Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
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.

The charge-zero level-one crystal through rank four at e = 3

Example

At e=3, charge Λ0, in the symmetric-group convention, the empty component through rank four has exactly the following vertices, one row per rank:

  • rank 0: ∅;
  • rank 1: (1);
  • rank 2: (2) and (1,1);
  • rank 3: (2,1) and (1,1,1);
  • rank 4: (3,1), (2,2), (2,1,1) and (1,1,1,1).

These are exactly the 3-restricted partitions of each size (1,1,2,2,4 of them). The cogood-addition arrows staying within ranks 0-4 are ∅→f~0(1);(1)→f~1(2),(1)→f~2(1,1);(2)→f~2(2,1); (1,1)→f~1(1,1,1);(2,1)→f~0(2,2),(2,1)→f~2(3,1);(1,1,1)→f~0(1,1,1,1),(1,1,1)→f~1(2,1,1). All other additions from ranks 0-3 vanish; additions from rank 4 leaving the displayed window are omitted, not declared zero. The good-deletion arrows into the listed ranks are (1)→e~0∅;(2)→e~1(1),(1,1)→e~2(1); (2,1)→e~2(2),(1,1,1)→e~1(1,1);(2,2)→e~0(2,1),(3,1)→e~2(2,1),(2,1,1)→e~1(1,1,1),(1,1,1,1)→e~0(1,1,1). In particular (2,1) has no arrow of residue 1 in either direction, and (2,1)→f~2(3,1) is the arrow whose conjugate is the quantum-group Fock arrow f~1 from (2,1) to (2,1,1).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: e=3, charge 0, and the modular signature, restricted-label and transport conventions of The symmetric-group level-one residue and partition-label convention; i-nodes are the addable and removable nodes of residue i=c−r.

[F1]

The modular reduced i-signature lists the i-nodes top to bottom, cancels a − above a +, and selects the first surviving − as the good removable node and the last surviving + as the cogood addable node; if a sign is missing the corresponding arrow is zero; a selected addition or deletion changes the number of diagram nodes of its residue by 1 (The symmetric-group level-one residue and partition-label convention).

[F2]

The empty component of the transported Fock crystal is exactly the set of e-restricted partitions, with these operators, so the vertices reachable from ∅ within a rank range are obtained by iterating the selected cogood additions, and a listed absence of a surviving sign is a genuine zero arrow (The restricted-partition component is the basic crystal in the symmetric-group convention).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1givenF2

The vertex list is the list of 3-restricted partitions by rank. A partition is 3-restricted when λa−λa+1<3 for all a (padded by zeros). Rank 0: ∅. Rank 1: (1). Rank 2: the partitions of 2 are (2) and (1,1), and both satisfy the inequalities (2−0=2<3, and 1−1=0, 1−0=1<3). Rank 3: the partitions are (3), (2,1), (1,1,1); (3) fails since 3−0=3, while (2,1) has 2−1=1<3 and (1,1,1) has parts differences 0,1<3. Rank 4: the partitions are (4), (3,1), (2,2), (2,1,1), (1,1,1,1); (4) fails (4−0=4≥3) and the other four satisfy 3−1=2<3, 2−2=0<3, 2−1=1<3 together with 1−1=0, and 0,0,0<3. Hence the displayed list has 1,1,2,2,4 shapes, and by [F2] these are precisely the component vertices in ranks 0-4.

1.2givenF1

The additions from ranks 0-2. Write each signature as the word of signs of the listed nodes and reduce. ∅: color 0 has the single addable node (1,1), word +, cogood (1,1), hence f~0∅=(1); colors 1,2 have no nodes, so those arrows are zero. (1): color 0 has the removable node (1,1), word − (no cogood, f~0=0); color 1 has the addable node (1,2), word +, so f~1(1)=(2); color 2 has the addable node (2,1) of residue −1≡2, word +, so f~2(1)=(1,1). (2): color 0 has no nodes (f~0=e~0=0); color 1 has the removable (1,2), word −, so f~1(2)=0 and e~1(2)=(1); color 2 has the addable (1,3) and the addable (2,1), both of residue 2, in the top-to-bottom word ++, whose last surviving + is (2,1), so f~2(2)=(2,1) and e~2(2)=0. (1,1): color 0 has no nodes; color 1 has the addables (1,2) and (3,1), word ++, cogood (3,1), so f~1(1,1)=(1,1,1); color 2 has the removable (2,1) of residue −1≡2, word −, so e~2(1,1)=(1) and f~2(1,1)=0.

2.1givenF1step 1.2

The additions from rank 3 and the vanishing claims. (2,1): color 0 has the addable (2,2) (residue 0), word +, so f~0(2,1)=(2,2); color 1 has the removable (1,2) and the addable (3,1), top-to-bottom word −+, which cancels, so f~1=e~1=0 and in particular (2,1) has no residue-1 arrow; color 2 has the addable (1,3) above the removable (2,1), word +− with no cancellable pair, so the last surviving + is (1,3), giving f~2(2,1)=(3,1), and the first surviving − is (2,1), giving e~2(2,1)=(2). (1,1,1): color 0 has the addable (4,1) (residue −3≡0), word +, so f~0(1,1,1)=(1,1,1,1); color 1 has the addable (1,2) above the removable (3,1), word +− with no cancellable pair, so f~1(1,1,1)=(2,1,1) and e~1(1,1,1)=(1,1); color 2 has no nodes. These are all the additions from ranks 0-3 inside the window, and every other color at these vertices has just been shown to have no surviving selected sign, hence a zero arrow.

3.1givenF1step 2.1∎

The deletions from rank 4 and the boundary. (2,2): the only removable node is (2,2), of residue 0 with word −, so e~0(2,2)=(2,1), and there is no removable node of residue 1 or 2, so the good deletions e~1 and e~2 are zero; the addable nodes (1,3) of residue 2 and (3,1) of residue 1 are each the unique surviving + of their color, so f~2 adds (1,3) and f~1 adds (3,1), both additions leaving rank 5 and therefore omitted from the displayed window. (3,1): color 2 has the removables (1,3) and (2,1), both of residue 2, word −−, whose first surviving − is (1,3), so e~2(3,1)=(2,1); color 1 has the addable (3,1) of residue 1 and color 0 the addables (1,4), (2,2) of residue 0, all with no surviving − for a good deletion and with cogood additions leaving rank 5. (2,1,1): color 1 has the removables (1,2) and (3,1), word −− of residue 1, first surviving − equal to (1,2), so e~1(2,1,1)=(1,1,1); color 0 has the addables (2,2) and (4,1), whose cogood is (4,1) and leaves rank 5; color 2 has the single addable (1,3), leaving rank 5, and no removable. (1,1,1,1): the only removable node is (4,1) of residue 0, so e~0(1,1,1,1)=(1,1,1); the addables (1,2) and (5,1) have residues 1 and 2 and lead to rank 5, so they are omitted rather than declared zero. Finally the conjugate comparison: transposition sends (3,1) to (2,1,1), fixes (2,1), negates residues, so the arrow (2,1)→f~2(3,1) corresponds to the quantum-group arrow f~1 from (2,1) to (2,1,1) with f2 reflecting to f−2=f1.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

18 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