Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedverified 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.

Parametric transversality

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice ACω (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)). Let F:M×S→N be a smooth family of maps and let Z⊆N be an embedded submanifold. If F⋔Z, then the set of parameters s∈S for which the slice Fs:M→N fails to be transverse to Z is a null subset of S.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: ACω and a smooth family F:M×S→N transverse to an embedded submanifold Z⊆N.

[F1]

The slice maps Fs come from the evaluation map F (Smooth families of maps and their evaluation maps).

[F2]

Transversality to an embedded submanifold means a tangent-space spanning condition at each point of the preimage (A smooth map transverse to an embedded submanifold).

[L1]

The preimage W=F−1(Z) is an embedded submanifold, and under ACω the critical values of the projection πS:W→S form a null set (The transverse preimage theorem, Morse-Sard for smooth manifolds).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1L1givenconstruct

Because F⋔Z, [L1] makes W:=F−1(Z)⊆M×S an embedded submanifold. Let πS:W→S be the restriction of the second projection.

2.1F1step 1.1algebra

Fix (p,s)∈W and write z:=F(p,s). The fibre of πS over s is πS−1(s)={(q,s)∈M×S:F(q,s)∈Z}, which identifies with Fs−1(Z) by [F1]. A pair (u,w)∈TpM×TsS lies in T(p,s)W exactly when dF(p,s)(u,w)∈TzZ, so d(πS)(p,s) is surjective exactly when every w∈TsS admits some u∈TpM with dF(p,s)(u,w)∈TzZ.

3.1F2step 2.1algebra

If Fs⋔Z at p, then [F2] gives dF(p,s)(TpM×{0})+TzZ=TzN. For any w∈TsS, choose u∈TpM so that dF(p,s)(u,0)+dF(p,s)(0,w)∈TzZ. Then (u,w)∈T(p,s)W, so step 2.1 makes πS a submersion at (p,s).

3.2F2step 2.1algebra

Conversely, assume πS is a submersion at (p,s). Given ξ∈TzN, the transversality of F in [F2] gives (u,w)∈TpM×TsS and η∈TzZ with ξ=dF(p,s)(u,w)+η. By step 2.1 choose u′∈TpM with (u′,w)∈T(p,s)W, so dF(p,s)(u′,w)∈TzZ. Then ξ=dF(p,s)(u−u′,0)+(η+dF(p,s)(u′,w))∈dF(p,s)(TpM×{0})+TzZ, which is exactly the transversality condition for Fs at p.

4.1L1step 3.1step 3.2∎

Therefore s is a regular value of πS if and only if the slice Fs is transverse to Z at every point of its fibre. Applying the Sard statement in [L1] to πS shows that the bad parameters form a null subset of S.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

25 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