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.

Cofinality and size of the scale subspace

Statement

Assume AC. For every b∈∏n∈Bℵn there is h∈X with b<h pointwise. Moreover ∣X∣=ℵω+1. No assertion that every normalized-scale class meets the Rudin space is required.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The normalized scale defining X. Put μ=ℵω, λ=ℵω+1, and Q=∏n∈Bℵn.

[F1]

The normalized scale (fα)α<λ is strictly increasing and cofinal in the eventual order on Q, and X consists of its eventual-equality classes intersected with XR(B) (Kojman-Shelah scale subspace).

[F2]

A strictly pointwise increasing ω1-sequence of product representatives of strictly increasing scale indices has, on n>1, a supremum below each factor of cofinality ω1, eventually equal to fδ for δ<λ (Tail suprema and normalized scales, m=k=1).

[F7]

Specified rules recurse on ordinals (Transfinite recursion).

[A1]

AC is assumed for cardinal regularity and for cardinal bounds on unions of the finite-modification classes (The Axiom of Choice).

Proof

1.1F1F3F4F7A1

Fix b∈Q. Recursively for ξ<ω1 construct indices αξ<λ and functions gξ∈Q. Given the earlier choices, put tξ(n)=sup⁡({b(n)+1}∪{gη(n)+1:η<ξ}). All entries in this supremum are below ℵn, since that cardinal is a limit and the earlier functions are in Q. The set is countable, so F3–F4 give tξ(n)<ℵn and tξ∈Q. The countably many earlier indices are bounded in regular λ by F3–F4. By F1 there is an index above them all with tξ<∗fα: first obtain eventual domination by cofinality, and if necessary pass to a larger scale index, whose strict eventual increase preserves domination. Choose the least such index αξ and set gξ(n)=max⁡(tξ(n),fαξ(n)). It belongs to Q, is eventually equal to fαξ, and is strictly above b and every earlier gη at every coordinate. The exceptional modification set is contained in the finite set where tξ(n)≥fαξ(n). These are specified rules with proved witnesses, so F7 constructs them throughout ω1. The initial stage uses only b(n)+1 and has no earlier-index obligation.

1.2F1F5F6A1

Fix α<λ. Every point eventually equal to fα is determined by a finite exceptional set S⊆B and its values in ∏n∈S(ℵn+1). There are countably many finite S, using their binary codes ∑n∈S2n. For nonempty S let r=max⁡S; each inclusive ordinal factor has cardinality ℵn≤ℵr, since its extra top can be sent to zero, the finite ordinals shifted by one and the other values fixed. F6 bounds the finite product by ℵr<μ; for empty S the product has one member. Thus the countable union of these possibilities has size at most μ by A1 and F6. Every class intersected with XR(B) has size at most μ, including empty classes. There are λ possible indices, so again A1 and F6 give ∣X∣≤λ⋅μ=λ.

2.1step 1.1F1F2

Apply F2 to (αξ,gξ)ξ<ω1. The indices strictly increase, the functions are actual members of Q, and they strictly increase pointwise by step 1.1. Since B⊆ω∖{0,1}, the tail n>1 is all of B. F2 gives h(n)=sup⁡ξ<ω1gξ(n)<ℵn, cf⁡(h(n))=ω1 at every coordinate, and h=∗fδ for some δ<λ. Thus h∈XR(B) with uniform strict bound ℵ2, and F1 gives h∈X. Since g0>b and h≥g0, also h>b. This proves pointwise cofinality and in particular nonemptiness.

3.1step 2.1F1F3F4F5A1

Every x∈X has a unique scale index α(x). Existence is F1; two different indices would force the same function to be eventually strictly less than itself outside finitely many coordinates, impossible on infinite B. Suppose ∣X∣<λ. By F3–F4 choose β<λ strictly above all its indices; the empty case is already excluded by step 2.1. Then x<∗fβ for every x∈X, by F1 and each eventual equality. But step 2.1 applied to b=fβ gives h∈X with fβ<h pointwise, contradicting h<∗fβ. Hence ∣X∣≥λ by F5 and A1.

4.1step 2.1step 3.1step 1.2

The lower bound of step 3.1 and upper bound of step 1.2 give ∣X∣=λ=ℵω+1. Step 2.1 establishes the asserted strict pointwise cofinality. The argument only used nonempty classes when a constructed point or an already given point provided a member. QED.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

39 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