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.
Verifying formula counts over a supplied field
Statement
Let have syntax nodes and variables, with occurrences of . Over any supplied finite field , its polynomial satisfies where is the number of satisfying assignments. With the formula-tree evaluator and bounds , sum-check has perfect completeness and soundness at most , using verifier field operations, including evaluation.
If is a supplied prime field with , then for every integer , The field and its implementation are inputs. Large extension-field cardinality alone does not guarantee this integer equivalence.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The objects and hypotheses in the statement above.
Every Boolean evaluation of the formula polynomial equals its Boolean truth value embedded in F (Arithmetization preserves Boolean values).
Individual degrees are bounded by occurrence counts and point evaluation costs O(s) field operations (Formula degree and point-evaluation cost).
With trusted individual bounds, false-claim acceptance is at most min(1,sum_i d_i/|F|) (Adaptive-prover soundness of sum-check).
The verifier uses O(D) field operations plus one point evaluation, where D=sum_i(d_i+1) (Sum-check verifier resources).
Proof
Each satisfying Boolean input contributes and each other input contributes by Boolean agreement. Adding the values gives , including and .
The formula degree lemma supplies the individual bounds and an point evaluator. Since , we have ; the verifier resource lemma therefore gives field operations including that evaluator.
The soundness theorem gives the stated false-claim error bound with . For a true claim the honest partial sums have these degree bounds, their values at sum to the preceding true value, and their value at each challenge is the next true value. Starting from , these identities propagate to the terminal value, so every honest execution accepts.
If , their field images are equal, proving the reverse implication. Conversely, equality of the images in implies divides . As , the only possible multiple is zero, so . This includes both allowed endpoints for each count. In a field of characteristic the integer image depends on reduction modulo , regardless of the field cardinality; for example a constant-one formula on one variable has count two and field sum zero in characteristic two.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
7 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
- Arora and Barak, Computational Complexity, January 2007 web draft, §8.5.1–8.5.2, Theorem 8.18 proof pp.158–160 (field supplied variant) (standard reference, not scraped)