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.
Existence and homotopy uniqueness of Eilenberg--Mac Lane spaces
Statement
Assume AC. Every group has a connected CW model . For every abelian group and every , there is a connected CW model . If two models carry identifications with the same group, they are homotopy equivalent by maps inducing the prescribed identification (with the usual basepoint transport in degree one).
Facts & Assumptions
Van Kampen computes the fundamental group of a presentation -complex (Seifert–van Kampen identifies the fundamental group with a group pushout).
For , the wedge is -connected and its is the free abelian group on the sphere inclusions (The first potentially nonzero homotopy group of a wedge of higher spheres has its cell basis).
Attaching cells of dimension does not change for (High relative cells do not change lower homotopy); relative Hurewicz and the exact sequence identify the selected attaching classes and kill the generated (Relative Hurewicz theorem in the simple-connectivity range).
Every sphere map, disk map, or homotopy into a CW union has image in a finite subcomplex and hence occurs at a finite construction stage (Each homotopy representative is supported on a finite CW subcomplex).
A weak equivalence between CW complexes is a homotopy equivalence under AC (Whitehead theorem).
AC selects simultaneous representatives, nullhomotopies, and attaching maps indexed by arbitrary sets (The Axiom of Choice).
Proof
Given: , or and , together with [A1].
For , begin with a wedge of one oriented circle for every . Attach a -cell along the word for every ordered pair . By [F1], the resulting complex has presentation
Sending to defines a surjective homomorphism to . Conversely is a homomorphism by the relations and is inverse to it; the relation with also forces . Thus . [F1]
Now let . Put . By [F2], . Let send the basis vector to . Choose a sphere representative for every element of and attach an -cell along it, obtaining . The pair is -connected and is simply connected. Relative Hurewicz identifies its relative with the free relative cell group, and the boundary map sends each cell generator to its attaching class. Exactness therefore gives
No lower positive homotopy group appears by [F3]. [A1, F2, F3]
Starting from the degree-one presentation in Step 1.1, inductively choose one based map representing every element of and attach an -cell along each, for . The relative exact sequence makes zero and surjective, hence , while [F3] preserves all lower groups. Put . For fixed , later cells do not recreate . By [F4], every representative and nullhomotopy in occurs at a finite stage; consequently and for . Thus is a .
Starting from the degree- complex in Step 1.2, attach one -cell along a representative of every element of at the current stage, beginning with . The argument of Step 2.1, now preserving , kills each higher group successively. The increasing union has and every other positive homotopy group zero by [F4]. This is a .
Let be any other degree-one model with the same identified group. From the completed model in Step 2.1, map each circle to a based loop representing the corresponding . Each multiplication relator maps to a nullhomotopic loop, so choose fillings of the -cells. Every higher attaching sphere maps trivially because for , and induction extends the map to . It induces the prescribed isomorphism on .
For a degree- model , begin with the completed model in Step 3.1 and map the sphere indexed by to a representative of the corresponding element of . Every attaching map indexed by becomes nullhomotopic, so the map extends over the -cells. All later attaching maps extend because the corresponding higher homotopy groups of vanish. The resulting induces the prescribed isomorphism on .
In either case, and are connected, is an isomorphism on their sole possibly nonzero positive homotopy group, and all their other positive homotopy groups vanish. Thus is a weak equivalence. By [F5], it is a homotopy equivalence. Applying Steps 3.2 and 4.1 to two models gives a zigzag of homotopy equivalences through ; choosing a homotopy inverse for one leg gives a homotopy equivalence between the models. Its induced group map is the prescribed identification, with the basepoint track supplying the standard conjugacy transport when .
The construction also covers the trivial group. In that case the resulting connected CW complex has every positive homotopy group zero, and its map to a point is a weak equivalence, hence a homotopy equivalence by [F5]. No countability, finite generation, or finite-dimensionality has been assumed. Every infinite selection is accounted for by [A1], while the passage to the union uses the individual compact-support statement [F4], not an unproved interchange of homotopy groups with an arbitrary colimit.
Depends on
- Eilenberg--Mac Lane space
- Vanishing of the primary obstruction is equivalent to extension over the next skeleton
- Whitehead theorem
- The Axiom of Choice
- Seifert–van Kampen identifies the fundamental group with a group pushout
- Relative Hurewicz theorem in the simple-connectivity range
- The first potentially nonzero homotopy group of a wedge of higher spheres has its cell basis
- High relative cells do not change lower homotopy
- Each homotopy representative is supported on a finite CW subcomplex
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
47 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
- James Davis and Paul Kirk, Lecture Notes in Algebraic Topology (standard reference, not scraped)
- Haynes Miller, MIT 18.906 Algebraic Topology II lecture notes (standard reference, not scraped)