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.
Chart independence of smoothness
Statement
Let and be smooth manifolds, let be continuous at , and let . Let , be smooth charts of at and , smooth charts of at , with and . If the representative is of class on a neighbourhood of , then the representative is of class on a neighbourhood of . Testing one chart pair therefore agrees with testing any other.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The manifolds, map, point, smoothness class , and the four charts of the Statement, with of class near .
Any two charts of a smooth manifold are smoothly compatible: their domains are disjoint or both transition maps are smooth (Smoothly compatible charts and the smoothness of Euclidean transition maps, Smooth manifolds and their smooth charts).
If is smooth and is , then is ; and if is and is smooth, then is (Compatibility of smooth atlases is an equivalence relation, and smooth Euclidean maps compose).
Proof
The overlaps and contain and , so both are [given, F1] nonempty; by [F1] the transitions on and on are smooth. Because is continuous at and , there is an open neighbourhood of with .
On the new representative factors as
First [L1] composes the smooth after the map and keeps ; then [L1] composes the smooth after that and keeps . The middle factor is on the image of under , which is an open neighbourhood of inside the set where the given representative is ; hence the composite is on . [given, F1, L1, step 1.1]
The set is an open neighbourhood of , so the [given, step 2.1] representative is near . The reverse implication is the same argument with the chart pairs interchanged.
Depends on
Used by
- Identity maps and composites of smooth maps are smooth Proposition
- Smooth maps are continuous Proposition
- Smoothness is local on the source Proposition
Cited to discharge well-definedness by Cʳ and smooth maps between smooth manifolds.
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
- Nigel Hitchin, Differentiable Manifolds, §2.4 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Rob van der Vorst, Introduction to differentiable manifolds, §2 (standard reference, not scraped)