Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
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.

Block idempotents lift uniquely from kH to OH

Statement

Let (K,O,k) be a splitting p-modular system and let H be finite. Reduction modulo the maximal ideal m induces a bijection between the primitive central idempotents of OH and those of kH. Thus every block idempotent c of kH has a unique central block lift c^ in OH.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The splitting system, its maximal ideal m, and the finite group H.

[F1]

In a splitting p-modular system, O is a complete discrete valuation ring and k=O/m (A splitting p-modular system for a finite group is a p-modular system whose fraction and residue fields split the needed group algebras).

[F2]

Blocks are the primitive central idempotents of the relevant group algebra (p-blocks from primitive central idempotents).

Proof

1.1F1algebra

Put A=OH. It is finite free over O, hence complete and separated for the m-adic topology by F1. Every element of mA lies in J(A): if x∈mA and y∈A, then (yx)n→0, so 1−yx has inverse ∑n≥0(yx)n. This is the Jacobson-radical test.

2.1F1step 1.1algebra

Let eˉ∈A/mA=kH be idempotent and choose any lift e1∈A. Inductively, if en2−en∈mnA, apply the Newton correction en+1=en−(2en−1)(en2−en). Because en commutes with en2−en, direct expansion shows that en+12−en+1 is a multiple of (en2−en)2, while en+1−en∈mnA. Thus the errors tend to zero and (en) is Cauchy. Completeness gives a limit e with e2=e and reduction eˉ.

3.1F1step 2.1algebra

Suppose now that eˉ is central. For X=eA(1−e) its reduction is eˉ(kH)(1−eˉ)=0, hence X=mX: the nontrivial inclusion uses that m=(π) in the DVR, since x=πa=e(πa)(1−e)=π(ea(1−e)). The finite O-module X has generators x1,…,xt with xi=π∑jaijxj. Multiplying (I−π(aij))(xj)=0 by its adjugate shows that det⁡(I−π(aij))xj=0 for every j. The determinant is congruent to 1 modulo m, hence is a unit, so X=0. Applying the same argument to (1−e)Ae gives that space zero too. Therefore ea=eae=ae for every a∈A, and e is central.

4.1step 1.1step 3.1algebra

If central idempotents e,f∈A have the same reduction, then e−f∈mA⊆J(A). The commuting products e(1−f) and f(1−e) are idempotents in J(A), and an idempotent in the Jacobson radical is zero. Hence e=ef=f. Thus every central idempotent of kH has exactly one central lift.

5.1F2step 2.1step 3.1step 4.1∎

Central primitivity is preserved. If a central lift e decomposed into two nonzero orthogonal central idempotents, neither summand could reduce to zero, since step 1.1 puts its kernel inside J(A); their reductions would decompose eˉ. Conversely, a central decomposition of eˉ lifts termwise by steps 2.1–3.1, and uniqueness in step 4.1 makes the lifted sum equal to e. Hence e is primitive exactly when eˉ is primitive. Together with F2 this proves the bijection and the asserted unique block lift, including the trivial-group case. The constructions are finite or sequential limits fixed by explicit formulas, so no choice principle is used.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

4 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