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.
Identities and composites of monomorphisms or epimorphisms retain cancellation; split monomorphisms are monic and split epimorphisms are epic
Statement
Identity morphisms are monic and epic; composites of monomorphisms are monic, composites of epimorphisms are epic; every split monomorphism is monic, and every split epimorphism is epic.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Composable morphisms in a category.
Monomorphisms and epimorphisms are defined by left and right cancellation (Monomorphism and epimorphism by left and right cancellation).
A split monomorphism has a left inverse and a split epimorphism has a right inverse (Split monomorphism, split epimorphism, retraction, and section); the two halves are dual by Every theorem about categories has a formal dual obtained by reversing morphisms and composition.
Proof
Identities cancel trivially; if and are monic and , cancellation by and then by gives , so composites of monomorphisms are monic.
Applying the dual argument of [L2] proves that identities and composites of epimorphisms are epic.
If , then implies , so a split monomorphism is monic; dually, makes a split epimorphism epic.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 8 results over 4 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Emily Riehl, Category Theory in Context, Chapter 1 (standard reference, not scraped)