Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
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.

Double crossing laws and associativity

Statement

For the candidate crossing χ and product on D(H) in Finite Drinfeld double: convention and candidate multiplication, χ is unital and satisfies both distributive laws for multiplication in H and H∗op. Consequently the candidate product is associative and unital, with injective algebra embeddings H∗op↪D(H) and H↪D(H) in normal order.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite-dimensional Hopf algebra H over a field k with bijective antipode S, and the candidate D(H) and χ of Finite Drinfeld double: convention and candidate multiplication. Prove the crossing laws and associativity.

[F1]

Hopf algebras and antipodes: H has a coassociative coproduct and counit, and its antipode satisfies ∑S(h1)h2=ε(h)1=∑h1S(h2).

[F2]

Finite tensor duality and basis-independent coevaluation: for finite-dimensional spaces, the dual of a tensor product is identified with the tensor product of the duals, so evaluation separates elements of the finite dual tensor.

[L1]

Finite Drinfeld double: convention and candidate multiplication: χ(h⊗f)=∑f1(S(h1))f3(h3)f2⊗h2 and (f⊗h)(g⊗k)=∑g1(S(h1))g3(h3)(g2∗f)⊗h2k.

[F3]

Uniqueness and anti-multiplicativity and anti-comultiplicativity of the antipode: S is anti-multiplicative and anti-comultiplicative, and ε∘S=ε.

[F4]

Convolution of linear maps is associative and unital: the convolution product on H∗ is associative and unital, so its opposite product is also associative and unital.

[A1]

The finite-dimensional Hopf algebra with bijective antipode is the explicit hypothesis of Finite Drinfeld double: convention and candidate multiplication.

Proof

1.1givenA1F2L1construct

Pairing the first tensor factor of χ(h⊗f) with x∈H gives ∑f(S(h1)xh3)h2, because ΔH∗(2)f evaluates on the three consecutive factors of S(h1)xh3. This determines χ uniquely by finite tensor separation.

1.2F1F3L1algebra

The unit identities are χ(1⊗f)=f⊗1 and χ(h⊗εH)=εH⊗h: the first contracts the first and third dual factors by εH, and the second uses εH∘S=εH from [F3] and the two counit identities in [F1].

1.3F2F3L1algebra

For h,k∈H, the two sides of χ(hk⊗f)=(id⁡⊗mH)(χ⊗id⁡)(id⁡⊗χ)(h⊗k⊗f), paired with x, both equal ∑f(S(k1)S(h1)xh3k3)h2k2. On the left use S(h1k1)=S(k1)S(h1) from [F3]; on the right, the successive crossings evaluate f1(S(k1))f2(S(h1))f3(x)f4(h3)f5(k3), which is the same dual coproduct evaluation.

1.4F1F2F3L1algebra

For f,g∈H∗, pairing the first tensor factor of the left side of χ(h⊗(f⊙g))=(mH∗op⊗id⁡)(id⁡⊗χ)(χ⊗id⁡)(h⊗f⊗g) with x gives the H-valued expression ∑(g∗f)(S(h1)xh3)h2; the h2 factor remains from χ. Since Δ(S(h1)xh3)=∑S(h2)x1h4⊗S(h1)x2h5 by [F3] and multiplicativity of Δ, this is ∑g(S(h2)x1h4)f(S(h1)x2h5)h3, which is also the result of the two successive crossings on the right.

2.1F1F4step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4L1algebra

Write χ(h,b)=∑b1⊗h1, χ(k,c)=∑c1⊗k1, and, for each such term, χ(h1,c1)=∑c2⊗h2. Starting with (a⊗h),(b⊗k),(c⊗l), the left association first crosses h past b, then crosses the product h1k past c; the H distributive law of step 1.3 expands that second crossing as first crossing k past c, then h1 past the resulting c1. It therefore gives ∑ab1c2⊗h2k1l. The right association first crosses k past c, then crosses h past the product bc1; the H∗op distributive law of step 1.4 expands that crossing as first crossing h past b, then h1 past c1, giving the same sum. Associativity of both factor products follows for H from [F1] and for H∗op from [F4]. Thus the associations agree on simple tensors and, by multilinearity, everywhere. The unit identities of step 1.2 make εH⊗1H a two-sided unit.

3.1F1step 1.2L1algebra∎

The maps f↦f⊗1H and h↦εH⊗h preserve products by step 1.2 and the defining multiplication. They are injective because applying id⁡H∗⊗εH or εH∗⊗id⁡H recovers the input; εH(1H)=1.

Remarks

The paired multiplication-law calculations use only finite tensor evaluations; they do not use a presentation of D(H) or an unproved PBW theorem. The antipode anti-multiplication and anti-comultiplication identities used above are supplied by Uniqueness and anti-multiplicativity and anti-comultiplicativity of the antipode.

Depends on

Used by

Cited to discharge well-definedness by Finite Drinfeld double: convention and candidate multiplication.

Dependency tree · two levels

30 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