Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-sol)audited 2026-09-27
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.

Elementary bounds on ideal cardinal invariants

Statement

In ZFC, for I=N the Lebesgue-null ideal and for I=M the meagre ideal of subsets of R (Add, cov, non and cof for null and meagre ideals),

ℵ1≤add⁡(I)≤min⁡(cov⁡(I),non⁡(I))≤max⁡(cov⁡(I),non⁡(I))≤cof⁡(I)≤c=2ℵ0.

The two middle terms are not an assertion that cov⁡ and non⁡ are comparable: min⁡ and max⁡ of the two cardinals are displayed, and min⁡≤max⁡ is immediate. The content is the four inequalities add⁡≤cov⁡, add⁡≤non⁡, cov⁡≤cof⁡, non⁡≤cof⁡, the lower bound ℵ1≤add⁡ coming from countable closure, and the upper bound cof⁡≤c coming from Borel hulls.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: ZFC, hence the Axiom of Choice and the Axiom of Countable Choice.

[F1]

For I=N or M the four numbers of Add, cov, non and cof for null and meagre ideals are cardinals, their defining minima are attained, every singleton is a member of both ideals, R∉I, a set is meagre exactly when it is contained in the union of a sequence of nowhere dense sets, and the two meagre conventions used in the library agree. (Add, cov, non and cof for null and meagre ideals, Nowhere dense, meagre, residual, and comeagre subsets of a topological space)

[F3]

The meagre subsets of a topological space contain ∅ and are closed under taking subsets, and under the Axiom of Countable Choice they are closed under countable unions. (The meagre subsets of a topological space form a sigma-ideal)

[F4]

Every E⊆R has a Gδ set G with E⊆G and λ∗(G)=λ∗(E); such a G is Borel. (Every subset of Rn has a Gδ measurable hull of the same outer measure)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Finite unions. If A0,…,Am∈I with I∈{N,M}, then ⋃i≤mAi∈I: extend the finite list to the sequence An:=∅ for n>m, the empty set being in both ideals, and apply the countable-union clause of [F2] respectively [F3].

F1F2F3
1.2

add⁡≤cov⁡. If A⊆I with ⋃A=R, then R∉I gives ⋃A∉I, so A is a candidate in the minimum defining the additivity and add⁡(I)≤∣A∣; minimizing over covers of R by members of I gives add⁡(I)≤cov⁡(I).

F1
1.3

add⁡≤non⁡. If Y⊆R with Y∉I, then Y=⋃y∈Y{y} is the union of the family {{y}:y∈Y} of members of I, of cardinality ∣Y∣; this family is a candidate in the minimum defining the additivity, so add⁡(I)≤∣Y∣, and minimizing over Y∉I gives add⁡(I)≤non⁡(I).

F1
1.4

cov⁡≤cof⁡. Let A⊆I be inclusion-cofinal in I with ∣A∣=cof⁡(I) (attained by [F1]). For each x∈R the singleton {x} is a member of I, so the set {A∈A:x∈A} is nonempty, and the Axiom of Choice selects a member Ax∈A containing x. Every real therefore lies in some member of A, that is, ⋃A=R, so A is a cover of R by members of I and cov⁡(I)≤∣A∣=cof⁡(I).

F1F6
1.5

non⁡≤cof⁡. Let A⊆I again be inclusion-cofinal with ∣A∣=cof⁡(I). Since R∉I, no member A∈A equals R, so each set R∖A is nonempty and the Axiom of Choice selects a point xA∈R∖A for every A∈A. Put Y:={xA:A∈A}; then Y⊆R and ∣Y∣≤∣A∣ because Y is the image of A under A↦xA. If Y were a member of I, cofinality would give A∗∈A with Y⊆A∗, and then xA∗∈Y⊆A∗ would contradict xA∗∈R∖A∗; hence Y∉I and non⁡(I)≤∣Y∣≤cof⁡(I).

F1F6
1.6

cof⁡(N)≤c. Let E∈N. By [F4] there is a Gδ set G with E⊆G and λ∗(G)=λ∗(E); here λ∗(E)=λ(E)=0 because E is measurable with λ(E)=0, so λ∗(G)=0, and G is a Borel set, hence a member of N, containing E. Therefore the family BN:={B∈B(R):B∈N} consists of members of N and is inclusion-cofinal in it, so cof⁡(N)≤∣BN∣≤∣B(R)∣=c by [F1] and [F5].

F1F2F4F5
1.7

cof⁡(M)≤c. Let E∈M and, by [F1], let (Nn)n∈N be a sequence of nowhere dense sets with E⊆⋃nNn. Put B:=⋃nNn‾. Each Nn‾ is closed by [F7], hence Nn‾=Nn‾‾ by [F7], so its interior int⁡(Nn‾‾)=int⁡(Nn‾)=∅ is empty, that is, Nn‾ is nowhere dense; thus B is the union of a sequence of nowhere dense sets and is meagre, and B is Fσ, hence Borel and a member of M, with E⊆B. Therefore BM:={B∈B(R):B∈M} is inclusion-cofinal in M, and cof⁡(M)≤∣BM∣≤∣B(R)∣=c.

F1F3F5F7
2.1

Countable families never witness. If A⊆I is at most countable, then ⋃A∈I: a finite family is handled by step 1.1, and a countably infinite family can be listed as a sequence and is handled by the countable-union clause of [F2] for N and of [F3] for M.

step 1.1F1F2F3
3.1

ℵ1≤add⁡(I). By [F1] the minimum defining the additivity is attained, so there is A⊆I with ∣A∣=add⁡(I) and ⋃A∉I. Step 2.1 shows that such an A is not at most countable, so add⁡(I)>ℵ0, and since add⁡(I) is a cardinal and ℵ1=ℵ0+ is the least cardinal strictly above ℵ0, it follows that ℵ1≤add⁡(I).

step 2.1F1F6
4.1

Combining step 3.1 with steps 1.2 and 1.3 gives ℵ1≤add⁡(I)≤min⁡(cov⁡(I),non⁡(I)); steps 1.4 and 1.5 give max⁡(cov⁡(I),non⁡(I))≤cof⁡(I); steps 1.6 and 1.7 give cof⁡(I)≤c for the two ideals; and min⁡≤max⁡ of two cardinals is immediate. This is the displayed chain. ∎

step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4step 1.5step 1.6step 1.7step 3.1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

104 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