Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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 A₂ quiver gives the quantum-dilogarithm pentagon

Example

Let Q be the A₂ quiver with one arrow 1→2:

\begin{tikzpicture}[>=stealth]
  \node[circle,draw,inner sep=2pt,label=below:{1}] (v1) at (0,0) {};
  \node[circle,draw,inner sep=2pt,label=below:{2}] (v2) at (2,0) {};
  \draw[->] (v1) -- (v2);
\end{tikzpicture}

The nodes are the two vertices and the single directed edge is the unique arrow. Let S1,S2 be the vertex simples and let E=(Fq→idFq). For z1,z2∈H with phases ϕi=arg⁡(zi)/π, the integrated wall identity is Et2(x2)∗Et2(x1)=Et2(x1)∗Et2(x(1,1))∗Et2(x2),x(1,1)=t x1∗x2,t=q. Here Et2(x)=∑n≥0tnxn/∏r=1n(t2r−1). The identity is the actual completed A₂ pentagon, with the factors coming from the two chambers; no commutative product is substituted.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The A₂ quiver above over Fq, charges z1,z2∈H, and t=q>0.

[F1]

Semistability is tested on nonzero subrepresentations, and Z(d1,d2)=d1z1+d2z2 (Finite-field stability data for an acyclic quiver).

[F2]

The completed HN products for any two upper-half-plane charge assignments agree after either integration (Completed Hall wall crossing for finite acyclic quivers).

[F3]

J(κM)=tχQ(d(M),d(M))xd(M) and the skew torus uses xd∗xe=t−⟨e,d⟩xd+e (Euler and skew integration are multiplicative for finite acyclic quivers).

[F4]

The phase of a sum of two upper-half-plane charges lies between their phases (The phase of a sum lies between upper-half-plane phases).

[F5]

The quiver Euler form satisfies dim⁡Hom⁡(X,Y)−dim⁡YExt⁡1(X,Y)=χQ(d(X),d(Y)) (Finite acyclic quiver representations: heredity, Euler form, and finite-field finitarity).

Verification

Given: The objects and hypotheses in the statement.

1.1F1constructalgebra

A representation is one linear map f:V1→V2. Choose a complement to ker⁡f and a complement to im⁡f. The restriction of f from the first complement to im⁡f is an isomorphism. In bases adapted to these spaces, the representation is S1⊕a⊕E⊕r⊕S2⊕b,r=rank⁡f,a=dim⁡ker⁡f,b=dim⁡(V2/im⁡f). Thus these three isomorphism types account for every representation.

1.2F3algebra

The Euler form gives χQ(e1,e2)=−1 and χQ(e2,e1)=0, so ⟨e1,e2⟩=−1 and ⟨e2,e1⟩=1. By [F3], x2∗x1=t x(1,1),x1∗x2=t−1x(1,1),x(1,1)=t x1∗x2. In particular x2∗x1=t2x1∗x2.

2.1F1F4step 1.1algebra

A subrepresentation of E is a pair of subspaces U1,U2⊆Fq with U1⊆U2. Its only proper nonzero possibility is S2. The phase of z1+z2 lies between ϕ1 and ϕ2 by [F4]. The sequence 0→S2→E→S1→0 is nonsplit because E has no subrepresentation isomorphic to S1; every nonzero arrow scalar is changed to the identity by vertex base changes, so this is the unique nontrivial extension of these simples. Hence E is stable when ϕ1>ϕ2, unstable when ϕ1<ϕ2, and strictly semistable when ϕ1=ϕ2.

3.1F1F4step 1.1step 2.1algebra

Suppose ϕ1>ϕ2. In the decomposition of step 1.1, if two different summand types occur, the direct sum of all summands of greatest phase is a proper subobject. Repeated application of [F4] shows the total phase is strictly below that greatest phase, because at least one summand has smaller phase; hence the representation is unstable. Pure sums S1⊕n and S2⊕n are semistable because all their nonzero subobjects have the same phase. A subrepresentation of E⊕n is a pair U1⊆U2; writing r=dim⁡U1 and s=dim⁡U2 gives r≤s. The determinant calculation Im⁡((z1+z2)‾(rz1+sz2))=(s−r)Im⁡(zˉ1z2)≤0 shows its phase is at most that of E⊕n. Thus the semistable objects are exactly pure sums of S1, E, or S2, in descending phase order.

3.2F1F4step 1.1step 2.1algebra

Suppose ϕ1<ϕ2. Every summand in the decomposition of step 1.1 has phase at most ϕ2, and an E summand or an S1 summand has smaller phase. Repeated application of [F4] therefore makes the phase of any object containing a lower-phase summand strictly less than ϕ2. An object with an E summand has the nonzero subobject S2, and an object with both S1 and S2 summands has an S2 summand; each is a destabilizing subobject. Hence only pure sums of S2 and pure sums of S1 are semistable, in that descending order. If ϕ1=ϕ2, all nonzero dimension vectors have the same phase, so every representation is semistable and the HN product has one phase factor containing both S1⊕S2 and E.

4.1F1F5step 1.1algebra

Each A∈{S1,S2,E} has End⁡(A)=Fq. For E, an endomorphism is a pair of scalars at the vertices that must agree because its arrow is the identity. Also χQ(d(A),d(A))=1 for each of these three objects. [F5] gives YExt⁡1(A⊕m,A⊕n)=0: the Hom space has dimension mn and χQ(md(A),nd(A))=mn. The semistable subcategory at each stable phase in step 3.1 is consequently equivalent to VectFq, with the displayed object as its one-dimensional simple.

5.1F3F5step 4.1algebra

For A one of these three stable objects, put γ=d(A). Then χQ(nγ,nγ)=n2 and ∣Aut⁡(A⊕n)∣=∣GL⁡n(Fq)∣. Counting ordered bases directly gives ∣GL⁡n(Fq)∣=∏j=0n−1(qn−qj)=qn(n−1)/2∏r=1n(qr−1). Therefore tn2∣GL⁡n(Fq)∣=tn∏r=1n(t2r−1) using q=t2. Thus the J-image of the semistable series at that phase is Et2(xγ). The empty product gives the same result for n=0.

6.1F2step 3.1step 3.2step 5.1step 1.2

If ϕ1>ϕ2, the descending semistable phases are S1,E,S2; if ϕ1<ϕ2, they are S2,S1. Apply [F2] to these two chamber assignments and substitute the phase images from steps 5.1 and 1.2. This gives the stated pentagon over Q(q).

7.1step 6.1algebra∎

Each fixed-bidegree coefficient of the pentagon is a rational function of t. Specializing to q=2m for every m≥1 gives infinitely many distinct t=2m/2>1, where every denominator t2r−1 is nonzero and step 6.1 proves equality. The numerator of the difference therefore has infinitely many roots and is the zero polynomial. This proves the identity coefficientwise in Q(t).

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

16 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