Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-09-23 (gpt-6-sol)
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.

The nondeterministic time hierarchy theorem

Statement

For nondecreasing time-constructible f,g with n≤f(n),g(n) eventually and f(n+1)=o(g(n)), NTIME(f(n))⊊NTIME(g(n)).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the displayed hypotheses, with constructibility and all-branch O(t) time classes as in Time-constructible and space-constructible functions and The classes DTIME, NTIME, DSPACE, and NSPACE.

Proof

technique · application of the internal nondeterministic recursive-padding separation theorem, with an exact-clock construction
1.1givenconstruct

Construct a deterministic unary-input clock as follows: read its input, compute the binary value g(n) with the fixed constructor, and perform g(n) countdown iterations before halting. A least-significant-bit-first binary counter has linear total decrement cost (the numbers of bit changes form a geometric sum); returning its head after each decrement has the same bound. Thus the clock's actual running time T(n) is Θ(g(n)) eventually, and can be arranged to be at least n for every n. It is an exact running time in the terminology of Seiferas--Fischer--Meyer, even though g was supplied only by an asymptotically bounded binary-output constructor.

2.1step 1.1

Apply Nondeterministic recursive-padding separation to the exact clock T from step 1.1. It gives a binary language D∈NTIME(T) under the local all-branch convention, but D∉NTIME(a) for every total recursive a≥n with a(n+1)=o(T(n)).

3.1step 1.1step 2.1

Since T(n)=O(g(n)), the all-branch O(T) machine from step 2.1 is an all-branch O(g) machine. Hence D∈NTIME(g).

3.2givenstep 1.1step 2.1algebra

If D belonged to local NTIME(f), a constant integer C would bound its accepting times at every length by the total recursive function a(n)=max⁡{n,Cf(n),C}: enlarge C to cover the finitely many exceptional lengths. Since f(n)≥n eventually, a(n+1)=O(f(n+1))=o(g(n))=o(T(n)). This contradicts the exclusion in step 2.1. Thus D∉NTIME(f).

4.1givenstep 3.1step 3.2algebra∎

Nondecreasing f gives f(n)≤f(n+1)=o(g(n)), so every all-branch O(f) decider is an all-branch O(g) decider. Together with steps 3.1 and 3.2 this proves the strict inclusion.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

14 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