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.
Every small limit can be constructed as an equalizer between products over the objects and arrows of the index category
Statement
Let be small. If the products
and the equalizer of the maps defined by and exist, then that equalizer is a limit of .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The displayed products and an equalizer of .
A product represents families of arrows into its factors (Products and coproducts as limits and colimits of discrete diagrams, including their existence-and-uniqueness equations).
An equalizer represents arrows on which its parallel pair agrees (Equalizers and coequalizers as limits and colimits of a parallel pair).
A small diagram has sets of objects and arrows (Finite, small, and large limits and colimits; complete and cocomplete categories).
A limit represents cones by unique mediating arrows (Limits and colimits as terminal cones and initial cocones, with existence and uniqueness in their universal properties).
Proof
By [F3] the two displayed families are set-indexed. By [F1], the stated coordinate equations define unique maps .
Put . Since , equality of the -coordinates says for every . Thus is a cone.
Given a cone , [F1] supplies a unique with . Its cone equations imply for all , so product uniqueness gives .
By [F2], factors uniquely as with . Then , so is a cone morphism.
If has the same leg equations, product uniqueness gives ; equalizer uniqueness gives .
Steps 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, and 4.1 are exactly [F4], so is a limit. If is empty, both products are terminal objects, , and their equalizer is isomorphic to the terminal object, so the construction still applies.
Depends on
- Products and coproducts as limits and colimits of discrete diagrams, including their existence-and-uniqueness equations
- Equalizers and coequalizers as limits and colimits of a parallel pair
- Finite, small, and large limits and colimits; complete and cocomplete categories
- Limits and colimits as terminal cones and initial cocones, with existence and uniqueness in their universal properties
Used by
- A category is complete exactly when it has all small products and equalizers, and cocomplete exactly when it has all small coproducts and coequalizers Corollary
- Assuming Choice, nonempty sets have all small products but a parallel pair with no equalizer and hence a diagram with no limit Counterexample
- Every small colimit can be constructed as a coequalizer between coproducts over the arrows and objects of the index category Theorem
- Finite, nonempty finite, and connected finite (co)limit criteria in terms of products, equalizers, pullbacks, terminal objects, and their duals Theorem
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 20 results over 8 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- E. Riehl, Category Theory in Context, Theorem 3.5.11 and Remark 3.2.13 (standard reference, not scraped)