Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-12
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.

Approximate cycle obstruction sequence for a complete filtered complex

Statement

Assume AC. Let (C,d,F) be an increasing filtered complex of modules, complete in each degree: the canonical map Ck→lim←⁡m≥0Ck/F−mCk is an isomorphism. Fix n and define A(p,t)=FpCn∩d−1(FtCn−1),Zp=FpCn∩ker⁡d,Qp=Rt→−∞A(p,t). Here L,R mean countable Delta kernel and cokernel; a tower toward minus infinity is indexed by t=T−m, m≥0, with inclusion transitions. Finite changes of T give the canonical same result. Let S(p,t) be the image of A(p,t) in FpCn/Fp−1Cn, and put S(p,∞)=⋂tS(p,t). There is a natural exact sequence 0→Zp−1→Zp→S(p,∞)→Qp−1→Qp→RtS(p,t)→0. Moreover Lp→−∞Qp=0 and Rp→−∞Zp=0. Naturality is for filtration-preserving chain maps of complete filtered complexes. Exhaustiveness is not needed for this lemma.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

In a Filtered chain complex, d(FpCk)⊆FpCk−1 and d2=0.

[F2]

Countable tower completion obstruction exact sequence identifies the kernel and cokernel of a subgroup completion map with intersection and Delta cokernel, under AC.

[F3]

Countable tower six term limit sequence gives the natural six-term sequence and invariance under finite cofinal tails, under AC.

[F4]

Two by two Delta complex for a double tower says that a commuting double system with LpA=RpA=0 for each t has LpRtA=0, under AC.

[F5]

The Axiom of Choice is assumed for the coordinate lifts in [F2]–[F4]; the residue and tail-sum constructions below select unique values and require no additional choice.

Proof

Given: The complete filtered complex and degree n of the statement. All submodules and quotients below have their usual element meaning.

1.1F1

Completeness includes injectivity, so ⋂mF−mCk=0. Every fixed FpCk is closed in the residue sense: if x∈⋂t(FpCk+FtCk), take t≤p to get x∈FpCk. A compatible family of residues defines a unique element of Ck by completeness, and if every sufficiently fine residue is represented in FpCk, its value lies in FpCk by this same test. Filtration preservation makes application of d compatible with residues.

2.1F1F2F3F5step 1.1

The transition maps of A(p,t) are inclusions in both coordinates and commute. For fixed t and p≤t one has A(p,t)=FpCn: [F1] gives the forward inclusion in the inverse-image condition, and the reverse is part of the definition. The cofinal p tower therefore has zero limit by separatedness and zero Delta cokernel by [F2] and completeness. The finite-tail identifications of [F3] give LpA(p,t)=RpA(p,t)=0 for the full p tower with any fixed upper endpoint.

2.2F1F3step 1.1

For the cycle tower at indices −m, let ym∈Z−m be any product tuple. For each m and l≥0 define a residue modulo F−lCn by the finite sum ∑m≤k<lyk when l>m, and zero when l≤m. The residues are compatible since all newly removed summands lie in the coarser filtration piece. Completeness supplies a unique xm∈Cn. Its residue modulo F−m is zero, so xm∈F−mCn. Applying d to every residue gives zero because each yk is a cycle; separatedness of Cn−1 implies dxm=0. Thus xm∈Z−m. Comparing the finite sums in every quotient gives xm−xm+1=ym, since the quotient family separates elements. Delta on this cycle tower is onto, so RpZp=0, again with arbitrary upper endpoint by [F3].

3.1F3F4F5step 1.1step 2.1

For fixed p, compatibility in the inclusion tower A(p,t) means a single element lies in every A(p,t). By separatedness of Cn−1 this is precisely Zp. Apply [F4] to the rectangular system restricted to any fixed upper endpoints in p,t. Step 2.1 verifies both required vanishings. Thus LpQp=LpRtA(p,t)=0. Changing endpoints gives the same result by [F3], so this holds for the full minus-infinity tower of the Qp.

4.1F3F5step 3.1

Fix p and use a common t endpoint for A(p−1,t) and A(p,t). The kernel of their map to FpCn/Fp−1Cn is exactly A(p−1,t); hence 0→A(p−1,t)→A(p,t)→S(p,t)→0 is termwise exact. The maps on S are inclusions of nested submodules in the fixed graded module. Its limit is their intersection: compatibility means every coordinate is the same element. Applying [F3] and step 3.1 identifies the first three limit terms as Zp−1,Zp,S(p,∞) and gives the asserted sequence, with the Q map induced by inclusion.

5.1F1F3F4step 3.1step 4.1step 2.2

A filtration-preserving chain map sends each A(p,t), Zp and S(p,t) to its counterpart. It commutes with their inclusions and quotient maps and therefore with the six-term sequence by [F3]. The double-Delta comparison is natural by [F4]; the residue construction is compatible because a continuous filtered map sends the uniquely determined residues to their images. This proves the stated naturality.

6.1F3F5step 3.1step 4.1step 2.2step 5.1∎

Steps 3.1, 4.1 and 2.2 establish the sequence and both vanishings. Zero chain groups give zero towers and zero sequences. A finite lower filtration bound makes all sufficiently small A(p,t) in the p direction zero, consistently with the argument. Repeated pieces and zero differentials are allowed: for d=0, A(p,t)=Zp=FpCn is constant in t, so Qp=0 and the exact sequence reduces to the graded quotient sequence. No sum over an unbounded set of nonvanishing residues was taken: each residue in step 2.2 is a finite sum, including the empty sum at l≤m. AC is confined to the cited tower lemmas as declared in [F5].

Source notes

The owner Delta alternatives sections 4–5 supplied the candidate. This proof supplies the approximate-cycle comparison and obstruction-limit vanishing directly, instead of importing the later double-derived-functor interchange in Weibel 5.8.7. The complete filtered hypotheses and the exact rectangular indices are part of the statement.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

9 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