Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Dual handle presentations of a genus-g surface

Example

Assume ACω. The closed orientable surface Σg has a presentation with one 0-handle, 2g 1-handles and one 2-handle. Its dual presentation has one 0-handle (the dual of the original 2-handle), 2g 1-handles (self-dual) and one 2-handle (the dual of the original 0-handle); for g=0 the dual presentation of the two-handle sphere is the same pair of handles read in reverse order. The example verifies the index exchange k↔2−k of the duality theorem in the surface case.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: g≥0 and ACω; construct Σg by successively adding g punctured-torus pieces to a disk and capping the remaining boundary.

[F1]

Morse functions and handle decompositions correspond: Assume ACω. An adapted excellent Morse function on a compact triad determines a handle decomposition relative to the incoming face with exactly one handle of index ind⁡(p) per critical point; conversely each finite handle presentation is realized by an adapted excellent function of the same handle indices.

[F2]

Index zero handles create components and Index n handles cap boundary spheres: a 0-handle attaches along the empty set and adds a disjoint n-disk; a 2-handle on a surface attaches along a circle and caps it.

[F3]

Dual handle decomposition: the dual of a presentation relative to M0 is the presentation of the reversed triad relative to M1 with the same handle bodies and exchanged disk factors, in reverse order; a k-handle becomes an (n−k)-handle and attaching and belt spheres are interchanged.

[F4]

Handle duality from negating a Morse function: Assume ACω. If f is adapted excellent on a compact triad then 1−f is adapted excellent on the reversed triad with indices n−ind⁡(p) at the same critical points, and its handle decomposition is the dual one.

[F8]

Under ACω, Every smooth manifold admits a riemannian metric supplies a background metric, Morse lemma supplies the quadratic critical charts, A manifold bump for a compact set inside an open set supplies finite chart cutoffs, and Compactly supported smooth vector fields are complete makes a compactly supported smooth field on a boundaryless carrier complete.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1F2givenconstruct

Start with a disk. In each of g repetitions, attach an orientable band along two arcs of the current single boundary circle so that the boundary splits into two circles; attach a second orientable band between these two circles. The boundary is again one circle and the surface has acquired one punctured-torus piece. This is the usual genus-g orientable surface with one disk removed. Capping its final circle gives Σg, using exactly one disk, 2g bands and one cap.

2.1F1F2step 1.1construct

Read the disk, the bands and the cap as handles of indices 0,1,2. By [F1] the resulting finite handle presentation is realized by an adapted excellent h:Σg→[0,1] with one minimum, 2g saddles of distinct values and one maximum. No arbitrary embedded height function is being assumed excellent or already in the adapted range. For g=0 the construction is two disks glued along their circle.

3.1F1F4F8step 2.1algebra

Patch a background metric from [F8] to Euclidean metrics in smaller disjoint Morse charts of the realizing function of step 2.1, using the finite chart cutoffs. Its negative gradient is strictly descending off the critical points and equals (2u,−2v) in these charts. It is complete by [F8] because the closed surface is compact. Thus it is an adapted field, and [F4] applies to this pair. The negated function 1−h is adapted excellent with the same 2g+2 critical points, and the indices are exchanged by k↦2−k: the maximum of h has index 0 for 1−h, the 2g saddles keep index 1, and the minimum of h has index 2 for 1−h (this is the general fact that negating a function changes the index of a nondegenerate critical point from k to n−k, here n=2). By [F1] applied to 1−h, the dual presentation has one 0-handle, 2g 1-handles and one 2-handle.

4.1F3F4step 2.1step 3.1algebra

Identify the handles of the two presentations through [F3]: the dual 0-handle is the original 2-handle, the 2g one-handles are self-dual since 2−1=1, and the dual 2-handle is the original 0-handle; the order of attachment is reversed and attaching and belt spheres are interchanged. For g=0 this says that the dual presentation of the sphere's two-handle presentation is the same pair of handles read in reverse order, which agrees with the explicit picture of two disks glued along their boundary circle.

5.1F1F3step 4.1algebra∎

The index exchange is verified in every surface degree: 0↔2 and 1↔1, so no handle of the dual presentation has an index outside {0,1,2} and the numbers of handles of each index are 1,2g,1 in both presentations. This is exactly the surface case of the duality theorem.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

48 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