Alphabeta Math
PropositionStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)
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.

Sum and product totalisations agree on finite diagonal double complexes

Statement

If each diagonal of a homological double complex C in an abelian category contains only finitely many nonzero objects, both totalisations exist and the canonical comparison η:Tot(C)TotΠ(C) is an isomorphism of chain complexes.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

Additive category supplies finite biproducts; Biproduct identifies the finite coproduct-to-product comparison as an isomorphism.

[F3]

Direct sum total complex of a double complex specifies the differential on each injection; The total differential squares to zero proves its chain condition.

[F4]

Product total complex of a double complex specifies the differential after each projection and verifies its chain condition.

Proof

Given: C as stated. Write Tn,Pn for the sum and product total objects, and ιp,qn,πp,qn for their structure maps whenever constructed.

1.1

Fix n and let In={(p,q):p+q=n, Cp,q0}. A finite biproduct of the objects indexed by In exists. Adjoining the unique maps from and to each omitted zero object makes its coproduct and product structures satisfy the universal properties for the whole diagonal: those omitted components impose no conditions on a family of maps. This constructs Tn and Pn, including In=, when both are zero.

F1F2given
2.1

Define ηn:TnPn by πa,bnηnιp,qn=1Cp,q if (a,b)=(p,q) and zero otherwise. Successive coproduct and product universal properties give its existence and uniqueness. Under the identifications in the preceding step it is precisely the finite biproduct comparison, so it is invertible. If In has one element, it is the identity on that component.

F1F2step 1.1
3.1

Test dnPηn and ηn1dnT by precomposing with ιp,qn and postcomposing with πa,bn1. Both composites are hp,q for (a,b)=(p1,q), vp,q for (a,b)=(p,q1), and zero otherwise, by the two differential formulas. Universal-property uniqueness gives dnPηn=ηn1dnT.

F2F3F4step 2.1
4.1

Multiplying this equation by the inverses gives dnTηn1=ηn11dnP. Hence the degreewise inverse is also a chain map. All components of the comparison are uniquely specified, and its inverses are unique; no simultaneous choice of lifts or representatives is involved. The conclusion holds for the zero complex and for a complex supported on one row or column as well.

step 2.1step 3.1algebra

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

14 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