Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-12
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.

Hg toolkit finitely many cayley cone types

Statement

For a finite generating set S of a hyperbolic group, there are only finitely many geodesic cone types C(g)={h∈G:∣gh∣S=∣g∣S+∣h∣S}. More precisely, with a slimness constant δ≥0, set r=max⁡{1,⌈12δ⌉}. The finite-set datum Pr(g)={h:∣h∣S≤r, ∣gh∣S≤∣g∣S} determines C(g), so at most 2∣{h:∣h∣S≤r}∣ cone types occur.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The standing finite-generator geometric hyperbolicity convention of Hg toolkit hyperbolic group and stable length; write ∣x∣=∣x∣S.

[F1]

Finite generating sets have finite word-metric balls by Balls of a word metric are finite if and only if the generating set is finite.

[F2]

The product condition holds with κ=3δ by Slim triangles imply the gromov product inequality.

Proof

1.1F2givenalgebra

We first derive the radial bound needed below. For specified geodesics [o,x],[o,y], suppose 0≤t≤(x∣y)o, and let xt,yt be their radius-t points. They exist since products do not exceed either radial length. We have (xt∣x)o=t and (y∣yt)o=t. Apply F2 through the chain xt,x,y,yt: two product inequalities give (xt∣yt)o≥t−2κ. Hence d(xt,yt)=2t−2(xt∣yt)o≤4κ=12δ. This calculation includes t=0 and δ=0.

1.2givenalgebra

Fix g,g′ with Pr(g)=Pr(g′). The identity lies in both cones. If ∣h∣=1 and h∈C(g), then h∉Pr(g) and hence h∉Pr(g′). Thus ∣g′h∣>∣g′∣, while ∣g′h∣≤∣g′∣+1. Integral word lengths force equality, proving h∈C(g′).

2.1step 1.2givenalgebra

Induct on l=∣h∣≥2, assuming cone membership transfers for shorter elements. If h∈C(g), take a shortest spelling h=h′s with ∣h′∣=l−1 and ∣s∣=1. The inequalities ∣g∣+l=∣gh∣≤∣gh′∣+1≤∣g∣+l force h′∈C(g); hence ∣g′h′∣=∣g′∣+l−1 by induction. Suppose for a contradiction that h∉C(g′). Writing A=∣g′∣, the endpoint g′h has length between A+l−2 and A+l−1, by its distance 1 from g′h′ and the failed cone equality. In particular its length is at least A.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1givenalgebra

Choose the geodesic from e through g′ to g′h′ provided by the equality in step 2.1, and any geodesic from e to g′h. Their endpoints have distance 1 and product at least ((A+l−1)+(A+l−2)−1)/2=A+l−2≥A. Let k1 be the vertex at radius A on the second geodesic, and put k2=k1−1g′h. The vertex exists because its length is at least A. Step 1.1 gives ∣g′−1k1∣=d(g′,k1)≤12δ≤r. Also ∣k1∣=A and ∣k2∣=∣g′h∣−A≤l−1. Set v=g′−1k1. Then v∈Pr(g′)=Pr(g), so ∣gv∣≤∣g∣.

4.1step 3.1F1algebra∎

Since h=vk2, we obtain ∣g∣+l=∣gh∣≤∣gv∣+∣k2∣≤∣g∣+l−1, a contradiction. This proves C(g)⊆C(g′) by induction. Interchanging g,g′ proves equality. The finite-radius set in the statement is finite by F1 (it is contained in the open radius-r+1 ball), so has finitely many subsets, at most 2 to its cardinality. Each possible Pr(g) determines just one cone, establishing finiteness and the stated count. Only finitely many geodesics are chosen for each specified inductive comparison; no AC is used.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

16 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