Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedverified 2026-09-23 (gpt-6-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.

Splitting finite-length modules across separated simple classes

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice.

Fix a finite-dimensional complex semisimple Lie algebra g, a Cartan subalgebra h, and a positive Borel b=h⊕n+. Write Q+=∑iZ≥0αi, μ≤λ when λ−μ∈Q+, and w⋅λ=w(λ+ρ)−ρ.

Partition the isomorphism classes of simple objects of O into parts Pt. Suppose every extension of two simples from different parts splits, in either order. Then each M∈O has a unique decomposition M=⨁tMt into submodules whose composition factors lie in Pt, with finitely many nonzero terms. This decomposition is functorial, and maps between modules supported on disjoint collections of parts are zero.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice), the setting above and the hypotheses in the statement.

[F1]

Under the Axiom of Choice, fix a finite-dimensional complex semisimple Lie algebra g, a Cartan subalgebra h, and a positive Borel b=h⊕n+. Write Q+=∑iZ≥0αi, μ≤λ when λ−μ∈Q+, and w⋅λ=w(λ+ρ)−ρ. Every object of O has a finite composition series and is both Noetherian and Artinian. The length of zero is zero. (Every object of O has finite length)

[F2]

If an object A in an abelian category has two composition series, then the two series have the same length and the same composition factors up to permutation and isomorphism. (Jordan-Holder theorem in an abelian category)

[F3]

Fix a finite-dimensional complex semisimple Lie algebra g, a Cartan subalgebra h, and a positive Borel b=h⊕n+. Write Q+=∑iZ≥0αi, μ≤λ when λ−μ∈Q+, and w⋅λ=w(λ+ρ)−ρ. The category O is closed under submodules, quotients and finite direct sums and is an abelian category. If 0→A→E→B→0 is exact, A,B∈O, and E is h-semisimple, then E∈O. The middle-term weight hypothesis is essential. (Category O is abelian and extension closed among weight modules)

Proof

1.1F1F2F3

Finite length and Jordan–Hölder make the set of composition factors of every object intrinsic. In any exact sequence the multiset of factors of the middle object is the union of those of the ends: concatenate a series in the subobject with the inverse images of a series in the quotient and use Jordan–Hölder. Thus a nonzero image of a map between objects with disjoint collections of parts would have a simple factor in both collections. Such maps are zero.

2.1givenalgebrastep 1.1

First fix a simple T in one collection of parts and an object A supported in disjoint parts. We prove every extension 0→A→E→T→0 splits by induction on the length of A. For A=0 this is immediate, and for A simple it is the hypothesis. Otherwise choose a maximal proper submodule A0 so S=A/A0 is simple. The quotient E/A0 is the pushout along A→S, explicitly (E⊕S)/{(a,−aˉ):a∈A}. The extension of T by S splits by hypothesis. The inverse image in E of a chosen section image is an extension of T by A0; induction splits it, supplying a section into E.

3.1algebrastep 2.1

For general B in parts disjoint from those of A, induct on its length in 0→A→E→pB→0. The case B=0 is immediate and a simple B was just handled. Choose a maximal submodule B0⊂B, with simple quotient T. The pullback is {(e,b)∈E⊕B0:p(e)=b}, equivalently p−1(B0). Induction splits it, giving a copy B~0⊂E disjoint from A. Now 0→A→E/B~0→T→0 splits by the preceding step. Its retraction onto A, composed with E→E/B~0, is a retraction of E onto A. Its kernel is a complementary copy of B, proving the required splitting for all lengths.

4.1F1algebrastep 3.1

Construct the decomposition by induction on the length of M, with the empty decomposition for zero. Choose a maximal proper submodule N and write its already constructed decomposition as N=Nt⊕Nout, where the simple quotient M/N belongs to part t. The extension 0→Nout→M/Nt→M/N→0 splits by the preceding argument. Compose its retraction onto Nout with M→M/Nt. The resulting retraction gives M=Nout⊕K, where 0→Nt→K→M/N→0. All factors of K lie in part t. This constructs finitely many summands.

5.1algebrastep 4.1∎

For two such decompositions, the composite of the inclusion of a part-t summand with projection onto any part-u summand for u≠t vanishes by the first step. Therefore that part-t submodule is contained in the other part-t submodule, and reversing the decompositions gives equality. The same argument for any map proves preservation of parts and functoriality.

Notes

The source leaves the formal finite-length decomposition to the reader. The local proof supplies the pushout, pullback, retraction and uniqueness arguments explicitly; its proof provenance is therefore ai-generated rather than literature-derived or a claimed transcription.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

18 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