Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07
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.

Composition of roofs is well defined

Statement

Given roofs (s:U→X,f:U→Y) and (t:V→Y,g:V→Z), choose a:W→U in S, b:W→V with fa=tb. Their composite is the class of (sa,gb). This is independent of both representatives and of the Ore square, is associative, and has identity roof (1X,1X).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Given roofs (s:U→X,f:U→Y) and (t:V→Y,g:V→Z), choose a:W→U in S, b:W→V with fa=tb. Their composite is the class of (sa,gb). This is independent of both representatives and of the Ore square, is associative, and has identity roof (1X,1X).

[F1]

Common refinement of roofs is an equivalence relation (Roof equivalence is an equivalence relation).

[F2]

Ore squares have a specified leg in S, and post-denominator equality can be cancelled after precomposition by a member of S (Multiplicative system in a category).

Proof

1.1F1F2

Ore supplies a,b of the indicated types and sa∈S. To compare any two candidate squares, it is enough to give a common refinement of their output roofs; common refinement is an equivalence relation.

1.2F2algebra

First replace (s,f) by a refinement (sr,fr), where sr∈S. Compare squares fa=tb and fra′=tb′, with a,a′∈S. Apply Ore to the denominators sa and sra′ to obtain v∈S,w with sav=sra′w∈S. Cancel s by a further e∈S to obtain ave=ra′we, then cancel t by k∈S to obtain bvek=b′wek. Thus the two composite roofs have equal numerator and denominator after refinement, with common denominator savek∈S. Taking r=1 proves independence of the square as well.

2.1F1F2step 1.2algebra

Next refine the second roof to (tr,gr), where tr∈S. Compare fa=tb and fa′=trb′. Ore gives v∈S,w with av=a′w∈S. Cancellation of t in tbv=trb′w gives e∈S with bve=rb′we. Hence the composites have equal numerator gbve=grb′we and common denominator save∈S. Arbitrary equivalent representatives share a refinement, so these two refinement checks and transitivity prove full representative independence.

3.1F2step 1.2step 2.1algebra

For a third roof (u:T→Z,h:T→R) choose fa=tb as above and ge=uk with e∈S. Ore applied to b:W→V and e gives i∈S,j with bi=ej. Then gbi=ukj and fai=tej. The two bracketings can therefore both be computed as (sai,hkj). Independence of square choices proves associativity for all choices.

4.1givenalgebra∎

Composing with an identity roof on the target uses a=1,b=f; composing with an identity roof on the source uses a=s,b=1. Both recover (s,f) exactly. Thus the operation has both identity laws, including when s itself is an identity.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

5 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