TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31

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.

For a Hausdorff space, paracompactness is equivalent, under choice and dependent choice, to the existence of a locally finite subordinate partition of unity for every open cover

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice and the Axiom of Dependent Choice. For a Hausdorff space $X$ , the following are equivalent: $X$ is paracompact; every open cover of $X$ admits a locally finite partition of unity subordinate to it.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A Hausdorff space $X$ , choice and dependent choice, and an open cover $U$ .

[L1]

A paracompact Hausdorff space has a locally finite partition of unity subordinate to each open cover (Under choice and dependent choice, every open cover of a paracompact Hausdorff space admits a locally finite subordinate partition of unity).

[F1]

In a subordinate partition, cozero sets are open, form a locally finite family, and each support lies in a member of $U$ (Locally finite partitions of unity and subordination to an open cover, Zero sets and cozero sets of continuous real-valued functions).

[F2]

Paracompactness asks for a locally finite open refining cover (Paracompactness: every open cover has a locally finite open refinement, with no separation axiom built into the word).

Proof

technique · direct

1.1

If $X$ is paracompact, [L1] supplies the asserted partition for $U$ .

1.2

Conversely, suppose every open cover admits such a partition. For the partition subordinate to $U$ , the cozero sets cover $X$ because their functions sum to one.

1.3

Each cozero set is open, locally finite among the cozero family, and contained in its support and hence in a member of $U$ ; it is therefore a locally finite open refinement of $U$ .

2.1

By [F2], step 1.3 proves that $X$ is paracompact, completing the equivalence.

F2step 1.1step 1.3∎

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

23 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

J. Robbin, Partitions of Unity (standard reference, not scraped)