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 lower-limit topology on , with the half-open intervals as a basis
Definition
Let . The lower-limit topology on is the topology having as a basis. The resulting space is the lower-limit line.
This basis is well defined. It covers , because for every . If , then , whose right endpoint exceeds and which lies inside the intersection. Thus the two basis conditions of A family is a basis for a unique topology iff it covers the set and every point of an intersection of two members lies in a member inside that intersection; finite intersections of any subbasis form a basis hold, so determines a unique topology.
The lower-limit topology is finer than the usual topology: if , then is a lower-limit basic interval containing and contained in . No equality with the usual topology is asserted here. The half-open intervals use the interval convention of Intervals of : the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length, and opens are exactly unions of basis members by Basis and subbasis for a topology, and the topology generated by a family of sets.
Depends on
- Intervals of $\mathbb{R}$: the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length
- A family is a basis for a unique topology iff it covers the set and every point of an intersection of two members lies in a member inside that intersection; finite intersections of any subbasis form a basis
- Basis and subbasis for a topology, and the topology generated by a family of sets
Used by
- Assuming choice, two paracompact lower-limit lines can have a nonparacompact product Counterexample
- Under choice, the lower-limit line is regular and separable but not second countable and therefore not metrizable Example
- Assuming choice, refuted: paracompactness is productive False statement
- FALSE: every regular space is metrizable False statement
- The lower-limit line has a clopen basis, is regular, and is Lindelöf under countable choice Lemma
- The lower-limit plane has a countable dense set and a closed discrete antidiagonal of size |ℝ| Lemma
Dependency tree · two levels
8 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
- L. A. Steen and J. A. Seebach, Counterexamples in Topology, Sorgenfrey line (standard reference, not scraped)
- Lower limit topology (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)