Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-30‡ rests on unproved material (inherited)
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.

‡ Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are ‡ Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, ‡ Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and ‡ The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

The published module five lemma as an instance

Example

Take the ambient abelian category to be R-Mod. Then the categorical five lemma is the isomorphism clause of the already-published module five lemma.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A commutative five-term diagram with exact rows in R-Mod.

[L1]

The categorical five lemma holds in any abelian category (Five lemma in an abelian category).

[L2]

The module case is already published under the expected name (The Five Lemma for modules).

Verification

1.1

The hypotheses of [L1] specialize verbatim to a commutative exact-row diagram of modules.

L1
2.1

The conclusion of [L1] is exactly the final, isomorphism clause of [L2]. The separate injective and surjective clauses of [L2] are sharper module statements, while its final clause is the module-valued instance of the categorical five lemma.

L2step 1.1∎

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

5 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