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.
Short five lemma by pullback without members
Statement
For a morphism of short exact sequences in an abelian category, the three conclusions of the short five lemma hold without using members: monic outer maps force the middle map to be monic, epic outer maps force it to be epic, and isomorphic outer maps force it to be an isomorphism.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A morphism of short exact sequences with vertical maps .
In a short exact sequence, the left map is a kernel and the right map is a cokernel (A short exact sequence is a kernel-cokernel pair).
The pullback square of an epimorphism is again a pullback square with epic left projection, and its induced map on kernels is an isomorphism (In a pullback square, the induced map on the kernels of the two parallel arrows is an isomorphism).
A cartesian square over an epimorphism is also cocartesian (A cartesian square over an epimorphism is also cocartesian).
In an abelian category, monic-plus-epic implies isomorphism (An abelian category is balanced).
Pullback diagram
The proof uses the following pullback of along :
Proof
Form the pullback of along shown above. Because , there is a unique comparison map with and . Since is the cokernel of by [L1], it is epic, so [L3] makes the square also cocartesian, and [L2] identifies with .
Assume and are monic. Then , so step 1.1 makes monic. If , then Because by [L1], there is with . Now The map is monic by [L1], and is monic by hypothesis, so and hence . Thus is monic, and therefore is monic.
Still with the pullback square of step 1.1, let be a kernel of ; by [L2] this exists and agrees with the induced map from to . Assume now that and are epic. To show that is epic, let satisfy . Then Since is epic, . Because , there is with . But then and is epic by [L1], so and hence . Therefore is epic.
To show that is epic under the same hypotheses, let satisfy . Since the square of step 1.1 is cocartesian by [L3], the compatible pair of maps and induces a unique with and . Because is epic, , so . Thus is epic, and therefore is epic.
If and are isomorphisms, steps 2.1 and 3.1 show that is both monic and epic. Therefore [L4] makes an isomorphism.
This gives the short five lemma again, now by a pullback-and-pushout argument and without any use of members.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
21 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
- David Mehrle, Category Theory, Part III, Lemma 7.23 (standard reference, not scraped)
- The Stacks Project, Section 12.5, Lemmas 12.5.12 and 12.5.13 (standard reference, not scraped)