Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passverified 2026-08-05 (gpt-5.6-sol-codex-subscription)
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.

Compact implies countably compact, Lindel"of and limit point compact; countably compact together with Lindel"of implies compact; and, at the cost of countable or dependent choice, sequentially compact implies countably compact, countably compact implies limit point compact, and the converse holds when every singleton is closed

Statement

Let (X,T)(X, \mathcal{T}) be a topological space (Topology on a set, open and closed sets, clopen sets, the closed-set axiomatisation, and the coarser/finer comparison), with compactness as in Open cover, subcover, and compact topological space; a compact subset is a subspace that is compact in its own right and the variants as in Countably compact, Lindel"of, sequentially compact, limit point compact and σ\sigma-compact spaces, and relatively compact subsets. Then:

  1. Theorems of ZF.
    • (a) If XX is compact it is countably compact and Lindelöf.
    • (b) If XX is countably compact and Lindelöf it is compact.
    • (c) If XX is compact it is limit point compact.
    • (d) If XX is countably compact then every countably infinite subset of XX (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable) has a limit point in XX.
  2. Assuming the Axiom of Countable Choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω\mathrm{AC}_\omega)): if XX is sequentially compact it is countably compact.
  3. Assuming the Axiom of Dependent Choice (The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an N\mathbb{N}-indexed chain): if XX is countably compact it is limit point compact.
  4. Assuming the Axiom of Countable Choice, and that every singleton {x}X\{x\} \subseteq X is closed: if XX is limit point compact it is countably compact.

Every hypothesis is stated where it is spent. Claim 1 uses no choice principle at all. Claim 2 spends countable choice once, to pick a point outside each of countably many nonempty sets; claim 4 spends it in the same place; claim 3 spends dependent choice once, to extract a countably infinite subset from an infinite set. Each is an upper bound on the cost of the proof given here, never a claim of necessity.

The hypothesis of claim 4 is written out rather than named. "Every singleton is closed" is a separation axiom, and separation axioms are not available at this point in the reading order; the condition is used exactly as stated and nothing about the axiom it belongs to is asserted.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A topological space (X,T)(X, \mathcal{T}).

[L1]

XX is compact when every open cover has a finite subcover; countably compact when every at most countable open cover has a finite subcover; Lindelöf when every open cover has an at most countable subcover; sequentially compact when every sequence has a convergent subsequence; limit point compact when every infinite subset has a limit point in XX (Open cover, subcover, and compact topological space; a compact subset is a subspace that is compact in its own right, Countably compact, Lindel"of, sequentially compact, limit point compact and σ\sigma-compact spaces, and relatively compact subsets).

[L2]

A finite family is at most countable, and infinite means not finite (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).

[L3]

A=AA\overline{A} = A \cup A', where AA' is the set of limit points of AA, and AA is closed exactly when A=AA = \overline{A}; a limit point of a subset of BB is a limit point of BB, since a neighbourhood meeting the smaller set meets the larger (A point lies in the closure of AA iff every basic neighbourhood of it meets AA; the closure is the smallest closed superset and equals AA together with its derived set, claim 3; Interior, closure, boundary, exterior, derived set and isolated point in a topological space).

[L4]

\varnothing and XX are open, unions of open sets are open, a union of finitely many closed sets is closed, and a set is closed exactly when its complement is open; a neighbourhood of a point contains an open set containing that point, and an open set containing a point is a neighbourhood of it (Topology on a set, open and closed sets, clopen sets, the closed-set axiomatisation, and the coarser/finer comparison, Neighbourhood of a point and neighbourhood base, with this library's convention that a neighbourhood need not be open).

[L5]

Countable choice: for every family (Yn)nN(Y_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}} of nonempty sets there is a function ff on N\mathbb{N} with f(n)Ynf(n) \in Y_n for every nn (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω\mathrm{AC}_\omega)).

[L6]

Dependent choice: for every nonempty set SS, every relation RR entire on SS and every aSa \in S there is a sequence (sk)(s_k) in SS with s0=as_0 = a and skRsk+1s_k \mathbin{R} s_{k+1} for every kk (The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an N\mathbb{N}-indexed chain).

[L7]

A nonempty at most countable family admits a surjection from N\mathbb{N}, so it may be listed as (Un)nN(U_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}} with repetitions allowed, and no choice principle is involved (A nonempty set is at most countable iff it is a surjective image of N\mathbb{N}, Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).

[L8]

A sequence is a function on N\mathbb{N} and N\mathbb{N} contains 00; xkpx_k \to p means xkx_k lies in each neighbourhood of pp from some index on; and a strictly increasing index map satisfies njjn_j \ge j (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences, Convergence and cluster points of a sequence in a topological space, sequential continuity, and the sequential closure, A strictly increasing index map satisfies nkkn_k \ge k, The natural numbers N\mathbb{N} (von Neumann)).

