Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)verified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Global fiber and local differential criteria for Bolker

Statement

Let Z⊂G×X be an analytic double fibration, and fix a local parameterization of its fibers over G,

(g,s)⟼(g,x(g,s)),

where s∈Rd and Dsx has rank d. Define

Eg={(s,ξ):ξ∈Tx(g,s)∗X∖0, (Dsx(g,s))Tξ=0},Lg(s,ξ)=(Dgx(g,s))Tξ.

On the cotangent relation over this incidence chart, the left projection is

(g,s,ξ)⟼(g,Lg(s,ξ)).

Consequently it is injective on this chart portion exactly when each map (s,ξ)↦Lg(s,ξ) is injective on Eg. Its differential is injective exactly when the only (s˙,ξ˙) satisfying

(Dsx)Tξ˙+(Ds2x[s˙,⋅])Tξ=0,(DsDgx[s˙,⋅])Tξ+(Dgx)Tξ˙=0

is (0,0). At a specified point of the full relation, the Bolker condition also requires that no point outside this chart portion has the same data covector; this is the global fiber-singleton clause. The displayed system is the local differential rank test.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The local fiber parameterization and its analytic double-fibration hypotheses.

[F1]

Analytic double-fibration transform and canonical relation: πG and πX are submersions and the incidence relation is defined by the conormal bundle.

[F2]

Bolker condition for a double-fibration transform: the global condition is an injective immersion of the left projection; the pointwise condition is a singleton full fiber together with an injective differential at that point.

[F3]

Incidence-coordinate conormal kernel and canonical relation: local defining functions give the conormal relation with sign convention (η,−ξ).

Proof

Given: The parameterization (g,s)↦(g,x(g,s)).

1.1F1F3givenalgebra

A tangent vector to Z at (g,x(g,s)) has the form (g˙,Dgx g˙+Dsx s˙). A pair (η,−ξ) annihilates every such tangent vector exactly when (Dsx)Tξ=0 and η=(Dgx)Tξ. This follows by setting g˙=0 and then varying g˙ arbitrarily. Thus all conormal pairs, except the zero pair, are parameterized by (g,s,ξ)∈Eg. The rank condition on Dsx makes this conormal parameterization smooth.

2.1step 1.1F2

Under this parameterization, the left projection sends (g,s,ξ) to (g,(Dgx)Tξ), as stated. Because the first component is retained, two points in this chart portion have the same left image exactly when their g coordinates agree and their values under Lg agree. This proves the chart-portion injectivity criterion; it says nothing about a second preimage outside this chart.

3.1F2step 1.1algebra∎

A tangent vector in the kernel of the differential of the left projection has g˙=0. Differentiating the defining equation (Dsx)Tξ=0 along (s˙,ξ˙) gives (Dsx)Tξ˙+(Ds2x[s˙,⋅])Tξ=0. Differentiating its output (Dgx)Tξ gives the second displayed equation in the statement. Therefore the differential is injective exactly when the simultaneous system has only the zero solution. This is the asserted rank test, and by [F2] it is precisely the local immersion clause of Bolker.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

10 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