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.
Depth depends only on the radical of the ideal
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice). Let be Noetherian, finite, and ideals contained in the Jacobson radical. If , then including the value .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Choice and the ring, module, and ideals in the statement.
Equal radicals give equal first nonzero Ext degrees, including simultaneous infinity (Radical invariance of first nonzero Ext).
Under the assumed Axiom of Choice, depth for a finite module and a Jacobson-radical ideal is its first nonzero Ext degree (Depth as the first nonzero Ext degree).
Proof
Apply [L1] to and : the least nonvanishing degrees of and agree, with both infinite if neither family has a nonzero group.
Apply [L2] separately to and ; both lie in the Jacobson radical by hypothesis. Their depths are the degrees equal in step 1.1, including the infinite case.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
9 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
- Depth and Cohen--Macaulay modules source treatment (standard reference, not scraped)