[L9]

A set is countably infinite exactly when it is equinumerous with N\mathbb{N}, and the range of an injection NA\mathbb{N} \to A is a countably infinite subset of AA (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable, Injection, surjection, bijection).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Claim 1(a): an at most countable open cover of XX is in particular an open cover, so compactness gives it a finite subcover, and XX is countably compact; and a finite subcover of an open cover is an at most countable subcover by [L2], so XX is Lindelöf.

L1L2
1.2

Claim 1(b): let U\mathcal{U} be an open cover of a countably compact Lindelöf space; Lindelöfness gives an at most countable subcover VU\mathcal{V} \subseteq \mathcal{U}, countable compactness gives a finite subfamily of V\mathcal{V} with union XX, and that subfamily is a finite subfamily of U\mathcal{U} with union XX.

L1L2
1.3

Claim 1(c): let XX be compact and let AXA \subseteq X have no limit point in XX; then U:={UT:UA has at most one element}\mathcal{U} := \{\, U \in \mathcal{T} : U \cap A \text{ has at most one element} \,\} covers XX, since each xXx \in X has a neighbourhood NN with N(A{x})=N \cap (A \setminus \{x\}) = \varnothing and an open UU with xUNx \in U \subseteq N, so that UA{x}U \cap A \subseteq \{x\}; compactness gives U0,,UnUU_0, \dots, U_n \in \mathcal{U} with X=U0UnX = U_0 \cup \dots \cup U_n, whence A=(U0A)(UnA)A = (U_0 \cap A) \cup \dots \cup (U_n \cap A) is listable and so finite by [L2]. Contraposing, every infinite subset of XX has a limit point.

L1L2L4algebra
1.4

For claim 2 assume countable choice, let XX be sequentially compact and let U\mathcal{U} be an at most countable open cover of XX with no finite subcover; then U\mathcal{U} \ne \varnothing, since the empty family covers only the empty space, so [L7] lists it as (Un)nN(U_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}, and En:=X(U0Un)E_n := X \setminus (U_0 \cup \dots \cup U_n) is nonempty for every nn, so [L5] supplies a sequence (xn)(x_n) with xnEnx_n \in E_n for every nn.

L1L5L7
1.5

For claim 1(d) let XX be countably compact and let BXB \subseteq X be countably infinite with no limit point in XX; fix a bijection kbkk \mapsto b_k of N\mathbb{N} onto BB and put Cn:={bk:kn}C_n := \{\, b_k : k \ge n \,\}. Each CnC_n is a subset of BB, so it has no limit point either by [L3], and therefore Cn=Cn=Cn\overline{C_n} = C_n \cup \varnothing = C_n and CnC_n is closed.

L1L3L9
1.6

For claim 3 assume dependent choice and let AXA \subseteq X be infinite. Let SS be the set of injections s:nAs : n \to A with nNn \in \mathbb{N}, nonempty because the empty function belongs to it, and relate ss to tt when tt is an injection σ(n)A\sigma(n) \to A extending s:nAs : n \to A; this relation is entire on SS, since an injection s:nAs : n \to A cannot have range AA, as that would make AA finite, so some aAran(s)a \in A \setminus \operatorname{ran}(s) gives the extension s{(n,a)}s \cup \{(n,a)\}. By [L6] there is a sequence (sk)(s_k) in SS with s0s_0 the empty function and each sk+1s_{k+1} extending sks_k, so each sks_k is an injection kAk \to A and bk:=sk+1(k)b_k := s_{k+1}(k) defines an injection NA\mathbb{N} \to A whose range is a countably infinite subset of AA.

L2L6L9
2.1

For claim 4 assume countable choice, let XX be limit point compact with every singleton closed, and let U\mathcal{U} be an at most countable open cover of XX with no finite subcover; as at step 1.4 the family is nonempty, [L7] lists it as (Un)nN(U_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}, the sets En:=X(U0Un)E_n := X \setminus (U_0 \cup \dots \cup U_n) are nonempty, and [L5] supplies a sequence (xn)(x_n) with xnEnx_n \in E_n for every nn.

L1L5L7
2.2

Sequential compactness gives a strictly increasing jnjj \mapsto n_j and pXp \in X with xnjpx_{n_j} \to p; some UmU_m contains pp and is a neighbourhood of it by [L4], so xnjUmx_{n_j} \in U_m for all large jj, while njjn_j \ge j by [L8] gives njmn_j \ge m for all large jj and hence xnjU0UnjUmx_{n_j} \notin U_0 \cup \dots \cup U_{n_j} \supseteq U_m for those jj — impossible. So no such U\mathcal{U} exists and XX is countably compact, which is claim 2.

L1L4L8step 1.4
2.3

The sets CnC_n satisfy nNCn=\bigcap_{n \in \mathbb{N}} C_n = \varnothing: a point outside BB lies in no CnC_n, and bkCk+1b_k \notin C_{k+1} because kbkk \mapsto b_k is injective. So V:={XCn:nN}\mathcal{V} := \{\, X \setminus C_n : n \in \mathbb{N} \,\} is an at most countable family of open sets whose union is XX.

