Alphabeta Math
CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-sol)audited 2026-09-27
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.

The singleton E-graph family is generalized nice

Statement

The singleton finite family {E} is generalized nice, with the complement-family convention in the published definition.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The singleton family {E} and the complement family {E}‾={co-E} of the published generalized-niceness convention.

[L1]

The singleton family {E} has property (∗) (The singleton family {E} has property (*)).

[L2]

The family {H5,co-E} has the Erdős-Hajnal property, so it has an Erdős-Hajnal constant (The family consisting of H5 and co-E has the Erdős–Hajnal property).

[L3]

Leaf/co-leaf transfer: if F is a finite family, H1∈F has a leaf v, H2∈F has a co-leaf w, and the two modified families are {H1∖{v}}∪(F∖{H1}) and {H2∖{w}}∪(F∖{H2}), then the Erdős-Hajnal property of both modified families implies it for F (Deleting a leaf and a co-leaf preserves the Erdős-Hajnal property of a finite forbidden family).

[L4]

In every co-E-free graph, every special-vertex comb of the property-(∗) trigger admits the {H5,co-E} structural partition: each block splits as Bi=Xi∪Yi with Yi {H5,co-E}-free and Xi carrying a nonempty-block pure blockade partition whose pattern is {H5,co-E}-free and whose blocks are pure to every vertex of the other comb blocks (A special-vertex comb in a co-E-free graph admits the {H5,co-E} structural partition).

[L5]

Special-vertex-local criterion: if finite families F1,F2 have a common Erdős-Hajnal constant c∈(0,1] and every special-vertex comb in every H‾-free graph admits a partition with clauses (1) and (2.1)--(2.3) of the structural comb partition, then H has property (∗) (The special-vertex-local structural-partition criterion implies property (*)).

[L6]

If a finite family has property (∗) and is leaf-reducible, then it is generalized nice (Property (*) and leaf reducibility imply generalized niceness).

[L7]

The singleton family {E} is leaf-reducible (The E-graph and Bird singleton families are leaf-reducible).

[L8]

Generalized niceness of a finite family F is the four-outcome schema quantified over F‾-free graphs (Generalized nice finite graph families).

[L9]

Property (∗) for a finite family F is a condition on F‾-free graphs carrying the special-vertex comb trigger (Property (*) for a finite graph family).

[L10]

The E-graph has edge set {p1p2,p2p3,p3p4,p4p5,p3q} on six vertices, and co-E is its complement (The E-graph and co-E).

[L11]

A vertex v is a co-leaf of a graph G when deg⁡G(v)=∣V(G)∣−2, equivalently when v is adjacent to every other vertex except one (Co-leaves of a finite graph).

[L12]

If ϵ is an Erdős-Hajnal constant for a hereditary class and 0<δ≤ϵ, then δ is one too (Every smaller positive exponent is again an Erdős–Hajnal constant).

Proof

technique · direct: record the published property-$(*)$ supplier and its transfer step, then apply the property-$(*)$-plus-leaf-reducibility implication
1.1

By [L1], the singleton family {E} has property (∗). Since [L9] quantifies the trigger over graphs free of the complement family, and [L10] identifies that complement family as {co-E}, the claim is a statement about co-E-free graphs.

L1L9L10
1.2

By [L7], the singleton family {E} is leaf-reducible.

L7
2.1

The published proof behind [L1] is the H={E} instance of [L5] with F1=F2={H5,co-E}: [L2] supplies the family's Erdős-Hajnal constant, lowered into (0,1] by [L12], and [L4] supplies the partition clause for every special-vertex comb of a co-E-free graph. The induction step of the proof of [L2] replaces the family {Hi,co-E} by the two families {Hi−1,co-E} and {Hi,P5‾}, deleting from Hi its pendant vertex vi′ and from co-E the vertex q; here q is a leaf of E by the edge list [L10], so it has degree 4=6−2 in the six-vertex graph co-E and is a co-leaf of co-E by [L11]. That replacement is exactly the transfer [L3], so every load-bearing input of the property-(∗) claim of step 1.1 is a published library item, with the transfer explicitly [L3].

L2L3L4L5L10L11L12step 1.1
2.2

Applying [L6] to the finite family {E}: property (∗) holds by step 1.1 and leaf-reducibility by step 1.2, so {E} is generalized nice.

L6step 1.1step 1.2
3.1

By [L8] the ambient class of the generalized-niceness condition for {E} is the co-E-free class, the complement-family convention named in the statement; step 2.2 establishes precisely that condition. This proves the corollary.

step 2.2L8L9∎

Remarks

  • The corollary is the E endpoint of the second reduction chain: property (∗) comes from the co-E comb structure, and leaf-reducibility turns it into generalized niceness. It is deliberately stated for the family {E} itself, not for the complement family {co-E}; the F‾ notation appears only inside the published definitions.
  • No Choice. All quantified objects are finite graphs and finite families, and no selection from a family of nonempty sets occurs; the argument uses only published finite reductions.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

53 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