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.
Borel subspaces of polish spaces are standard borel
Example
Under AC, every Borel subset of a Polish space is standard Borel with its trace Borel sigma-algebra. A concrete instance is , presented by its discrete topology.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC, a Polish space P and a Borel subset B; the concrete instance is Q inside R.
Under AC a Borel subset has a finer Polish topology with exactly its trace Borel sets. (Borel subspaces admit polish presentations)
Q is countable. ( is countably infinite)
AC supplies the topology and metric choices in the refinement lemma. (The Axiom of Choice)
The usual real metric is complete. (The reals are complete)
Q is dense in R. (The rationals embed densely in the reals)
Verification
Apply [F1] with its AC hypothesis [F3]. It gives a Polish topology on B whose Borel sigma-algebra is the trace of that of P. The identity map from the trace measurable space to this presentation is therefore bimeasurable, proving the general assertion, including B empty.
For the instance, R is complete by [F4] and separable by [F2]–[F5], hence Polish. Each singleton rational is closed in R (a point outside it has a ball avoiding it), so Q and every subset of Q are Borel by [F2] and countable unions. Thus . The discrete metric is complete because a Cauchy sequence is eventually constant; Q itself is countable dense for this topology. Its Borel sets are again all subsets. For example the preimage of under the identity is exactly in both measurable structures. This gives the claimed explicit Polish presentation without requiring the inherited metric to be complete.
Source notes
Marker Theorem 2.24, printed pp.20–21, and Definition 2.29, pp.21–22; Durrett Theorem 2.1.22, printed pp.53–54. The Q instance is calculated locally.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
41 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
- Durrett, Probability: Theory and Examples, 5th ed. (standard reference, not scraped)