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.

Cartan coherence for higher diagonals

Statement

Work over F2. Put C=C(X), E=C(Y), and let A:C(X×Y)CE and S:CEC(X×Y) be Alexander--Whitney and shuffle. If T interchanges the two factors output by a higher diagonal and τ regroups

(CC)(EE)(CE)(CE),

define degree-i maps

Li=(AA)DiX×YS,Ri=r+s=iτ(DrXTrDsY).

Let Q interchange the two CE blocks. There are natural degree- (i+1) maps Hi, with H1=0, such that

LiRi=dHi+Hid+(1+Q)Hi1.

These homotopies preserve both relative carriers: for BX and DY, they carry C(B)E into (C(B)E)2 and CC(D) into (CC(D))2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Spaces X,Y, their ordinary unnormalized mod-two singular chains, and a fixed natural higher-diagonal system.

[F1]

The higher diagonals satisfy dDi+Did=(1+T)Di1 (Natural higher diagonal approximations).

[F2]

The Alexander--Whitney formula is a finite sum of tensor products of face restrictions (Alexander–Whitney map and diagonal approximation).

[F3]

The shuffle S and Alexander--Whitney A are natural chain-homotopy inverses on ordinary unnormalized chains without AC (Alexander--Whitney and shuffle are natural chain-homotopy inverses).

[F4]

A specified homotopy has a finite prism operator satisfying the singular chain-homotopy identity (The singular chain homotopy formula).

[F5]

The higher diagonals are natural (Natural higher diagonal approximations).

[F6]

The higher diagonals preserve the chain complexes of subspaces (Natural higher diagonal approximations).

Proof

Proof technique: compare two equivariant chain maps in the same explicit fourfold acyclic carrier.

1.1

Record the diagonal on the mod-two C2 resolution. [given] Let W have one free-orbit generator ei in every degree i0, with dei=(1+T)ei1 and e1=0. Define

ρ(ei)=r+s=ierTres.

With the diagonal C2 action on WW, this is a chain map. Indeed, expanding dρ(ei) makes every term with r,s>0 occur twice after the index shifts (r,s)(r1,s) and (r,s)(r,s1); the two endpoint terms that remain are exactly ρ((1+T)ei1). All sums are finite.

1.2

Fix an explicit contraction of every common fourfold model carrier. [F4] For a standard simplex Δm, let Pm be the prism from its affine contraction to the first vertex. By [F4], dPm+Pmd=1jmpm, where pm collapses to a point and jm includes that vertex. On the unnormalized point complex, whose degree-n generator is en, put a(en)=en+1 for odd n and a(en)=0 for even n. Directly, da+ad=1ηϵ. Hence

hm:=Pm+jmapm

satisfies dhm+hmd=1jmηϵpm. On a tensor of four standard simplex complexes use h1111+e1h211+e1e2h31+e1e2e3h4, where each et is its augmentation projection. The mixed terms cancel, giving a fixed h(4) with dh(4)+h(4)d=1ηϵ. Thus every positive-degree cycle and every augmentation-zero degree-zero cycle has the specified filling h(4)z. Every displayed operator is a finite sum, so this family of contractions is fixed without AC.

2.1

Assemble the two displayed families into equivariant maps. [F1, F3, F5, step 1.1] Define L(eiz)=Li(z). This is the composite obtained by shuffling z to X×Y, applying the equivariant higher diagonal there, and applying A to its two outputs. Define R by first applying ρ, then applying the two higher-diagonal systems and finally regrouping with τ. The factor Tr in Ri is precisely the twist in ρ. Naturality and the chain-map identities in [F1]--[F3], together with step 1.1, show that both are C2-equivariant chain maps

W(CE)(CE)2,

where C2 acts on the target by Q.

3.1

Construct the coherent homotopy. [step 1.2, step 2.1] Induct first on i and then on p+q. Suppose Hi1 and the values of Hi on lower-dimensional model generators are known. On the identity model generator zp,q form

ω=(LiRi)(zp,q)Hi(dzp,q)(1+Q)Hi1(zp,q).

The chain-map equations for L and R from step 2.1 and the already established lower equations give dω=0; the two augmentation-preserving maps agree in total degree zero, so the remaining degree-zero case has augmentation zero. Set Hi(zp,q)=h(4)ω and extend to arbitrary uv by postcomposition. Taking its boundary gives exactly

LiRi=dHi+Hid+(1+Q)Hi1.

The postcomposition formula proves naturality. The fixed contractions and the lexicographic recursion use no choice principle.

4.1

The construction preserves the stated relative carriers. [F2, F3, F6, step 1.2, step 3.1] If u lands in BX, every occurrence of u# in the two maps and in the model filling lands in C(B); the other factor remains in E. The same argument applies when v lands in DY. Linearity gives the assertions for their generated subcomplexes and for their sum. Empty factors give zero complexes; zero chains and i=0 are included by H1=0; one-point and degenerate singular simplices remain in the unnormalized model. Hence every boundary case obeys the same equation. ∎

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

14 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