Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-28
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.

Localizing (x2,xy)=(x)∩(x,y)2 keeps only the matching component

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice), and let k be a field.

In R=k[x,y], (x2,xy)=(x)∩(x,y)2. Localizing at (x) kills the (x,y)-primary component, while localizing at (x,y) preserves both components.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, a field k, the polynomial ring R=k[x,y], and the decomposition (x2,xy)=(x)∩(x,y)2.

[L1]

Assuming the Axiom of Choice, over a Noetherian commutative ring and in a finitely generated module, localizing a primary component away from its radical preserves it, while localizing at a multiplicative set meeting its radical turns it into the whole localized module (Localisation of a primary submodule either stays primary or becomes the whole module).

[L2]

Assuming the Axiom of Choice, an isolated primary component with prime radical in the Noetherian finite-module setting is recovered by localizing at its prime and contracting back (Isolated primary components are recovered by localization and contraction).

[L3]

A polynomial ring in finitely many variables over a Noetherian commutative ring is Noetherian (If R is Noetherian then R[x1,…,xn] is Noetherian for every n∈N).

[L4]

A polynomial ring in finitely many variables over an integral domain is an integral domain (A polynomial ring in finitely many indeterminates over an integral domain is an integral domain).

[L5]

For a commutative ring and an ideal P, the quotient R/P is an integral domain if and only if P is prime (R/P is an integral domain if and only if P is a prime ideal).

[L6]

A proper ideal Q is p-primary when every zero divisor on R/Q acts nilpotently and Ann⁡R(R/Q)=p (Primary submodules and primary ideals).

[L7]

A primary decomposition is minimal exactly when no component is redundant and the component radicals are pairwise distinct; an isolated component has a radical minimal among those radicals (Primary decompositions, minimality, and isolated components).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1L3givenalgebra

The field k is Noetherian because its only ideals are 0 and k, so [L3] makes R=k[x,y] Noetherian. As an R-module, R is finitely generated by 1. The inclusion (x2,xy)⊆(x)∩(x,y)2 is immediate. Conversely, every element of (x)∩(x,y)2 has the form xf with f∈(x,y), hence lies in (x2,xy). So (x2,xy)=(x)∩(x,y)2.

1.2L4L5L6algebra

Since a field is an integral domain, [L4] makes k[y]≅R/(x) an integral domain, so [L5] makes (x) prime. If multiplication by a class aˉ on the domain R/(x) has nontrivial kernel, then aˉ=0; hence that multiplication is zero and therefore nilpotent. Also Ann⁡R(R/(x))=(x), whose radical is (x). Thus [L6] shows that (x) is (x)-primary.

1.3L5L6algebra

Put Q=(x,y)2. Every class in R/Q has the form c+αxˉ+βyˉ. If c≠0, this class is a unit, with inverse c−1−c−2(αxˉ+βyˉ) because (xˉ,yˉ)2=0. Therefore every zero divisor lies in (xˉ,yˉ) and is square-zero, so every zero divisor on R/Q acts nilpotently. Moreover Ann⁡R(R/Q)=Q and Q=(x,y): every element of (x,y) has square in Q, while fn∈Q forces the constant term of f to vanish. Finally, R/(x,y)≅k is a domain, so [L5] makes (x,y) prime. Thus [L6] shows that (x,y)2 is (x,y)-primary.

2.1L7step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3algebra

The two prime radicals (x) and (x,y) are distinct, with (x)⊊(x,y). The decomposition from step 1.1 is irredundant: y2∈(x,y)2∖(x), so the component (x) is not redundant, while x∈(x)∖(x,y)2, so the component (x,y)2 is not redundant. By [L7], the displayed primary decomposition is minimal, and its (x)-primary component is isolated because (x) is the smaller of the two radicals.

3.1L1L2step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 2.1algebra

At the prime (x), the element y becomes a unit. Since y2∈(x,y)2, fact [L1] and steps 1.1–2.1 give ((x,y)2)(x)=R(x), while (x)(x) survives. Hence (x2,xy)(x)=(x)(x). Since step 2.1 proves that (x) is the isolated component of a minimal primary decomposition, fact [L2] says it contracts back to (x).

3.2L1step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 2.1

At the maximal ideal (x,y), neither prime radical meets the denominator set, so [L1] and steps 1.1–2.1 preserve both primary components. Thus the whole decomposition survives in R(x,y).

4.1step 3.1step 3.2∎

This computation shows concretely how localization removes exactly the components whose radicals meet the denominator set.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

28 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