Alphabeta Math
False statementConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-29
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.

FALSE: member equivalence is transitive in any pointed category with pullbacks

Statement

In any pointed category with pullbacks, the member relation ≡ is transitive.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The weakened hypothesis of the statement.

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1constructalgebra

Work in the category of commutative rings not required to have an identity, with arbitrary ring homomorphisms. The zero ring is a zero object, and pullbacks are the usual fibre-product rings, so this category is pointed and has pullbacks. Let A:=C[t,t−1],x:C[t]↪A,y:=1A:A→A,z:C[t−1]↪A be the two localization inclusions and the identity member. The map x is epic: if φ,ψ:A→R agree on C[t], then they agree on e:=φ(1)=ψ(1) and a:=φ(t)=ψ(t). Both φ(t−1) and ψ(t−1) are inverses of a in the commutative corner ring eR, so they are equal; hence φ=ψ. The same argument shows that z is epic. Therefore x≡y and y≡z.

1.2constructalgebra

The pullback of x and z is the constant subring C, because inside C[t,t−1] one has C[t]∩C[t−1]=C. Its two projections are the constant-term inclusions p1:C→C[t],p2:C→C[t−1].

2.1step 1.2assume-hypalgebra

Suppose x≡z. Then there would exist a ring T and epimorphisms q:T→C[t] and r:T→C[t−1] with xq=zr. By the pullback property from step 1.2, there would be a map m:T→C with q=p1m and r=p2m. Since q is epic, p1 would also be epic. But p1 is not epic: the evaluation maps ev⁡0,ev⁡1:C[t]→C are distinct and satisfy ev⁡0p1=ev⁡1p1=1C. This contradiction shows that x≢z.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1∎

Thus ≡ is not transitive in this pointed category with pullbacks, and the statement is false.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

9 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