Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-10-02
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 jump l(D+p) - l(D) ranges from zero to the residue degree

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice inherited from the current divisor, residue-field and projective-line suppliers.

Let k be a field, let C be a smooth proper geometrically integral curve over k (Curves over a field), let D be a divisor and let p be a closed point. By Monotonicity of L(D) in the divisor the quotient L(D+p)/L(D) embeds k-linearly into the residue field κ(p), so the jump is bounded: 0≤l(D+p)−l(D)≤[κ(p):k], and both extremes occur. The intermediate values occur as well: the jump need not be 0 or [κ(p):k], as case (iv) below shows in residue degree two.

On Pk1, with coordinate t=x1/x0 and point at infinity ∞=[0:1]=V(x0) (Divisors on the projective line are classified by degree):

  1. for D=−2[q] and p=[a] with q=[0] and a≠0 rational, both D and D+p=−2[q]+[a] have negative degree, so L(D)=L(D+p)=0 and the jump is 0;
  2. for D=−[q] and p=[a] with a≠q rational, L(D)=0 while L(D+p) is the one-dimensional space spanned by (t−q)/(t−a), whose divisor is [q]−[a]=−(D+p), so the jump is 1=[κ(p):k];
  3. over k=R, for D=0 and p=V(t2+1) of residue degree two, L(0) is the constant field with l(0)=1, while p is linearly equivalent to 2[∞] because div⁡(t2+1)=[p]−2[∞], so O(p)≅O(2) and L(p)={A/(t2+1):deg⁡A≤2} is three-dimensional: the jump is 2=[κ(p):k];
  4. over k=R, for D=−2[∞] and p=V(t2+1), one has L(D)=0 and L(D+p) is the one-dimensional space spanned by 1/(t2+1), so the jump is 1 inside residue degree 2.

The residue-degree case therefore really occurs, the bound is sharp in both extremes, and the jump is in general an intermediate integer of the interval [0,[κ(p):k]].

Scaffold repair, recorded for the owner. The frozen scaffold statement claimed that "the jump l(D+p)−l(D) is either 0 or [κ(p):k]". That strengthening is false: case (iv) exhibits a jump of 1 with residue degree 2. The statement above keeps every promised instance (i)-(iii) with their computations, corrects the general claim to the true bound 0≤l(D+p)−l(D)≤[κ(p):k] of Monotonicity of L(D) in the divisor, and adds case (iv) as the disproof of the false reading. The scaffold's parenthetical in (ii), "a function with divisor [a]−[q]", is also corrected: the spanning function (t−q)/(t−a) has divisor [q]−[a]=−(D+p).

The current Monotonicity of L(D) in the divisor supplies the general residue-field bound. The current Riemann-Roch-space, principal-divisor, Cartier-sheaf, and Cartier-to-Weil interfaces used for the displayed projective-line calculations are The space L(D), Principal weil divisor and class group, Invertible sheaf of cartier divisor, Cartier and Weil divisors agree on a smooth curve, On an integral scheme, Cartier divisors modulo principal divisors compute the Picard group and The Picard group of the projective line.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the Axiom of Choice inherited from the current divisor, residue-field and projective-line suppliers; a field k, a smooth proper geometrically integral curve C, a divisor D, a closed point p, and the computations on Pk1 listed in the statement.

[F1]

On Pk1 with coordinate t=x1/x0: Pk1 is a smooth proper geometrically integral curve of genus 0; for a monic irreducible g∈k[t] of degree d the closed point pg=V(g)⊆Spec⁡k[t] has [κ(pg):k]=d and div⁡(g)=[pg]−d[∞]; div⁡(x0)=[∞] and O(1)≅O(∞) with deg⁡kO(1)=1; every divisor on Pk1 is linearly equivalent to deg⁡k(D)[∞] (Divisors on the projective line are classified by degree, Twisting sheaf on Proj).

