Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-12
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.

Pcf generators restrict, finitely cover, and carry scales

Statement

Assume AC. Let A be a nonempty progressive set of infinite regular cardinals and fix generators (Bμ[A])μpcf(A). For cardinals outside pcf(A) put Bμ[A]=. Then:

  1. If A0A and λpcf(A0), then A0Bλ[A] generates Jλ[A0] over J<λ[A0], and equals any Bλ[A0] modulo the latter ideal.
  2. Every XA is covered by finitely many Bμ[A] with μpcf(X). Consequently, for every cardinal λ, J<λ[A] consists exactly of subsets of finite unions of Bμ[A] with μ<λ.
  3. Every universal λ-sequence, for λpcf(A), restricts to a strict cofinal scale on Bλ/J<λ[Bλ], of true cofinality λ.
  4. For a proper filter F on A and any cardinal λ, the following are equivalent: tcf(A/F)=λ; BλF and J<λ[A]F; every ultrafilter extending F has product cofinality λ. In particular an ultrafilter's product cofinality is the least generator index it contains.
  5. The cofinality of A under everywhere comparison is maxpcf(A), whether cofinality is defined using weak or strict domination.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The set A, AC and generating sequence of the statement. A proper filter excludes the empty set; comparisons modulo a filter require the corresponding comparison set to belong to that filter.

[F1]

PCF is monotone, ultrafilter support extension preserves product cofinality, and a strict cofinal chain has its stated regular true cofinality (Progressive products and true cofinality transfers).

[F2]

Cofinality ideals restrict by intersection, and their membership criterion tests supported ultrafilters (Pcf cofinality ideals and cutoff conventions).

[F3]

The ultrafilter cutoff equivalences identify cofinality λ with avoiding J<λ and meeting Jλ (Pcf ideal directedness and ultrafilter cofinality cutoffs).

[F4]

Every nonempty progressive subset has a maximum possible cofinality (Progressive pcf has a maximum and continuous cutoff ideals).

[F5]

Universal sequences exist for every index in PCF (Progressive pcf has universally cofinal sequences).

[F6]

Generators are positive and unique modulo the smaller ideal; their criterion is larger-ideal membership and containment by every cofinality-λ ultrafilter (Pcf cofinality ideals have single generators).

[F7]

Under AC every proper filter extends to an ultrafilter (The ultrafilter lemma, from the Axiom of Choice: every filter extends to an ultrafilter).

[A1]

AC selects witnesses from nonempty sets (The Axiom of Choice).

Proof

1.1

For nonempty A0A, progressiveness persists because A0A<minAminA0. Fix λpcf(A0) and put B=Bλ[A]. F6 gives BJλ[A], so F2 gives BA0Jλ[A0]. If D0 on A0 has cofinality λ, define D={YA:YA0D0}. F1 gives the same cofinality on A, so F6 gives BD, which means BA0D0. F6's criterion on the progressive support A0 now proves generation; its uniqueness proves equality modulo J<λ[A0] with every chosen generator there.

F1F2F6given
1.2

Fix λpcf(A), I=J<λ[A], B=Bλ[A] and any universal sequence f. F6 says BI, so IB is proper and the restricted chain is strict. Suppose some hB is not strictly below any restricted fξ modulo this ideal. Then Tξ={aB:fξ(a)h(a)} is positive for each ξ. For ξ<η, outside the I-small failure set of fξ<fη we have TηTξ. Hence for any finitely many indices with largest index η, their T-intersection contains Tη minus a finite union of small sets and is positive. Its intersection with BE for any EI is still nonempty. Thus the family of these T sets and the dual ideal on B has the finite intersection property and generates a proper filter. By F7 extend it to an ultrafilter on B, and extend by support to D on A using F1. This D contains B, avoids I, and meets Jλ through B; F3 gives cofinality λ. Extend h by zero off B to a product function hˉ. Every TξD yields fξDhˉ. Universality gives η with hˉ+1Dfη, a contradiction to those two inequalities on their D-large intersection. Here hˉ+1 is a product member because every coordinate is an infinite cardinal. Thus every h is strictly dominated by a restricted term. F1 gives true cofinality λ, proving clause 3.

