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.
Rephasing the trivial projective representation of C2 by a coboundary
Example
Let and let be the trivial one-dimensional projective representation on , with factor set . Rephasing by the function , gives , with so and : the rephased factor set is the coboundary of , and both factor sets represent the zero class of . Multiplying by returns the genuine representation .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The group with , the one-dimensional space , the trivial projective representation , and the function with , .
For with , the rephasing has factor set , hence the same cohomology class as . (Rephasing changes factor sets by coboundaries).
A normalized projective representation of on a nonzero finite-dimensional space is a map with and for a factor set , which is determined by . (Projective representations and normalized factor sets).
The Clifford obstruction of an invariant irreducible normal-subgroup type is the class in of the factor set of its normalized projective operators, and it is unchanged by rephasing; a class vanishes exactly when the cocycle is a coboundary. (The Clifford obstruction class of an invariant irreducible representation).
For scalars one has , and .
Verification
The map with is a normalized projective representation with factor set : and, since and is one-dimensional, for all four pairs with .
Rephasing by gives and , so is again normalized; and , while the defining relation for at the pair reads , so ; the pairs involving have , so is the function with the single nontrivial value and .
The rephasing formula of [F1] reproduces this value: , using and ; so in the multiplicative coboundary notation, with and on the pairs involving the identity.
Rephasing is reversible and returns the genuine representation: with , so that and , the rephased family has and ; by [F1] its factor set is , so it is the original multiplicative representation of step 1.1.
Both factor sets therefore have the same class in , namely the zero class: is the identity cocycle, and is a coboundary, so by [F3]. To realize this as a Clifford obstruction, take , and the unique irreducible representation of on . It is -invariant, with inertia group and quotient . Both and restrict to , and and (and the same identities for ) hold since . Thus they are projective inertia operators for this specified type in [F3]. Their factor sets give its same vanishing obstruction, although is not the constant cocycle.
The example is verified: the trivial one-dimensional projective representation of has ; rephasing by , produces with , which is exactly ; and since is a coboundary, the two factor sets lie in one cohomology class, the zero class, which step 3.2 confirms by rephasing back to with multiplier .
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
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
- Britta Späth, Reduction theorems for some global-local conjectures — Remark 1.5(a), printed p. 3 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Tammo tom Dieck, Representation Theory — §4.2, printed pp. 54–57 (standard reference, not scraped)