False statementConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06‡ 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 Kunneth short exact sequence has no generally canonical splitting

Statement

The assertion that the Kunneth short exact sequence has a canonical splitting is false.

Refutation

Given: let $C_{1} = Z e \oplus Z f$ , $C_{0} = Z g$ with $d (e) = 2 g$ , $d (f) = 0$ , and let $D_{1} = Z a$ , $D_{0} = Z b$ with $d (a) = 2 b$ .

1.1

We have $H_{1} (C) = Z f$ , $H_{0} (C) = H_{0} (D) = Z / 2$ , and $H_{1} (D) = 0$ . In total degree one the Kunneth sequence is therefore $0 ⟶ Z / 2 ⟶ H_{1} (C \otimes D) ⟶ Z / 2 ⟶ 0$ . Writing $v = e \otimes b - g \otimes a$ , a direct kernel/modulo-boundary calculation gives $H_{1} (C \otimes D) = (Z / 2) v \oplus (Z / 2) (f \otimes b)$ ; the left Kunneth term is generated by $f \otimes b$ and the quotient by the class of $v$ .

givenalgebra

2.1

The chain automorphism $u (e) = e + f$ , $u (f) = f$ , $u (g) = g$ of $C$ induces the identity on $H_{*} (C)$ , hence on both outer Kunneth terms, but sends $v$ to $v + f \otimes b$ in the middle term.

step 1.1algebra

3.1

Every section of the quotient sends its generator to $v + t (f \otimes b)$ for some $t \in Z / 2$ . Naturality under $u \otimes 1_{D}$ would require this lift to be fixed, but $u$ changes $t$ to $t + 1$ . Thus no splitting of all Kunneth sequences can be canonical or natural.

step 2.1contradiction∎

Depends on

The Kunneth sequence splits nonnaturally

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

2 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, An Introduction to Homological Algebra (standard reference, not scraped)