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.
Any ordinary homology theory has a cellular chain complex on a cw pair
Statement
For a CW pair and an ordinary theory with coefficient , put and for . Set Each is the direct sum of copies of indexed by the relative -cells. Define and for let be the triple boundary to followed by its map to . Then , naturally for cellular maps of CW pairs.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The objects and hypotheses in the statement above.
Let be an ordinary theory with coefficient group . For every and , At the pair means . Also for and zero otherwise, including . Choose the disk identifications by ordered orientations and iterated cone boundaries, so they commute with these boundaries. (Any ordinary homology theory computes relative cell groups from its coefficient group)
Ordinary unreduced theories on CW pairs and reduced ordinary theories on based CW spaces with vertex basepoints determine one another, naturally and compatibly with morphisms and coefficients. For the correspondence gives ; for it gives , where . Under this correspondence, pair boundaries are cofiber boundaries followed by inverse suspension, and arbitrary disjoint-sum additivity corresponds to arbitrary wedge additivity. For a CW triple there is a natural exact sequence , whose last map is the pair boundary followed by . (Unreduced pair and reduced quotient axioms are equivalent on cw pairs)
Write for the union of cells of dimension at most , with . A CW subcomplex is a union of open cells such that, whenever contains an open cell , it contains the whole closure . A relative CW complex is formed from the subcomplex by attaching cells in stages; thus is a cellular inclusion. (Skeleta, CW subcomplexes, and relative CW complexes)
Proof
By the skeletal definition F3, collapsing leaves a wedge of one -sphere per relative cell, using the disjoint-basepoint convention when is empty. Quotient identification and arbitrary wedge additivity in F2, followed by F1, show is zero for and the stated direct sum for . This includes no cells and zero-dimensional cells.
Write for the triple boundary and for the quotient map. The differential is . Exactness of the triple gives .
Consequently for ; for it holds because . A cellular map preserves each and all natural triple maps, so it commutes with these differentials. No sphere-map incidence identification has been used.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
7 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
- May, A Concise Course in Algebraic Topology, 15§2, definition of C_n and d, p.119 (standard reference, not scraped)