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.
Change-of-injective-resolution isomorphisms satisfy identity and cocycle laws
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Dependent Choice.
Let be supplied injective resolution data on the same domain, and let be an additive functor between abelian categories. For each ordered pair among these data, let be the change-of-data natural isomorphism whose component at an object is induced by any comparison extension of . Then:
- for every .
- for every .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An object in the common domain and an integer .
The chosen injective resolutions of the same object are homotopy equivalent under that object (Injective resolutions of the same object are homotopy equivalent under that object).
Two injective comparison maps extending the same morphism are cochain-homotopic (Injective comparison maps are unique up to cochain homotopy).
Reindexing turns cochain homotopies into chain homotopies, and homology then respects both homotopy and composition (Cochain complex in an abelian category, Chain-homotopic maps induce the same map on homology, Homology respects identities and composition).
Comparison extensions exist for morphisms between objects in the domain of each supplied injective datum (A morphism has a comparison extension between the supplied injective resolutions).
Proof
For any ordered pair , [L1] gives comparison extensions and of . Their composites extend , so [L2] and [L3] show that the induced cohomology maps are inverse. Any other choice of extends the same identity and hence induces the same map. For a morphism , choose within-data comparison extensions using [L4]. The two composites from to both extend , so [L2] and [L3] give the naturality square. Thus the displayed construction specifies a well-defined natural isomorphism .
For the pair , the identity cochain map on is a comparison extension of . Any comparison extension used in step 1.1 to define extends the same identity morphism, so [L2] makes it cochain-homotopic to the identity. By [L3], the induced map on cohomology is therefore the identity on .
For the triple , the cochain map defining is the composite of two comparison extensions of , while the map defining is another comparison extension of . By [L2] these are cochain-homotopic, so [L3] gives
Since was arbitrary, steps 2.1 and 2.2 prove the identity and cocycle laws for the natural isomorphisms constructed in step 1.1.
Depends on
- Two supplied injective resolution data define naturally isomorphic right derived functors
- A morphism has a comparison extension between the supplied injective resolutions
- Injective resolutions of the same object are homotopy equivalent under that object
- Injective comparison maps are unique up to cochain homotopy
- Cochain complex in an abelian category
- Chain-homotopic maps induce the same map on homology
- Homology respects identities and composition
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
17 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
- Charles A. Weibel, An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Chapter 2 `Derived Functors` (standard reference, not scraped)