L4L7step 1.5
3.1

The set A:={xn:nN}A := \{\, x_n : n \in \mathbb{N} \,\} of step 2.1 is infinite. Were it finite, then for each aAa \in A the least mm with aUma \in U_m exists, since (Un)(U_n) covers XX, and the largest MM of those finitely many least indices exists; but xMEMx_M \in E_M misses U0UMU_0 \cup \dots \cup U_M while xMAx_M \in A lies in UmU_{m} for some mMm \le M.

L1algebrastep 2.1
3.2

Countable compactness applied to V\mathcal{V} gives a finite subfamily V0,,VpV_0, \dots, V_p with union XX; each VjV_j is XCmX \setminus C_{m} for some mm, and taking NjN_j to be the least such mm and NN the largest of N0,,NpN_0, \dots, N_p gives Vj=XCNjXCNV_j = X \setminus C_{N_j} \subseteq X \setminus C_N for every jj, since the CnC_n decrease. Hence X=XCNX = X \setminus C_N and CN=C_N = \varnothing, contradicting bNCNb_N \in C_N. So a countably infinite subset of a countably compact space has a limit point in it, which is claim 1(d).

L1algebrastep 1.5step 2.3
4.1

Limit point compactness gives a limit point pp of the infinite set AA; some UmU_m contains pp, the set F:={x0,,xm}{p}F := \{x_0, \dots, x_m\} \setminus \{p\} is closed by [L4] as a union of finitely many closed singletons, and W:=UmFW := U_m \setminus F is therefore open and contains pp, hence is a neighbourhood of pp meeting A{p}A \setminus \{p\}: there is nn with xnWx_n \in W and xnpx_n \ne p.

L1L4step 2.1step 3.1
4.2

Claim 3: given an infinite AXA \subseteq X with XX countably compact, step 1.6 produces a countably infinite BAB \subseteq A, step 3.2 gives BB a limit point pp in XX, and pp is then a limit point of AA by [L3], since BAB \subseteq A. So XX is limit point compact.

L1L3step 1.6step 3.2
5.1

If nmn \le m then xnx_n is one of x0,,xmx_0, \dots, x_m and differs from pp, so xnFx_n \in F, contradicting xnW=UmFx_n \in W = U_m \setminus F; hence n>mn > m, so UmU0UnU_m \subseteq U_0 \cup \dots \cup U_n and xnWUmx_n \in W \subseteq U_m contradicts xnEnx_n \in E_n. No such U\mathcal{U} exists, so XX is countably compact, which is claim 4.

L1step 2.1step 4.1
6.1

Claims 1(a), 1(b), 1(c) and 1(d) are steps 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 3.2; claim 2 is step 2.2; claim 3 is step 4.2; and claim 4 is step 5.1.

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 2.2step 4.2step 5.1

Remarks

That an infinite set has a countably infinite subset is not a theorem of ZF, which is what claim 3 pays dependent choice for (FALSE: every infinite set has a countably infinite subset, in ZF). Claim 1(d), the part of claim 3 that speaks only about countably infinite subsets, is free of that cost and is proved in ZF.

Why claim 4 needs the singleton hypothesis and claim 1(c) does not. A limit point of the set AA built at step 2.1 need not be one of the xnx_n with large index unless the finitely many early terms can be cut away, and cutting them away is exactly what closedness of singletons permits. Without that hypothesis the implication fails, and the witness is worked on this page's companion, as cex-limit-point-compact-without-countable-compactness: a space in which every nonempty subset has a limit point, for the trivial reason that each point has a partner it cannot be separated from, and which has a countable open cover with no finite subcover.

The individual reverse implications fail in general, with the one exception proved above: claim 1(b) is the reverse of claim 1(a) taken jointly, and it holds in every space. Assuming the Axiom of Countable Choice, compactness is strictly stronger than countable compactness (FALSE: every countably compact space is compact) and sequential compactness does not imply compactness (FALSE: every sequentially compact space is compact); assuming the Axiom of Choice, compactness does not imply sequential compactness (FALSE: every compact space is sequentially compact, whose witness is compact by Tychonoff's theorem). Each of those false statements carries a witness reachable from this page, and each states the choice principle its witness spends.

For a metrizable space the picture collapses. Compactness, countable compactness, sequential compactness and limit point compactness are all equivalent there (For a metric space, compact, countably compact, limit point compact, sequentially compact, and complete together with totally bounded are all equivalent, given countable choice and dependent choice), at a choice cost recorded arrow by arrow in What each implication between the compactness properties of a metric space costs: which are theorems of ZF, which use countable choice, and which use dependent choice; the implications proved without choice in the metric setting are In any metric space compactness implies countable compactness and limit point compactness, and each of countable compactness and limit point compactness implies sequential compactness; every implication here is proved without a choice principle. Nothing in that collapse is available here, and the counterexamples of this page are all non-metrizable.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 117 results over 32 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