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.
A sparse -free graph has an anticomplete two-blockade
Statement
There exists such that every -sparse -free graph with contains an anticomplete blockade of length and width at least .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An -sparse -free graph with .
Lemma 4.4 of the cited source proves exactly the displayed conclusion for , using repeated large-component consequences of the failure of the desired anticomplete blockade.
Proof
The cited source lemma assumes the negation of the desired blockade, first obtains a connected component of size at least , and then obtains two further large connected pieces outside successive neighbourhoods.
The source shows that the absence of the blockade then forces five selected vertices to induce , contradicting the hypothesis. Therefore the stated anticomplete two-blockade exists.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
11 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
- Tung Nguyen, Alex Scott, and Paul Seymour, Induced subgraph density. VII. The five-vertex path, Lemma 4.4 (standard reference, not scraped)