Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-12
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.

SAT is NP-complete

Statement

The satisfiability language SAT is NP-complete.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A language L∈NP.

[L1]

The language SAT lies in NP, by SAT lies in NP.

[L2]

The verifier and nondeterministic-machine definitions of NP agree, by The verifier and nondeterministic definitions of NP agree.

[L3]

For a fixed nondeterministic polynomial-time machine, the Cook-Levin formula is satisfiable exactly when an accepting bounded tableau exists and is computable in polynomial time, by The Cook-Levin formula is satisfiable if and only if an accepting bounded tableau exists and The Cook-Levin reduction map is computable in polynomial time.

[L4]

A language is NP-complete exactly when it lies in NP and every language in NP polynomial-time many-one reduces to it, by NP-hard and NP-complete languages and Polynomial-time many-one reductions.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1L1L4given

By [L1], SAT is in NP. To prove NP-completeness via [L4], it remains to prove NP-hardness.

1.2L2givenconstruct

Because L∈NP, [L2] supplies a nondeterministic polynomial-time machine N deciding L. For an input x, let f(x) be the Cook-Levin formula ψN,x for a polynomial bound on computations of N on x.

2.1L3step 1.2

By [L3], the formula f(x) is satisfiable exactly when N has an accepting bounded tableau on x; with the bounded-tableau convention that later rows may repeat a halting configuration, this happens exactly when x∈L. The same citation shows that f is computable in polynomial time. Therefore L≤pSAT.

3.1L4step 1.1step 2.1∎

Since L∈NP was arbitrary, step 2.1 proves that every language in NP reduces to SAT. Together with step 1.1, [L4] gives that SAT is NP-complete.

Depends on

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