Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passaudited 2026-08-13
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.

Substitution by a zero-constant series is a ring homomorphism, and composition is associative when both inner series have zero constant coefficient

Statement

Let gRx have zero constant coefficient. Then

Sg:RxRx,Sg(f)=fg,

is a unital ring homomorphism. Thus

(f+h)g=fg+hg,(fh)g=(fg)(hg),1g=1.

If g and h both have zero constant coefficient, then

(fg)h=f(gh)

for every fRx. Admissibility of the four displayed compositions is not by itself enough for this identity; the hypothesis on the two inner series is what makes both sides the same locally finite rearrangement.

Also fx=f and xf=f. Composition need not be commutative.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses and notation of the statement above.

[F1]

Formal composition is fg=n0[xn]fgn, defined when f is a polynomial or when g(0)=0 (Composition fg of formal series when the outer series is a polynomial or the inner series has zero constant term).

[F2]

A summable family may be bijectively reindexed or partitioned and regrouped without changing its sum (Summable formal families may be regrouped and rearranged, distribute over multiplication, and have well-defined locally finite products).

Proof

technique · compare finite coefficient sums
1.1

Linearity follows by splitting the locally finite defining sum. For multiplication, expand (fh)g using the Cauchy coefficients of fh and regroup the locally finite double family to obtain (i[xi]fgi)(j[xj]hgj). Constants give 1g=1.

givenF1F2F3
1.2

For associativity assume [x0]g=[x0]h=0. Then ordx(gn)n and ordx(hm)m, so expanding either side by [F1] gives the same doubly indexed family [xn]f[xm](gn)hm, in which only finitely many terms contribute below each degree. [F2] therefore rearranges one into the other. The hypothesis is used exactly here: without it a term of arbitrarily high index can contribute in low degree, and the two sides need not agree even when all four compositions are individually admissible.

givenF1F2
1.3

Substituting x leaves every coefficient in place, while substituting into the polynomial x returns the inner series. Finally, x2(x+x2)=x2+2x3+x4 whereas (x+x2)x2=x2+x4 over Z, so composition is not commutative.

givenF1
2.1

Steps 1.1-1.3 give the homomorphism, associativity, identity, and noncommutativity claims.

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 24 results over 10 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