F1F2F3F6F7
1.3

Put M=maxpcf(A), which exists by F4 and is infinite by F1. Every everywhere-cofinal family maps to a cofinal family in an ultraproduct of cofinality M, so has cardinality at least M. For the opposite inequality, use A1 and F5 to choose a universal sequence for every μpcf(A). Its terms are indexed by pairs (μ,ξ) with μM and ξ<μ; there are at most M such pairs by F8, since the set of cardinals at most M injects into M+1, which has cardinality M. Let H consist of all finite pointwise maxima of those terms, including the empty maximum 0. For each finite length, F8 bounds the number of tuples by M; the countable union still has size at most M by F8 and AC. All members of H belong to the product and H is closed under binary maxima. Given gA, put Th={a:g(a)<h(a)}. The identity Tmax(h,k)=ThTk shows that if no Th=A, the subsets of these sets form a proper ideal: its empty member comes from h=0, its union closure is the displayed identity, and it omits A. Extend its proper dual filter by F7 to D. For every hH, AThD, so hDg. But μ=cf(A/D) belongs to pcf(A) and its chosen universal sequence is contained in H; cofinality of that sequence dominates g+1 in D, contradicting its bound by g. Some Th=A, proving strict everywhere domination. Weak cofinality has the same lower bound and strict cofinality the proved upper bound, so both equal M.

F1F4F5F7F8A1
2.1

The empty set is covered by the empty family. Suppose a nonempty XA failed clause 2, and choose such an X with least μ=maxpcf(X); F4 applies by progressiveness as in step 1.1. By that step, XBμ[A] generates the larger ideal on X. Since XJμ[X], its remainder Y=XBμ[A] belongs to J<μ[X]. If Y is empty, Bμ alone covers X. Otherwise F4 gives ν=maxpcf(Y)<μ by F2. Minimality of the counterexample gives a finite cover of Y by generators indexed in pcf(Y)pcf(X), using F1. Adjoining Bμ covers X, again a contradiction. Thus the finite-cover assertion holds. If XJ<λ[A], each index in this cover is below λ by F2. Conversely for μ<λ with μpcf(A), BμJμ[A]J<λ[A] by F2 and F6; indices outside PCF contribute empty sets. Downward and finite-union closure prove the converse ideal characterization, including λ=0.

step 1.1F1F2F4F6
2.2

For any proper filter F, a set S lies in every ultrafilter extension if and only if SF. One direction is inclusion. For the other, if SF, each TF meets AS, since TS would force SF. Finite intersections in F show that adjoining AS has the finite intersection property; its generated filter is proper and F7 extends it to an ultrafilter omitting S. Now if a strict cofinal regular λ-chain exists modulo F, it remains strict and cofinal in every ultrafilter extension. F1 therefore gives cofinality λ in all of them. Conversely suppose every extension has that cofinality. There is at least one extension by F7, so λpcf(A). By F6 each extension contains Bλ, and by F3 each avoids J<λ, hence contains each member of its dual. Applying the just-proved intersection property separately to these sets gives BλF and J<λF. Finally suppose these latter conditions hold. They imply Bλ, hence λpcf(A) by our empty-generator convention. By F5 and step 1.2 take a scale on Bλ modulo the restricted ideal and extend each term by zero off Bλ. For every comparison its successful set contains BλE for some EJ<λ[A], which belongs to F. For any product function, restrict it to Bλ and use the scale there; the same set calculation proves cofinality modulo F. Strictness and F1 give true cofinality λ. This proves all three implications and covers cardinals outside PCF as well.

step 1.2F1F3F5F6F7
3.1

For an ultrafilter D, set λ=cf(A/D). F6 puts BλD and F3 makes D avoid J<λ. If μ<λ, then BμJ<λ by the ideal inclusion calculated in step 2.1 (or is empty), so BμD. Thus the least generator index in D exists and equals λ, which also proves the converse characterization of that least index. Clauses 1, 3 and 5 were proved in steps 1.1–1.3, clause 2 in step 2.1 and the filter equivalence in step 2.2. QED.

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 2.1step 2.2F3F6

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

56 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