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.
Cellular boundary is the incidence degree matrix
Statement
Let be a CW complex. For , in the integral cellular chain groups with the chosen cell orientations,
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A CW complex , integral cellular chains, and the chosen cell orientations; the differential is as in Cellular boundary from three consecutive skeleta.
Proof
Project the three-skeleton connecting map defining to the summand of a fixed -cell.
For , first pass from to as required by the relative target of the cellular boundary, and then collapse all summand spheres except that of . Equivalently, collapse the entire complement , including . Naturality of the connecting homomorphism for the characteristic disk identifies the coefficient with the composite from its oriented boundary sphere to this quotient sphere. This is precisely the reduced-homology endomorphism in Incidence number of two CW cells, so its degree is .
For , use a characteristic interval compatible with the chosen edge generator. Its connecting homomorphism is the singular boundary . For each chosen vertex generator , the identity gives coefficient , exactly the incidence number of Incidence number of two CW cells. This includes negatively chosen zero-cell generators and gives zero when both endpoints coincide. The boundary is an element of a direct sum, so only finitely many coefficients are nonzero; equality of all its projections therefore proves the formula for every ; separately, by definition.
Depends on
Used by
- A homology cobordism need not be an h-cobordism Counterexample
- Cellular boundary matrix of a closed orientable surface Example
- Cellular homology of a lens space Example
- Cellular homology of real projective space Example
- Cohomology of lens spaces from UCT Example
- Field cohomology of an infinite wedge of circles Example
- Kronecker pairing for a cellular circle generator Example
- Mapping cone of a degree d circle map Example
- Morse and cellular boundaries for a surface handle presentation Example
- Period matrix and Jacobian of the pentagon curve Example
- Axiomatic cellular boundaries are integral incidence matrices with coefficients Lemma
- Cellular boundary coefficients are the signed trajectory counts Lemma
- Cellular homology of the one-polygon surface model Lemma
- Handle boundary coefficients are attaching-belt intersection numbers Lemma
- Homological AHSS exact couple from the skeletal filtration Lemma
- Incidence curl has zero discrete divergence and gradient curl Lemma
- Real projective space cellular homology and the pinch map Lemma
- The AHSS first differential is the cellular coboundary Lemma
- Degree of identity constant reflection and antipodal sphere maps Proposition
- Elementary matrix operations are realized by handle slides Proposition
- Characteristic-class vanishing is only necessary for embedding Remark
- Homological Atiyah–Hirzebruch spectral sequence Theorem
- The Morse complex is chain isomorphic to the handle cellular complex Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
6 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
- Allen Hatcher, Algebraic Topology, Section 2.2 (standard reference, not scraped)