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.
UCT as a two-column spectral sequence over the integers
Example
Assume AC. For a bounded-below free integer chain complex and an abelian group , the UCT sequence has only resolution columns , and its finite decreasing filtration gives For , , , and , the nonzero entries are at . The target is in degree zero and in degree one.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The AC and bounded free-complex hypotheses above.
UCT has page and finite decreasing filtration (Universal coefficient spectral sequence).
Under AC submodules of free PID modules are free (A submodule of an arbitrary-rank free module over a PID is free).
The UCT quotient is evaluation, and its cycle-boundary construction identifies the Ext kernel (The universal coefficient theorem for cohomology over a PID).
A chosen cycle retraction supplies a UCT section; a chain shear prevents general naturality (UCT and Kunneth collapse retains an extension problem).
Verification
Present any abelian group by the free group on its underlying set. F2 makes the kernel free, and AC lifts arbitrary basis images to prove these free groups projective. Thus every such group has a projective resolution of length at most one and Ext vanishes for . In F1 every for changes by at least two, so its source or target vanishes. Therefore , and is the Ext-one term while is the Hom term. The edge is restriction of a Hom cocycle to cycles, hence evaluation as in F3; the boundary quotient defining its kernel is the same free presentation of used in F3. This proves the displayed exact sequence with its actual arrows.
For the specified , its homology is , , zero elsewhere. Hom of the presentation into has zero differential, so Hom and Ext-one of into are both . Hom of is and its positive Ext is zero, using its one-term projective resolution. This gives exactly the three asserted page entries. Directly, is in degrees zero and one, confirming both targets and zero in all other degrees.
In degree zero . In degree one, identify a cochain by ; then , , . Evaluation is and the Ext injection is . The section splits this particular extension. But fixes homology and induces , which moves every lift of ; hence no section is natural in , in agreement with F4. The finite endpoints prove there is no unresolved convergence issue. AC is used for the general free-kernel argument and optional general sections; this displayed finite calculation itself makes no infinite choices.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
21 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
- Weibel, Sections 5.6-5.7 (standard reference, not scraped)