Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
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.

Equivalent Dedekind-finiteness tests in the basic Cohen model

Statement

For the basic Cohen set A, the following are equivalent in ZF: A has a countably infinite subset, there is an injection ωA, and A is in bijection with a proper subset. Their negations all hold in the basic Cohen model.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses, objects, and conventions in the Statement.

[F1]

The basic Cohen model has an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals proves that A is infinite and Dedekind-finite.

[F2]

Dedekind infinitude is equivalent to a countable subset gives the choice-free equivalence between Dedekind infinitude, an injection from ω, and a countably infinite subset.

Proof

1.1

If BA is countably infinite, a displayed bijection b:ωB followed by inclusion is an injection ωA. Conversely, the range of an injection i:ωA is a subset of A bijective with ω. These are explicit maps and require no simultaneous choices.

F2
1.2

From an injection i:ωA, define h:AA{i(0)} by h(i(n))=i(n+1) and h(x)=x off i[ω]. The two pieces are disjoint, and the inverse sends i(n+1) to i(n) and fixes the complement, so h is a bijection onto a proper subset.

F2
1.3

Conversely, if h:ABA is a bijection, choose the single witness x0AB and recursively put xn+1=h(xn). Injectivity of h and the fact that x0 is not in its range show by cancellation that the xn are distinct. Thus nxn injects ω into A. This uses one existential witness and recursion, not Countable Choice.

F2
2.1

F1 rules out the proper-subset bijection. By step 1.1, step 1.2, step 1.3 it therefore rules out an ω-injection and a countably infinite subset as well. Both implications of every equivalence have been accounted for in ZF.

F1step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

7 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