Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)verified 2026-07-29 (claude-fable-5)
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.

In a locally compact Hausdorff space every open set containing a point contains an open set containing it whose closure is compact and still inside; such a space is regular

Statement

Let X be a locally compact (Locally compact topological space: every point has a compact neighbourhood; and what this says in a metric space) Hausdorff (Hausdorff space: distinct points have disjoint open neighbourhoods; every metrizable space is Hausdorff and the indiscrete topology on two points is not) space, so that every point of X has a compact neighbourhood (Neighbourhood of a point and neighbourhood base, with this library's convention that a neighbourhood need not be open, Open cover, subcover, and compact topological space; a compact subset is a subspace that is compact in its own right). Closures are taken in X unless a subscript names another space (Interior, closure, boundary, exterior, derived set and isolated point in a topological space). Then:

  1. Shrinking with a compact closure. For every x∈X and every open U⊆X with x∈U there is an open V⊆X with x∈V⊆V‾⊆U and V‾ compact.
  2. A base. The family of open subsets of X whose closure is compact is a basis for the topology of X (Basis and subbasis for a topology, and the topology generated by a family of sets).
  3. Regularity. X is regular (Regular spaces and T3 spaces, with the source disagreement over whether regularity includes T1 stated explicitly).

Nothing stronger than regularity is claimed: complete regularity of such a space is a separate statement, needs a continuous real-valued function, and is not proved here.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A locally compact Hausdorff space X, a point x∈X and an open set U⊆X with x∈U.

[L1]

For S⊆X the open sets of the subspace S are the traces U′∩S of the open sets of X; an open subset of X contained in S is open in S; and for S⊆T⊆X the topology S inherits from T is the topology it inherits from X (Subspace topology: the traces of the open sets, its closed sets and its bases, the continuity of the inclusion, and the characteristic property of a map into a subspace).

[L3]
[L4]

A space is regular if and only if for every point p of it and every set W open in it with p∈W there is a set V open in it with p∈V⊆cl⁡(V)⊆W, the closure being taken in that space (A space is regular if and only if every point has a neighbourhood base of closed neighbourhoods, if and only if x∈U open gives an open V with x∈V⊆V‾⊆U, (a) iff (b), Regular spaces and T3 spaces, with the source disagreement over whether regularity includes T1 stated explicitly).

[L7]

A family of open sets is a basis for the topology exactly when for every open W and every p∈W some member of the family contains p and is contained in W (Basis and subbasis for a topology, and the topology generated by a family of sets).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

By [A1] fix a compact K⊆X and an open O⊆X with x∈O⊆K; then O⊆int⁡(K) by [A3], so x∈int⁡(K).

A1A3choose
1.2

The subspace K is Hausdorff: distinct p,q∈K have disjoint open U1∋p and U2∋q in X by [A2], and the traces U1∩K and U2∩K are disjoint open sets of the subspace containing p and q respectively.

A2L1
1.3

K is closed in X, being a compact subset of the Hausdorff space X.

A2L2
2.1

The subspace K is compact and Hausdorff, hence regular.

step 1.2L3
2.2

Put G:=U∩int⁡(K); it is open in X, contains x by step 1.1, is contained in K by [A3], and is therefore also open in the subspace K.

step 1.1A3L1
3.1

Applying [L4] inside the space K, which is regular by step 2.1, to the point x and the set G open in K, there is a set V open in K with x∈V⊆cl⁡K(V)⊆G.

step 2.1step 2.2L4choose
4.1

V is open in X: by [L1] there is an open V′⊆X with V=V′∩K, and since V⊆G⊆int⁡(K) we get V=V∩int⁡(K)=V′∩K∩int⁡(K)=V′∩int⁡(K), an intersection of two open subsets of X.

step 2.2step 3.1L1A3
4.2

V‾=cl⁡K(V): from V⊆K and K closed in X (step 1.3) the smallest closed superset of V satisfies V‾⊆K, and [L5] gives cl⁡K(V)=V‾∩K=V‾.

step 1.3step 3.1A3L5
5.1

V‾ is compact: by step 4.2 it is cl⁡K(V), which is closed in the compact subspace K and hence compact by [L6]; and by the transitivity clause of [L1] the topology it inherits from K is the one it inherits from X, so it is a compact subset of X.

step 4.2L1L6
6.1

Combining, V is open in X by step 4.1, x∈V⊆V‾=cl⁡K(V)⊆G⊆U by steps 3.1, 4.2 and 2.2, and V‾ is compact by step 5.1; as x and U were arbitrary this is claim 1.

step 2.2step 3.1step 4.1step 4.2step 5.1
7.1

The open subsets of X with compact closure are open, and by step 6.1 every open U and every x∈U admit such a set V with x∈V⊆U; so by [L7] they form a basis for the topology of X, which is claim 2.

step 6.1L7
7.2

Step 6.1 gives, for every x and every open U∋x, an open V with x∈V⊆V‾⊆U, which is condition (b) of [L4] for the space X; hence X is regular, which is claim 3.

step 6.1L4
8.1

Steps 6.1, 7.1 and 7.2 are claims 1, 2 and 3, so the lemma is proved.

step 6.1step 7.1step 7.2∎

Remarks

  • Which clause of local compactness is used. Only that every point has a compact neighbourhood, in the weak sense of Locally compact topological space: every point has a compact neighbourhood; and what this says in a metric space: a compact K with x in its interior. The stronger-sounding conclusion, a neighbourhood base of open sets with compact closure, is derived from it here, and the Hausdorff hypothesis is what makes the derivation possible — it is used twice, once to make K closed in X and once to make the subspace K regular.

  • Why the argument moves into the subspace K and back out. Regularity is available inside K, because K is compact Hausdorff, and not yet available in X — proving it for X is claim 3. The two transfers back to X are step 4.1, which uses that V sits inside the open set int⁡(K), and step 4.2, which uses that K is closed. Neither transfer works without its hypothesis: an open set of a subspace need not be open in the ambient space, and a closure computed in a subspace need not agree with the ambient closure.

  • Compactness of V‾, not merely of its closure inside K. Compactness is a property of a space, and V‾ carries the same topology whether it is reached through K or directly from X (Subspace topology: the traces of the open sets, its closed sets and its bases, the continuity of the inclusion, and the characteristic property of a map into a subspace); step 5.1 records that, so no second notion of "compact subset" is created.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

36 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