Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-05 rests on unproved material (inherited)
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.

Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

The effacement extension is independent of the effacing morphism

Statement

In either case of A partial morphism of delta functors extends through one dimension shift, the new component defined from a chosen effacement of A is independent of which effacing morphism is used.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Two chosen effacements of the same object A.

[L1]

Item 19 defines the next-degree component from any chosen effacement and proves naturality for morphisms covered by morphisms between chosen effacement sequences (A partial morphism of delta functors extends through one dimension shift).

[L2]

Finite coproducts of projectives are projective and finite products of injectives are injective (A coproduct of projectives is projective and a product of injectives is injective).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

In the homological case, let pi:PiA be two effacements of the relevant target value. Form the epimorphism p=(p1,p2):P1P2A. By [L2], P1P2 is projective. Since Tn is additive, the canonical biproduct identification gives Tn(P1P2)Tn(P1)Tn(P2), and under this identification the map Tn(p) has components Tn(p1) and Tn(p2), both zero. Thus Tn(p)=0, so p is again an admissible effacement.

L1L2givenconstruct
2.1

The inclusions ιi:PiP1P2 satisfy pιi=pi, so they give morphisms from each original effacement to the dominating effacement of step 1.1 over the identity of A. By the naturality part of [L1], the component defined from pi agrees with the one defined from p for each i. Hence the components defined from p1 and p2 are equal.

L1step 1.1algebra
3.1

The cohomological case is dual: if ei:AIi are two effacements, then e=(e1,e2):AI1×I2 is again an admissible effacement by [L2], and the projections I1×I2Ii compare it with each original choice. Applying [L1] as in step 2.1 shows that the resulting degree-(n+1) component is independent of the chosen injective effacement.

L1L2givenalgebra

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