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.
A formula on elementary tensors defines a homomorphism exactly when its underlying pairing is balanced
Statement
Let be an abelian group and let be a function. A prescription
extends to a group homomorphism if and only if is balanced. When it exists, the extension is unique.
The balance condition cannot be replaced by a check on tensor symbols alone. In , the prescription is not balanced and does not descend: the relation would force its value to be both and .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A function into an abelian group.
Composition with the elementary-tensor map is a bijection from group homomorphisms to balanced maps (Universal property of the tensor product for balanced maps into abelian groups).
In the tensor product, and the elementary-tensor map is additive in each variable (The tensor product from the additive group underlying the free -module on , elementary tensors, and finite tensor sums).
The integers form a commutative unital ring (The integers form a commutative ring).
Proof
If is balanced, [L1] supplies a unique group homomorphism satisfying .
Conversely, if such a homomorphism exists, composing it with the elementary-tensor map gives ; [L2] and additivity of show that is additive in each variable and satisfies , so is balanced.
For , which is permitted by [L3], balance gives by [L2]. The function assigns to and to , so it is not balanced and no homomorphism can have the proposed elementary-tensor values.
Steps 1.1 and 1.2 prove the equivalence and uniqueness, while step 1.3 verifies the asserted failure.
Depends on
Used by
- For a field extension K/F, one has K⊗_FFⁿ≅ Kⁿ Example
- For a field extension K/F, one has K⊗_FMₙ(F)≅ Mₙ(K) as K-algebras Example
- A commuting outer scalar action descends to a tensor product Theorem
- Associativity of tensor products for compatible bimodules Theorem
- Extension of scalars is left adjoint to restriction of scalars Theorem
- Over a commutative ring, M⊗_RN is an R-module with r(m⊗ n)=(rm)⊗ n=m⊗(rn) Theorem
- Tensoring is right exact Theorem
- The regular module is a tensor unit: R⊗_RN≅ N and M⊗_RR≅ M Theorem
- The tensor product of R-algebras has multiplication (a⊗ b)(a'⊗ b')=aa'⊗ bb' Theorem
- Universal mapping property of the tensor product of commutative algebras Theorem
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 40 results over 9 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
- Stacks Project, Section 10.12: Tensor products (standard reference, not scraped)
- C. Dennis, Week 1 recap on tensor products (standard reference, not scraped)