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.

Parallel Henkinization for arbitrary set languages

Statement

In ZF, every consistent sentence theory T in a set-sized first-order language admits a canonical tagged ω-stage expansion with a seed constant and Henkin witness axioms. Every finite collection of added axioms is consistent with T, and the union theory is consistent and has a witness axiom for every existential sentence in the union language. No well-ordering of the language is required.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

Fresh constants may be eliminated from a finite proof makes any pure set-sized fresh-constant expansion conservative for original sentences.

[F2]

Adding one fresh witness preserves consistency preserves consistency on adding ∃xϕ→ϕ[c/x] when c is absent from the theory and from ϕ.

[F3]

Finite support, weakening, and composition of derivations says any derivation has finite assumption support and permits weakening.

Proof

Given: A consistent sentence theory T in a set-sized language L.

1.1givenalgebra

First embed L into a disjoint tagged copy, so that further tags cannot collide with original symbols. Adjoin one distinguished seed constant to get L0. Given Ln, introduce a different constant cn,E for each existential Ln-sentence E=∃xϕ, and put Ln+1=Ln∪{cn,E:E as above}. These are sets since finite strings on a set form a set; tagging by (n,E) is injective. Let Hn be all sentences E→ϕ[cn,E/x]. Set L∞=⋃n<ωLn and TH=T∪⋃n<ωHn. The stage recursion uses uniquely specified sets, not choices of an enumeration.

2.1F1F2step 1.1algebra

Fix a finite subset K of the added axioms, and list it in nondecreasing stage order, ordering each finite same-stage block arbitrarily. Starting from T, first use F1 to allow all constants of L∞ except the finitely many designated witness constants in this list. This is a consistent pure expansion. When adding an axiom at stage n, its designated constant occurs neither in T, nor in an earlier-stage axiom, nor in the matrix of any other axiom at stage n: those matrices are in Ln, whereas the new constants were introduced in Ln+1. It is therefore fresh in the current theory and its matrix. F2 adjoins it with its axiom preserving consistency. After finitely many additions every axiom of K has been added and the language is L∞. Thus T∪K is consistent in the union language.

3.1F1F3step 1.1step 2.1algebra

If TH were inconsistent, F3 would give a finite proof using only finitely many axioms from the sets Hn. These form a finite K as in step 2.1, contradicting its consistency. Hence TH is consistent. Every existential L∞-sentence uses finitely many symbols, each introduced at some finite stage; the maximum of those finitely many stages places the sentence in some Ln. Its witness axiom is then in Hn⊆TH. The seed ensures a closed term even when the original language has no constants, and the empty finite set of new axioms is covered by F1. QED.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

11 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