Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-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.

Weyl orbit sums form a basis of finite Weyl invariants

Statement

Orbit sums indexed by the distinct W-orbits in P form a complex vector-space basis of C[P]W. Equivalently they are indexed by dominant integral weights, with exactly one per orbit, including weights on chamber walls. Every invariant has finite support in this basis.

For each dominant λ, the set of dominant μλ is finite. In fact every such μ satisfies μλ for the specified invariant Euclidean norm. All assertions are choice-free.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The root-system, dominance and lattice conventions of Finite Weyl root system, lattice and chamber conventions.

[F1]

The formal finite-support algebra and orbit sums are Weyl orbit sum in a group algebra.

[F2]

Each weight orbit has a unique dominant representative by Finite Weyl closed chambers and stabilizers.

[F3]

The fundamental weights form a lattice basis of P by Finite Weyl positive roots and simple reflections.

Proof

1.1

Invariance of f=μcμeμ is equivalent, by equality of coefficients in the formal basis, to cwμ=cμ for all w,μ. Thus its support is a finite union of entire orbits and its restriction to each orbit is one scalar times that orbit sum. This proves spanning by a finite sum. Distinct orbits have disjoint supports and each orbit sum has coefficient one at every point of its orbit, so a vanishing finite linear combination has every coefficient zero. This proves independence.

F1givenalgebra
1.2

If λ,μ are dominant and μλ, write λμ=iniαi with ni0 integers. Both dominance inequalities give (αi,λ+μ)0, so λ2μ2=(λμ,λ+μ)=ini(αi,λ+μ)0. For μ=iaiωiP, the integer coordinate is ai=(μ,αi) and satisfies aiλαi by Cauchy–Schwarz. Hence only finitely many coordinate tuples, and therefore finitely many such μ, exist.

F3givenalgebra
2.1

F2 gives a unique dominant index for each orbit sum in step 1.1; in particular no ambiguity arises from a singular stabilizer. This reindexes the basis without any family choice. Step 1.2 proves the supplementary finiteness and norm bounds. The zero invariant has the empty expansion; the rank-zero system has only m0=1; and at λ=0 the norm bound forces μ=0. These cases obey the same arguments.

step 1.1step 1.2F1F2F3

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

5 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