;Z)=Z.

3.1F5A1step 2.2

Apply [F5] in degree one. Since H0(K)=Z is free, its Ext term is zero, and every homomorphism Z/2→Z is zero. Consequently H1(K;Z)≅Hom⁡(Z⊕Z/2,Z)≅Z.

4.1F4F5step 2.1step 3.1

By [F4] and [F5], both base and fiber have one copy of Z in cohomological degrees zero and one. Falsely declaring the fiber basis (1,u) constant would make the degree-one Leray–Hirsch source H1(S1)⊗⟨1⟩⊕H0(S1)⊗⟨u⟩≅Z2, whereas step 3.1 gives only Z. The failed conclusion and its missing global-basis hypothesis are therefore witnessed explicitly.

5.1F1F2F3F4F5A1step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2step 3.1step 4.1∎

The base, fiber and total space are nonempty, and the coefficient ring is fixed as nonzero Z. Steps 1.1–4.1 include the one base loop, its two seam endpoints, the degree-zero unit, the zero kernel of multiplication by two, identity action on H0, reflection action on H1, and the degenerate false identity-monodromy comparison. AC is used only through [A1] in [F1] and [F5]; the mapping-torus and Wang calculations are choice-free. No converse claim is made.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

28 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