Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passaudited 2026-08-28
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.

Kirchhoff's matrix-tree theorem

Statement

Let G be a finite simple graph on vertices v1,,vn with n2 and Laplacian L(G). For each i, let L(i) be the matrix obtained from L(G) by deleting row i and column i. Then

detL(i)=τ(G),

where τ(G) is the number of spanning trees of G. In particular, every principal cofactor of the Laplacian is the same.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite simple graph G on vertices v1,,vn with n2, an oriented incidence matrix B, and an index i.

[F1]

A spanning tree of G is a spanning subgraph that is a tree, and τ(G) counts the spanning trees (Spanning trees of a graph, The spanning-tree number τ(G)).

[L1]

The Laplacian satisfies L(G)=BBT (The Laplacian equals BBT for every oriented incidence matrix B).

[L2]

A graph on n vertices is a tree exactly when it is connected and has n1 edges (Equivalent characterisations of a nonempty tree by unique paths, edge count, minimal connectivity and maximal acyclicity).

[L3]

The Binet-Cauchy formula expands determinants of products of rectangular matrices as sums of products of maximal minors (The Binet-Cauchy formula).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Delete row i from B to obtain an (n1)×E(G) matrix B(i). By [L1], the matrix L(i) obtained by deleting row i and column i from L(G) is L(i)=B(i)(B(i))T. Applying [L3] gives detL(i)=S=n1det(B(i)[S])2, where S ranges over all (n1)-edge subsets of E(G).

L1L3algebra
1.2

Fix such a set S, and let GS be the spanning subgraph with edge set S. If GS is disconnected, then the vertex-indicator vector of the component of vi gives a nonzero linear relation among the rows of B(i)[S], so det(B(i)[S])=0. If GS is connected, then GS has n1 edges and is therefore a tree by [L2]. In that case choose the orientation of every edge of GS away from the root vi and order the nonroot vertices so that every parent precedes its children. In this order the matrix B(i)[S] is triangular with diagonal entries all ±1, hence det(B(i)[S])=±1. Therefore det(B(i)[S])2 is 1 when S is the edge set of a spanning tree and 0 otherwise.

F1L2choosealgebra
2.1

Substituting step 1.2 into the sum of step 1.1 shows that detL(i) counts exactly the spanning trees of G, namely τ(G) by [F1]. Since the right-hand side does not depend on i, every principal cofactor of the Laplacian is equal.

step 1.1step 1.2F1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

24 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