Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-09-01
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.

Completion need not be exact without a finiteness hypothesis

Example

Let p be a prime integer, let M:=⨁n≥1Zen, and define an endomorphism f ⁣:M→M,f(en)=pnen. Then 0→M→fM→coker⁡(f)→0 is exact, but the induced map on (p)-adic completions f^ ⁣:M^→M^ is not surjective. So completion is not exact without a finiteness hypothesis.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A prime integer p, the module M=⨁n≥1Zen, and the map f(en)=pnen.

[L1]

The (p)-adic completion of a module is the inverse limit of the quotients M/prM (The I-adic completion of a module).

[L2]

Exactness of completion on finite modules is a genuinely finite statement (Adic completion is exact on finite modules over a Noetherian ring).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1givenalgebra

The map f is injective because, if f ⁣(∑i=1Naiei)=∑i=1Naipiei=0, then every coefficient aipi is 0 and hence every ai is 0. Therefore 0→M→fM→coker⁡(f)→0 is exact.

1.2L1construct

For each N≥1, set sN:=∑n=1Npnen∈M. If N′>N, then sN′−sN=∑n=N+1N′pnen∈pN+1M. For each r≥1, define xr to be the class of sN modulo prM for any N≥r. The displayed containment makes this independent of N, and the classes xr are compatible under reduction. Hence x=(xr)r is an element of M^ by [L1].

2.1step 1.2algebra

Suppose x=f^(y) for some y∈M^. Let y‾ be the image of y in M/pM=⨁n≥1(Z/pZ)en. Because this is a direct sum, y‾ has finite support. But for each n≥1, comparing the en-component modulo pn+1 shows that the en-coefficient of y‾ must be 1∈Z/pZ, since f multiplies the en-coordinate by pn and x has en-coefficient pn modulo pn+1. Thus y‾ would have infinitely many nonzero coordinates, a contradiction. So x∉im⁡(f^).

3.1L2step 1.2step 2.1∎

Every partial sum sN from step 1.2 lies in im⁡(f), so its image in coker⁡(f) is 0. Therefore the compatible family x∈M^ maps to 0 in every quotient coker⁡(f)/prcoker⁡(f), hence to 0 in coker⁡(f)^. Step 2.1 showed that x∉im⁡(f^), so the completed sequence fails exactness at the middle term. This is exactly the failure excluded by the finite-generation hypothesis in [L2].

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