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: unrestricted diagonalization respects any resource bound
Statement
An unrestricted universal diagonalization automatically stays within whatever resource bound is claimed for its simulated machines.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: the claimed constant bound .
Refutation
Fix a machine that halts after one transition without reading its input, and consider the valid pairs as grows. The simulated computation respects the bound , but the specified universal simulator must first decode the complete self-delimiting pair and reject malformed encodings. This takes time at least linear in the unbounded pair length.
Hence this unrestricted diagonalizer is not an -time computation, despite every selected run of taking one step. A candidate's resource bound alone therefore does not bound decoding and universal-simulation overhead; a separate clock and a proved gap are needed.
Depends on
Used by
- Overhead breaks an unrestricted diagonalization claim Counterexample
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
- Arora and Barak, Computational Complexity, §3.1 (standard reference, not scraped)