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

Relative simplicial approximation after subdivision

Statement

Let K,L be finite complexes, AK a subcomplex, and f:KL continuous with fA the realization of a simplicial map. For some r there is a simplicial g:DArKL agreeing pointwise with f on A and homotopic to f rel A. This is a homotopy of pairs into (L,f(A)).

A prescribed compatible finite linear subdivision A of A can first be extended to a finite linear subdivision K of K. If fA is simplicial on this prescribed A, the conclusion applies to DArK, fixing it pointwise. The simpliciality condition must hold on the chosen triangulation; refining a source alone does not automatically retain it.

Source locators

Theorem and proof, pp.39–42; Maunder 2.5.20 pp.55–56.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

Adjustment provides the near-A star condition and shrinking far stars. Relative subdivision neighbourhood adjustment.

[F3]

The finite realization is compact metric with its Euclidean topology. Finite simplicial weak topology agrees with euclidean topology.

[F4]

Star approximation gives a homotopy fixed wherever the maps agree. The open star criterion produces a simplicial map.

[F5]

Compatible boundary coning extends finite triangulations. Relative derived subdivision of a finite simplicial pair.

Proof

Given: Finite K,L, subcomplex A, and f continuous and simplicial on A.

1.1

Take h and Tr from the neighbourhood-adjustment lemma. Compose its homotopy Ht with f to obtain a homotopy from f to fh, fixed on A. The inverse images under fh of the target vertex stars form an open cover of compact metric K, so there is a Lebesgue number δ>0. For empty K the empty map already proves the theorem.

F1F2F3
2.1

Choose r3 so that every star of a Tr vertex in B2 has diameter less than δ. For each such vertex the Lebesgue-number property gives a target vertex g(v) whose open star contains fh(st(v)). For any remaining vertex v, the adjustment lemma gives aA with h(st(v))stA(a). Since fA is simplicial, a point having positive a coordinate has positive f(a) coordinate in its image, so f(stA(a))stL(f(a)); take g(v)=f(a). On A take a=v, hence g(v)=f(v). These are finitely many choices.

F1F2step 1.1
3.1

All vertex stars now satisfy the criterion for fh, so g extends simplicially and the criterion supplies Jt(x)=(1t)fh(x)+tg(x). On A, the simplicial maps g and f agree on vertices and therefore on all affine combinations; also h is the identity there. Thus J fixes fA. Concatenate fH2t for 0t1/2 with J2t1 for 1/2t1. At the join both equal fh, so this is a continuous homotopy from f to g, fixed on A. Its restriction there always lies in the simplicial image f(A), proving the pair assertion.

F4step 1.1step 2.1
4.1

To extend a prescribed compatible A, process simplices of K outside A by increasing dimension. Their boundary triangulations are already fixed and compatible. Cone each such boundary from an interior barycenter of its original simplex. Every ray meets the boundary once, so these cones triangulate the simplex and restrict to the already specified boundaries. This finite induction constructs K restricting exactly to A. If f is simplicial there, apply the preceding argument to (K,A). When A is empty it is ordinary approximation; when A=K and f is already simplicial take g=f,r=0.

F5step 3.1

Remarks

The result approximates fh, not necessarily f in the strict carrier sense. Zeeman, pp.40–43, explains the distinction: near a fixed edge the star cover need not become subordinate to the pullback cover for f, even after relative subdivision. His p.43 circular-arc example rules out requiring the final map to stay in the carrier of f(x) at every point while fixing that edge. The two successive homotopies above impose no such additional claim. The prescribed-subdivision clause is conditional on simpliciality in that triangulation, not on the original one alone.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

31 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