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.
Integral Stallings theorem for finite lower-central quotients
Statement
Assume AC. Let be a group homomorphism inducing an isomorphism and an epimorphism . For a group , define and . Then for every finite , the induced homomorphism is an isomorphism.
Statement references
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC and a group homomorphism satisfying the stated and hypotheses.
Full AC, written AC, is The Axiom of Choice; it is inherited from the group-extension homology sequence supplier.
For every group extension , the exact sequence is natural in maps of extensions, including its transgression (the supplier proves this naturality using maps of classifying-space fibrations). Five-term homology sequence of a group extension
AC implies DC by choosing one successor at each stage of a serial relation. The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an -indexed chain
Under DC with supplied projective-resolution data, the bar complex computes group homology. In the bar complex, degree one has generators and degree-two boundaries , so . Diagonal bar coinvariants compute group homology
Proof
Given: The group map and hypotheses above.
Supply the resolution convention for [F2] by taking, for every module over each relevant group ring, the free module on its underlying set, augmented , and repeating this construction on successive kernels. These surjections give an exact free resolution. By [A1] and [L1], DC also holds. The case is the map between two trivial quotients. For , the bar degree-one calculation in [F2] identifies with the assumed isomorphism on . These are the base cases.
Fix and assume is an isomorphism. Apply [F1] to the extensions and . Since for , the maps are isomorphisms. Exactness therefore makes the transgression onto, with kernel the image of . By definition .
Naturality of [F1] makes the map compatible with the two transgressions. It is an isomorphism because the quotient-group map is an isomorphism by the induction hypothesis. The epimorphism makes the image of in map onto the image of in . The induced map on the two cokernels is consequently an isomorphism. By step 1.2 and exactness, those cokernels are and .
The inclusions and quotient maps give exact central extensions because . The maps on the kernel and quotient terms are isomorphisms by step 2.1 and the induction hypothesis. The middle map is injective: an element in its kernel projects to the identity in the quotient, hence lies in the kernel term, where injectivity holds. It is surjective: for a target element, lift its quotient class through the quotient isomorphism and then correct the chosen middle lift by a kernel element using the kernel isomorphism. Thus is an isomorphism.
Steps 1.1 and 3.1 prove by induction the isomorphism for every finite . Apart from the inherited AC used to obtain the homology sequence [F1], the induction uses only exactness and a single element lift at a time; no additional choice principle is used.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
22 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
- John McCleary, Nontrivial fundamental groups, §8bis.2 (standard reference, not scraped)