Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passaudited 2026-08-13 rests on unproved material (inherited)
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.

Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Two representatives in a filtered colimit of sets are equal exactly when they become equal at one common later stage

Statement

Let D:JSet be a small filtered diagram. For xD(j) and yD(k), their images in colimD are equal if and only if there are arrows a:j and b:k such that D(a)(x)=D(b)(y).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The filtered diagram and the two elements in the statement.

[F1]

Filteredness supplies common target objects and coequalizers of parallel arrows (Filtered categories and filtered colimits).

[L1]

A Set-colimit is the tagged union modulo the equivalence relation generated by the diagram arrows (Set has all small colimits, realized as a quotient of a set-indexed disjoint union).

[F2]

An equivalence relation is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive (Equivalence relation, equivalence class, and the quotient set A/).

Proof

technique · identify the generated equivalence relation
1.1

On tagged elements define (j,x)(k,y) when some jabk satisfies D(a)x=D(b)y. Identity arrows prove reflexivity, and exchanging a,b proves symmetry.

F1F2
1.2

For transitivity, suppose the first equality is witnessed in by a:j, b:k, and the second in m by c:km, d:nm. Choose r:p and s:mp by [F1]. Then rb,sc:kp are parallel, so choose t:pq with trb=tsc. Applying D shows tra(x)=tsd(z), proving (j,x)(n,z).

F1given
2.1

Thus is an equivalence relation. It contains every generating pair (j,x) and (k,D(u)x) by choosing =k, a=u, and b=1k. Conversely, a witness a,b gives a chain of two generating identifications from (j,x) and (k,y) to their equal tagged element in D(). Hence is exactly the equivalence relation in [L1].

F2L1step 1.1step 1.2
3.1

By [L1], equality of the two colimit classes is equivalence under that relation. Step 2.1 identifies this with the existence of the displayed common stage, proving both directions of the biconditional.

L1step 2.1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 34 results over 14 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources