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.
Every class defined by forbidden induced subgraphs is hereditary
Statement
For every family of finite graphs, the class of all -free finite graphs is hereditary.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A family of finite graphs.
Induced subgraphs of an -free graph remain -free (Every induced subgraph of an -free graph is -free).
-freeness is invariant under graph isomorphism (-free and -free graphs under the induced-subgraph convention).
Heredity means closure under isomorphism and induced subgraphs (Hereditary graph classes).
Proof
The class of -free graphs is closed under isomorphism because an isomorphism transports every induced copy in both directions.
It is closed under induced subgraphs by L1.
These are exactly the two requirements for a hereditary class.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 13 results over 8 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
- Valerio Boncompagni, On hereditary graph classes defined by forbidding Truemper configurations (PhD thesis, 2018) (standard reference, not scraped)