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.
Eisenstein criterion over the integers
Statement
Let be primitive with . If there is a prime such that
then is irreducible in .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A primitive polynomial and a prime satisfying the displayed divisibility conditions.
A rational factorization of a primitive integer polynomial clears to a primitive integer factorization (Gauss lemma: primitive factorisations over can be cleared to primitive factorisations over ).
Polynomial rings over fields are unique factorisation domains, hence domains (For every field , is a unique factorisation domain).
Reduction of coefficients modulo is a polynomial-ring homomorphism (Universal property of : a coefficient homomorphism and the image of determine a unique ring homomorphism).
The ring is the quotient (For every , the congruence-class ring is the quotient ring ).
A prime is greater than and its only positive divisors are (Prime and composite integers: is prime when and its only positive divisors are and ).
The ring is a field (For every prime , the two operations on make it a field).
Proof
Suppose for contradiction that is reducible over ; [L1] gives with primitive integer polynomials of positive degree.
By [L3] and [L4], reduction modulo gives in the domain of [L6] and [L2]. Because , the leading coefficients of and both survive reduction: their product is , so neither is divisible by . Thus and . Comparing the least nonzero terms in the product now shows that both reductions are monomials of positive degree, so the constant coefficients of and are divisible by .
The constant coefficient is the product of those two constant coefficients, so step 2.1 gives , contradicting the hypothesis; hence is irreducible over .
Depends on
- Gauss lemma: primitive factorisations over $\mathbb Q$ can be cleared to primitive factorisations over $\mathbb Z$
- For every field $F$, $F[x]$ is a unique factorisation domain
- Universal property of $R[x]$: a coefficient homomorphism and the image of $x$ determine a unique ring homomorphism
- For every $n\in\mathbb N$, the congruence-class ring $\mathbb Z/n$ is the quotient ring $\mathbb Z/n\mathbb Z$
- Prime and composite integers: $p$ is prime when $p > 1$ and its only positive divisors are $1$ and $p$
- For every prime $p$, the two operations on $\mathbb{Z}/p$ make it a field
Used by
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 112 results over 23 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
- Thomas W. Judson, Abstract Algebra: Theory and Applications, Theorem 17.17 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Keith Conrad, Irreducibility Tests in Q[T], Appendix A.4 (standard reference, not scraped)