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.
In with substituted for , the vertex set of is a module, the two factors are recovered as induced subgraphs, and substituting a one-vertex graph changes nothing
Statement
Let be a substitution (Substituting one graph for a vertex of another), and write . Then:
- is a module of ;
- and ;
- for every , the map that fixes every vertex of and sends to is an induced embedding of into ;
- if then .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A substitution with , so that is a disjoint union.
For distinct vertices of : two vertices of are adjacent in exactly when they are adjacent in ; two vertices of are adjacent in exactly when they are adjacent in ; and is adjacent in to exactly when is adjacent to in (Substituting one graph for a vertex of another).
is a module of when the pair is pure for every (Modules of a graph, and the trivial modules).
An induced embedding of in is an injection such that, for all distinct , if and only if ; its image induces a copy of , the restricted map being an isomorphism onto it (Induced embeddings and induced copies of a graph).
A graph isomorphism is a bijection with if and only if for all distinct (Graph isomorphisms, automorphisms and graph complements).
A disjoint pair is complete when every cross pair is an edge, anticomplete when no cross pair is an edge, and pure when it is complete or anticomplete (Edges between disjoint vertex sets; complete, anticomplete, pure and mixed pairs).
Proof
The vertices of outside are exactly those of , and for the adjacency of to a vertex is the condition that is adjacent to in , which does not mention .
For distinct, if and only if ; and for distinct, if and only if .
Fix and let fix pointwise and send to . It is injective: it is the identity on , and because and are disjoint, so no vertex of is sent to .
By step 1.1, if is adjacent to in then is adjacent in to every vertex of , and otherwise to none, so is pure for every ; by [F2] this makes a module of , which is claim 1.
By step 1.2 the edges of inside are the edges of inside , so ; and the edges of inside are the edges of , whose vertex set is , so . This is claim 2.
For distinct , step 1.2 gives if and only if ; and for , step 1.1 gives if and only if . Every pair of distinct vertices of is of one of these two shapes, so is an induced embedding, which is claim 3.
If , say , then the image of is , so is a bijection onto preserving and reflecting adjacency, that is, an isomorphism ; this is claim 4.
Depends on
- Substituting one graph for a vertex of another
- Modules of a graph, and the trivial modules
- Subgraphs, induced subgraphs and spanning subgraphs
- Graph isomorphisms, automorphisms and graph complements
- Induced embeddings and induced copies of a graph
- Edges between disjoint vertex sets; complete, anticomplete, pure and mixed pairs
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
- T. Huang, Y. Ju and R. Zhou, Erdős–Hajnal beyond the five-vertex path, sec. 1.2 (standard reference, not scraped)