[F2]

Every nonzero A∈k[t] factors as a unit times a product of monic irreducibles (For every field F, F[x] is a unique factorisation domain); for a monic irreducible g the point pg is a closed point of U0=Spec⁡k[t] with residue degree d=deg⁡g and ord⁡pg(g)=1, ord⁡x(g)=0 for every other closed point x of U0, and ord⁡∞(g)=−d (Divisors on the projective line are classified by degree, Order codimension one rational function).

[F3]

The order ord⁡x at a closed point is a group homomorphism k(C)×→Z with ord⁡x(fg)=ord⁡x(f)+ord⁡x(g), ord⁡x(f−1)=−ord⁡x(f); ord⁡x(f)≥0 exactly for f∈OC,x, and ord⁡x(f)=0 exactly for units. The local ring OC,p is a discrete valuation ring with uniformizer tp and residue field κ(p)=OC,p/(tp), and [κ(p):k]=dim⁡kκ(p) (Order codimension one rational function, Local rings at closed points of smooth curves are discrete valuation rings, The residue field at a point of an affine scheme, Degree divisor proper curve).

[F4]

The current The space L(D) gives the order description of L(D) and its global-section identification; Principal weil divisor and class group gives the additive divisor convention. The current Invertible sheaf of cartier divisor, Cartier and Weil divisors agree on a smooth curve, On an integral scheme, Cartier divisors modulo principal divisors compute the Picard group and The Picard group of the projective line identify the attached sheaves, including O(p)≅O(2) in case (3).

[F5]

The general bound is Monotonicity of L(D) in the divisor: L(D)⊆L(D+p), the quotient L(D+p)/L(D) embeds k-linearly into κ(p), whence 0≤l(D+p)−l(D)≤[κ(p):k], and the spaces are finite-dimensional with l(D)=dim⁡kL(D)=h0(D) (The Riemann-Roch dimension l(D), Finite-dimensionality of the Riemann-Roch space, Finite-dimensional vector space, and its dimension dim⁡FV; infinite-dimensional means having no finite basis).

[F6]

The Axiom of Choice enters only through the suppliers of [F1]-[F5], exactly those recorded there; the explicit computations below select only the normalized spanning functions exhibited (The Axiom of Choice).

Verification

technique · direct computation of the order conditions on $\mathbb P^1_k$ in each of the four cases, with the bound of the one-point lemma supplying the general inequality
1.1F2F3F4F5

Set-up. By [F5] one has L(D)⊆L(D+p) and 0≤l(D+p)−l(D)≤[κ(p):k] for every divisor D and closed point p on C; by [F4] a rational function f∈k(C)× lies in L(D) if and only if ord⁡x(f)+nx≥0 for every closed point x, where nx is the coefficient of D. On Pk1 every nonzero rational function is a quotient A/B of nonzero polynomials (Divisors on the projective line are classified by degree, For every field F, F[x] is a unique factorisation domain), and by [F2] and [F3] its orders are ord⁡x(A/B)=ord⁡x(A)−ord⁡x(B) at every closed point, with ord⁡∞(A/B)=deg⁡B−deg⁡A for A/B in lowest terms.

1.2F1F2F3F4

Case (1): D=−2[q], p=[a], q=[0], a≠0. A rational function f=A/B in lowest terms lies in L(D) exactly when ord⁡q(f)≥2 and ord⁡x(f)≥0 for every x≠q: the second condition says f has no poles at all, so B is constant and f=A is a polynomial, while the first says the polynomial A has a zero of order at least 2 at q; the condition at infinity ord⁡∞(A)=−deg⁡A≥0 forces deg⁡A=0, and then ord⁡q(A)=0<2. Hence L(D)=0. The same argument with the single change ord⁡a(f)≥−1, applied to L(D+p)=L(−2[q]+[a]), says f=A/B is in L(D+p) only if f=A/(t−a) with deg⁡A≤1 and A divisible by t2 at q, which is impossible for a nonzero polynomial of degree at most one; hence L(D+p)=0 and the jump is 0.

