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.
Unknot, trefoil, and positive untwisted Whitehead double cases
Example
Assume full AC. The unknot has the empty Seifert matrix, Alexander polynomial , and a smooth slice disk. The right-handed trefoil has positive-push matrix and Alexander polynomial , so the Alexander-one theorem gives no conclusion for it and does not prove it nonslice. Let denote the satellite of the right-handed trefoil by the positive-clasped, untwisted Whitehead pattern, embedded using the preferred longitude. This knot has Alexander polynomial ; by topologically slice we mean that it bounds a locally flat embedded disk in . The established theorem gives that topological conclusion, not a smooth slice disk.
Example references
The Alexander-one topological sliceness theorem
The right-handed trefoil matrix
The determinant convention used in the calculations
The satellite-pattern and winding-number conventions
Matthew Hedden and Juanita Pinzón-Caicedo, “Satellites of Infinite Rank in the Smooth Concordance Group,” §5.2.2 and Figure 2, printed pp.18–19, https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.04186
Arunima Ray, Slice Knots and Knot Concordance, Definition 1.10, Theorem 1.13, and Figure 8, printed pp.5–6, https://aru-ray.github.io/documents/slicenotes.pdf
Stavros Garoufalidis and Peter Teichner, “On Knots with Trivial Alexander Polynomial,” Appendix A, https://people.math.gatech.edu/~stavros/publications/teichner1.pdf
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Full AC, the unknot, the right-handed trefoil, and its positive untwisted Whitehead double.
The Axiom of Choice: Full AC is the axiom used by the determinant supplier.
A positive Hopf plumbing gives the trefoil Seifert matrix: The right-handed trefoil has in the positive-push convention.
Satellite pattern, companion, and winding number: A satellite is obtained by inserting a pattern into a preferred-longitude tubular embedding of its companion; its winding number is the pattern's algebraic intersection with a meridional disk.
Alexander polynomial one implies topological sliceness: Under full AC, a smooth oriented Alexander-one knot bounds a locally flat proper disk in the standard four-ball.
The skew part of a Seifert matrix is the surface intersection form: In a positive handle basis , the entries satisfy .
Well-definedness of the Seifert pairing: Linking is symmetric and the positive-push pairing is independent of the sufficiently small positive push and cycle representatives.
Proof
For the unknot, the Seifert surface is a disk, so and the empty determinant is ; the standard flat disk in proves sliceness. For the trefoil, [F1] and [F2] give , which is not a Laurent unit.
Construct the actual surface inside the preferred-longitude tube of from [F3]. Take a narrow annulus about its core with the zero product framing. In a small ball meeting in one square , plumb to a positive Hopf annulus : identify their squares so the two annular core arcs are the two crossing coordinate axes in , and place the parts outside the square on opposite sides. Smooth the four square corners. Outside that ball the boundary is the two oppositely oriented zero-framed parallels of ; inside the ball the positive Hopf band joins them by its positive clasp. This is precisely the positive-clasped untwisted Whitehead pattern in the specified tube. The untwisted condition is the zero framing of , and the construction uses the preferred longitude rather than an arbitrary longitude. It is also the surface of the cited Figure 2; that figure identifies the convention but is not a substitute for the following matrix calculation.
Let be the annulus core and the Hopf core, with orientations chosen so their sole square intersection has . The plumbed surface is connected and oriented. Its Euler characteristic is , and tracing the alternating four attaching edges gives one boundary component. The two annuli retract to their two core loops with the square intersection identified, so is an integral handle basis and the surface has genus one. Choose the plumbing side in which the positive push of the -arc is above the square. The unknotted Hopf core has a spanning disk in the local ball lying below the square except for its boundary arc; use the lower side for the remainder of . Thus this disk misses , including the part of outside the ball. This is a local disk for , and does not assert that the companion bounds a disk.
The positive push of is a small parallel with the product annulus framing; its linking with is zero because that product longitude is the preferred longitude. Equivalently move the push to the annular side direction through nonzero normal directions, keeping it disjoint from . The local square does not add a twist to this annular framing. Hence . The two boundary components of the positive Hopf annulus, with induced orientations, link . Equally oriented core parallels therefore link , since one induced boundary orientation is reversed. Moving one core parallel to the positive normal push preserves this linking, so . The local spanning disk from step 2.1 and symmetry of linking give . Finally [F5] gives . Thus the ACTUAL Whitehead double of , not just the pattern applied to the unknot, has matrix .
Direct calculation gives . This is a Laurent unit, with inverse , so [F2] gives . Applying [F4] proves the stated locally flat proper slice disk in the standard . The argument establishes the announced topological conclusion; it contains no smooth slice-disk construction and no inference that the trefoil is nonslice from its nonunit Alexander polynomial. Every claim in the example follows without a general satellite determinant theorem.
Depends on
- Alexander polynomial one implies topological sliceness
- The Seifert determinant is the knot Alexander polynomial
- Seifert pairing and matrix of an oriented knot
- Satellite pattern, companion, and winding number
- A positive Hopf plumbing gives the trefoil Seifert matrix
- The skew part of a Seifert matrix is the surface intersection form
- Well-definedness of the Seifert pairing
- The Axiom of Choice
- The Axiom of Countable Choice ($\mathrm{AC}_\omega$)
- AC implies DC implies countable choice
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
55 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
- Matthew Hedden and Juanita Pinzón-Caicedo, Satellites of Infinite Rank in the Smooth Concordance Group (standard reference, not scraped)
- Stavros Garoufalidis and Peter Teichner, On Knots with Trivial Alexander Polynomial (standard reference, not scraped)
- Arunima Ray, Slice Knots and Knot Concordance (standard reference, not scraped)