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.
Bounded above complexes admit projective replacements
Statement
If has enough projectives and for , there is a termwise epic quasi-isomorphism with each projective and for . Assume DC for the successive objectwise choices, or supply the successive projective epimorphisms. If only for , a quasi-isomorphism with this upper bound still exists, without the termwise-epic assertion.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: If has enough projectives and for , there is a termwise epic quasi-isomorphism with each projective and for . Assume DC for the successive objectwise choices, or supply the successive projective epimorphisms. If only for , a quasi-isomorphism with this upper bound still exists, without the termwise-epic assertion.
Enough projectives means every object is a quotient of a projective (A category with enough projectives and with enough injectives).
The pullback of an epimorphism in an abelian category is an epimorphism (The pullback of an epimorphism is an epimorphism).
DC supplies successive choices for an entire relation on a nonempty set (The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an -indexed chain).
Upper canonical truncation preserves cohomology through its cut and kills higher cohomology (Canonical truncation is a complex and has the claimed cohomology).
Proof
Start with for ; this includes . At stage maintain the complex and map in degrees , epic terms, an epimorphism , and cohomology isomorphisms above . The initial stage has these properties.
Form , where is its differential. Choose a projective epimorphism . Its two components define and , giving and . The projection is epic by pullback stability, hence so is .
The subobject of with second coordinate zero is ; its inverse image in is exactly . Pullback stability therefore makes the map on cycles epic. Moreover the image of is precisely the inverse image of inside : this follows by pulling the epimorphism back along . Consequently is an isomorphism. Higher degrees stay fixed.
These stages have extensions at every step. For a definable class of possible object choices, first make a set of admissible partial constructions: starting with the initial node, bound ranks of extensions of each node by the least rank with an extension, use Replacement to bound these ranks over each set of nodes, and take all extensions within that bound. The union over the countably many stages is a set with an entire extension relation. DC gives a branch, or supplied epimorphisms give it directly. Every degree stabilizes after finitely many stages and step 3.1 proves that the resulting map is a quasi-isomorphism. This is objectwise existence, not a class-indexed replacement assignment.
Under a cohomological upper bound, first replace by . Its natural map to is a quasi-isomorphism; compose with the construction above. The kernel term at the cut explains why the composite need not be epic onto .
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
17 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
- Lemma 13.15.4, full descending induction (standard reference, not scraped)