Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07
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 of the bounded above left total derived functor

Statement

For additive F:AB and supplied bounded-above projective replacements with the model-equivalence hypotheses, the replacement construction is a functor LF:D(A)D(B) with the terminal universal property in its definition. Right exactness of F is not needed for existence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: For additive F:AB and supplied bounded-above projective replacements with the model-equivalence hypotheses, the replacement construction is a functor LF:D(A)D(B) with the terminal universal property in its definition. Right exactness of F is not needed for existence.

[F1]

Supplied projective models and the augmentation specify the left total derived construction (Left total derived functor on the bounded above derived category).

[F2]

Projective replacement comparisons are unique relative to augmentations (Left total derived functor is independent up to a unique augmentation-compatible natural isomorphism).

[F3]

An additive functor induces an exact functor on homotopy categories (An additive functor on abelian categories induces an exact functor on homotopy categories).

Proof

1.1

Compose the supplied quasi-inverse D(A)K(ProjA) with K(F) and QB. These are functors, so this gives LF on all arrows, including identities and zero complexes. The homotopy equality pYu~=upX for an ordinary map makes QF(pX) a natural augmentation.

F1F3
2.1

Given (G,γ), for a projective complex P put μQP=ϵP1γP; the augmentation here is invertible by replacement comparison with PP. For general X define μQX=LF(QpX)μQPXG(QpX)1. This is meaningful since both functors take QpX to isomorphisms. For a derived arrow, lift its conjugate between projective models; naturality of γ on that ordinary homotopy-class map gives naturality of μ after conjugation.

F2step 1.1algebra
3.1

Naturality of ϵ along pX and of γ gives ϵXμQX=γX. Conversely this equation determines μ on projective complexes because ϵP is invertible, and naturality along QpX forces the formula at every object. Thus the universal comparison exists uniquely. All uses of F required only additivity and preservation of homotopies.

step 1.1step 2.1algebra

Depends on

Used by

Cited to discharge well-definedness by Left total derived functor on the bounded above derived category.

Dependency tree · two levels

10 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