Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-31
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.

A noninvertible ideal in a singular one-dimensional domain

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let k be a field, let R:=k[t2,t3]⊆k(t), and let m=(t2,t3). Then R is a one-dimensional domain that is not Dedekind, and m is not an invertible ideal.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A field k, the cusp ring R=k[t2,t3] inside k(t), and its maximal ideal m=(t2,t3).

[L1]

A nonzero finitely generated fractional ideal is invertible exactly when all maximal localisations are principal (Equivalent characterizations of invertible fractional ideals).

[L2]

Assuming Choice, injective integral extensions preserve Krull dimension (Injective integral extensions preserve Krull dimension).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1L2givenalgebra

The inclusion R⊆k[t] is integral because t satisfies the monic equation X2−t2=0 with coefficient t2∈R. The ring k[t] is a one-variable polynomial ring over a field, hence a nonfield principal ideal domain and therefore one-dimensional. Thus [L2] gives dim⁡R=1. The same monic equation shows that t is integral over R, but t∉R, so R is not integrally closed and therefore is not Dedekind.

2.1step 1.1givenalgebra

In the local ring Rm one has mm2=(t4,t5,t6)Rm. If t2 lay in mm2, we could write t2=(at4+bt5+ct6)/s with a,b,c∈R and s∉m, so s=t2(a+bt+ct2)∈m, contradiction. Hence t2∈mm∖mm2. If mm were principal, say mm=aRm, then t2=au for some u∈Rm. Because t2∉mm2=amm, the element u is a unit, so mm=t2Rm. But then t3∈mm implies t=t3/t2∈Rm, impossible: if t=r/s with r∈R and s∉m, then r=ts would have a linear t-term while elements of R=k[t2,t3] have no such term. Therefore mm is not principal.

3.1L1step 2.1∎

Since mm is not principal, [L1] shows that m is not invertible.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

11 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