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.
Common multiple, and the least common multiple , taken to be when or
Definition
Let . An integer is a common multiple of and when and (Divisibility in : when for some integer ).
Case and : a least positive common multiple exists. The integer is a positive common multiple. It is a common multiple because gives and hence , the last step because is or (Divisibility is reflexive and transitive on , and is linear: if and then for all integers ; also implies , and , The absolute value of an integer), and symmetrically for ; and it is positive because (The integers have no zero divisors; multiplicative cancellation), so and (Absolute value in : ; exactly when ; ; ; ; and exactly when ). Every positive common multiple is nonnegative, hence of the form for a unique , where is the embedding of The naturals embed in the integers; so the set
is a nonempty subset of and has a least element (The well-ordering principle). Since preserves the order, is then the least positive common multiple of and , and we define
the least positive common multiple. It is unique, greatest and least elements being unique by antisymmetry (The integers form a totally ordered ring, Order on the integers).
Case or : the only common multiple is . Say . Then reads , which holds exactly for (Divisibility in : when for some integer ); and is indeed a common multiple, since every integer divides . So there is no positive common multiple at all, and we set
This is not a free choice dressed as one: is the only common multiple of the pair, so any other value would name an integer that is not a common multiple.
With both cases together is defined for every pair, and always.
Remarks
-
The two boundary values agree, but they have different standing. is a genuine convention, adopted in Common divisor, and the greatest common divisor , with the convention because no greatest common divisor exists there; at a vanishing argument is not a convention at all, since is the only common multiple available. With the two together, holds at every pair without exception (Every common multiple of and is a multiple of , and ). At that identity reads , which is true for every .
-
"Least" is least in the order of , among the positive common multiples. The stronger statement, that divides every common multiple and not merely that it is smallest, is a theorem and is proved as the first half of Every common multiple of and is a multiple of , and . It is that divisibility form, not the minimality, that later pages use.
-
Two arguments only. As with , no least common multiple of a longer list is defined on this page, because nothing here needs one.
Depends on
- Divisibility in $\mathbb{Z}$: $d \mid a$ when $a = dq$ for some integer $q$
- Divisibility is reflexive and transitive on $\mathbb{Z}$, and is linear: if $d \mid a$ and $d \mid b$ then $d \mid ax + by$ for all integers $x, y$; also $d \mid a$ implies $d \mid ac$, $-d \mid a$ and $d \mid -a$
- The well-ordering principle
- The naturals embed in the integers
- The natural numbers $\mathbb{N}$ (von Neumann)
- Order on the natural numbers
- The absolute value $|a|$ of an integer
- Absolute value in $\mathbb{Z}$: $|a| \ge 0$; $|a| = 0$ exactly when $a = 0$; $|-a| = |a|$; $|ab| = |a|\,|b|$; $-|a| \le a \le |a|$; and $|a| \le c$ exactly when $-c \le a \le c$
- The integers have no zero divisors; multiplicative cancellation
- The integers form a totally ordered ring
- Order on the integers
- The integers form a commutative ring
- Arithmetic on the integers
Used by
- 12ℤ + 18ℤ = 6ℤ and 12ℤ ∩ 18ℤ = 36ℤ, the arithmetic of gcd and lcm read off the subgroups of (ℤ,+) Example
- 360 = 2³ · 3² · 5 and 84 = 2² · 3 · 7, with gcd(360,84) = 12 and lcm(360,84) = 2520 read off the exponents Example
- FALSE: For all integers a and b, gcd(a,b) · lcm(a,b) = ab False statement
- aℤ + bℤ = gcd(a,b) ℤ and aℤ ∩ bℤ = lcm(a,b) ℤ; equivalently, in (ℤ,+) the subgroup generated by {a,b} is ⟨ gcd(a,b) ⟩ and ⟨ a ⟩ ∩ ⟨ b ⟩ = ⟨ lcm(a,b) ⟩ Theorem
- Every common multiple of a and b is a multiple of lcm(a,b), and gcd(a,b) · lcm(a,b) = |ab| Theorem
- For positive integers a and b and every prime p: vₚ(gcd(a,b)) = min{vₚ(a), vₚ(b)} and vₚ(lcm(a,b)) = max{vₚ(a), vₚ(b)}; so the exponent-wise greatest common divisor is the gcd of the divisibility page and not a second notion Theorem
- If g and h have finite orders m and n, then ι(ord(g,h))=lcm(ι(m),ι(n)) in G× H Theorem
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 53 results over 21 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Least common multiple (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)