Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passaudited 2026-08-02
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.

Under dependent choice and the ultrafilter lemma, the Samuel compactification of a nonempty compact Hausdorff space adds no points up to unique uniform isomorphism

Example

Assume dependent choice and the ultrafilter lemma. Let KK be a nonempty compact Hausdorff space and give it its unique compatible uniformity. Its Samuel compactification is then uniformly isomorphic over KK to KK itself, and the identity idK\operatorname{id}_K realizes the corresponding ordinary completion.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A nonempty compact Hausdorff space KK with its unique compatible uniformity.

[L1]
[L2]

Under dependent choice, every Samuel completion of a separated totally bounded space is, up to the unique uniform isomorphism fixing that space, its ordinary uniform completion; under the ultrafilter lemma this common completion is compact (Under dependent choice the Samuel completion of a separated totally bounded space is its uniform completion; under the ultrafilter lemma it is compact).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

By [L1], the identity KKK\to K is a Hausdorff completion: it is a uniform embedding, its image is dense, and its target is complete.

L1
2.1

Apply [L2]: every Samuel completion is uniformly isomorphic over KK to the identity completion of step 1.1, and under the stated choice principles it is the Samuel compactification.

L2step 1.1
3.1

Thus no point is added; the singleton case is included.

step 2.1

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 61 results over 11 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources