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.
Perfect-set game strategy dichotomy on Cantor space
Statement
In ZF let . In each round I plays a finite binary block (possibly empty), then II plays a bit. I wins iff the concatenated sequence is in . An I winning strategy yields a continuous injection with compact closed image having no isolated points. A II winning strategy yields an injection . Fixed block codes turn this into a natural-number game, with an illegal II bit losing immediately.
Facts & Assumptions
Cantor and Baire sequence spaces and coordinate codings supplies countable finite-word codes, the cylinder topology, and compactness and absence of isolated points of .
Gale–Stewart games and strategies defines full-history strategies and winning plays.
Proof
Given: The block-and-bit game in the statement; no determinacy or choice axiom is assumed.
Enumerate all finite binary words by length and then lexicographic order, including the empty word first. This gives I's natural-number codes. II's numbers zero and one are legal bits; at the first other number declare I the winner. At each legal round at least one output bit is appended, so the concatenation is infinite. A winning strategy on the coded game never prescribes a first illegal move on its consistent legal histories, since the opponent can always continue legally; restriction thus gives the stated game.
Fix an I winning strategy . For let be the outcome against II's successive bits . It lies in by F2. If first differ at , their game histories through I's nth block are identical, and their next bits differ at the same output position, so . If two inputs agree in their first bits, the first full rounds agree and append at least bits, hence their outputs agree in their first bits. Thus is continuous.
Fix instead a winning II strategy and . A barrier for is a finite legal full history consistent with , ending before an I move, whose concatenation is a prefix of , such that for every finite block with , the response differs from the next bit of . If no such barrier existed, start with the empty history and at each round choose the least block code preserving agreement with after responds. The absence of a barrier makes this set nonempty at each resulting history. Recursion constructs a full -play concatenating to (lengths grow by at least one), contrary to . Hence a barrier exists.
By F1 and the open-cover definition, the image of under is compact: pull a cover back, take a finite subcover, and push its coverage forward. A compact set in a metric space is closed: for the balls cover ; finitely many suffice, and the minimum of the finitely many positive radii gives a ball about missing all those balls. Closed subsets of a compact space are compact, since adjoining their open complement to a cover gives a cover of the whole space. Consequently images under of closed subsets of are compact and closed; injectivity now says its inverse on the image takes inverse images of closed sets to closed sets. Thus is a homeomorphism onto its image. That image has no isolated point because has none by F1.
A fixed barrier history can serve at most one . Its concatenation gives the first bits. Recursively, after reconstructing the additional block , recover the next bit as . Each query uses the same fixed history , not an evolving hypothetical history. The barrier property justifies every such recovered bit, including with empty . Full finite histories have natural-number codes by iterated finite-word coding F1. Assign each the least code of its barriers. Existence follows from step 1.3 and uniqueness per code from this reconstruction, so this assignment is an injection into . When it is the empty injection. QED.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
9 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
- Theorem 10.10(i), Claims 10.11–10.12 and their complete proofs, printed pp100–101 (standard reference, not scraped)