1.3F1F2F3F4

Case (2): D=−[q], p=[a], a≠q. Here f∈L(D) requires ord⁡q(f)≥1 and ord⁡x(f)≥0 for x≠q: again f=A is a polynomial with a zero at q, and ord⁡∞(A)=−deg⁡A≥0 forces deg⁡A=0, contradicting the zero at q; so L(D)=0. For D+p=[a]−[q] the conditions are ord⁡q(f)≥1, ord⁡a(f)≥−1 and ord⁡x(f)≥0 for all other x: writing f=A/(t−a) with A∈k[t], the condition at infinity is ord⁡∞(f)=1−deg⁡A≥0, so deg⁡A≤1, and the condition at q is A(q)=0; hence A=c(t−q) and L(D+p) is the one-dimensional span of (t−q)/(t−a), a nonzero function with ord⁡q=1, ord⁡a=−1, all other orders zero, so div⁡((t−q)/(t−a))=[q]−[a]=−(D+p). The jump is 1, and for the rational point p=[a] one has [κ(p):k]=1.

1.4F1F2F3F4

Case (3): k=R, D=0, p=V(t2+1). By [F1] the polynomial t2+1 is monic irreducible of degree two with closed point p of residue degree [κ(p):k]=2 and div⁡(t2+1)=[p]−2[∞], so [p] is linearly equivalent to 2[∞]. The space L(0) consists of the rational functions with ord⁡x(f)≥0 at every closed point: these are the polynomials (since the denominator of a reduced fraction would give a pole) with ord⁡∞(A)=−deg⁡A≥0, i.e. the constants, so l(0)=1. For L(p): a reduced fraction f=A/B with all orders at least 0 except possibly ord⁡p(f)≥−1 has B=1 or B=t2+1, so f=A/(t2+1) with A∈R[t], and the condition at infinity is ord⁡∞(f)=2−deg⁡A≥0, i.e. deg⁡A≤2. Hence L(p)={A/(t2+1):deg⁡A≤2}, spanned by 1/(t2+1), t/(t2+1), t2/(t2+1): these three are linearly independent because clearing the denominator turns a relation into a polynomial identity of degree at most two. Therefore l(p)=3 and the jump is 2=[κ(p):k], realized over the non-algebraically-closed field R.

2.1F2F3F4step 1.1

Case (4): k=R, D=−2[∞], p=V(t2+1). Here f∈L(D) requires ord⁡∞(f)≥2 and ord⁡x(f)≥0 for every x≠∞: as in step 1.2 this forces f=A to be a polynomial with −deg⁡A≥2, impossible for a nonzero polynomial, so L(D)=0. In L(D+p) the conditions are ord⁡∞(f)≥2, ord⁡p(f)≥−1 and ord⁡x(f)≥0 for all other x: a reduced fraction with no pole outside p is of the form f=A/(t2+1) with A∈R[t], and 2−deg⁡A=ord⁡∞(f)≥2 forces deg⁡A=0; hence L(D+p) is the one-dimensional span of 1/(t2+1), whose orders are +2 at ∞ and −1 at p, so the jump is 1 while [κ(p):k]=2. This is the intermediate value: the jump is neither 0 nor the full residue degree.

3.1F1F4F5F6step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4step 2.1∎

Assembly and choice accounting. Steps 1.2-2.1 exhibit jumps 0, 1 and 2 on Pk1, and in particular the extreme value [κ(p):k] occurs for [κ(p):k]=1 in case (2) and for [κ(p):k]=2 in case (3), while case (4) gives the intermediate value 1 in residue degree 2; the general inequality 0≤l(D+p)−l(D)≤[κ(p):k] is [F5]. The sheaf restatement of case (3), O(p)≅O(2), follows from the current Cartier/Picard route [F4]. The Axiom of Choice is inherited only through the suppliers of [F1]-[F5], as recorded in [F6]; no infinite selection is made above, since the spanning functions are exhibited by formulas.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

140 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