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.
The commutative-monoid enrichment of a category with finite biproducts is unique
Statement
Let a category with finite biproducts carry a commutative-monoid law on each hom-set for which composition is bilinear and the given finite biproducts are biproducts for that enrichment. Then this law is the one defined in A category with finite biproducts is enriched in commutative monoids. In particular, the commutative-monoid enrichment is unique.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A category with finite biproducts and a second candidate bilinear commutative-monoid law on its hom-sets.
Finite biproducts define a canonical addition on every hom-set (A category with finite biproducts is enriched in commutative monoids).
Proof
Fix , and write for the codiagonal and for the coproduct injections. Because composition is bilinear for , the morphism satisfies and , where are the product projections and the off-diagonal terms vanish by the biproduct zero equations. Thus by the product universal property.
Applying and using bilinearity again gives , since . But the left-hand side is exactly the canonical sum from [L1].
Therefore for every pair of parallel morphisms. So every bilinear commutative-monoid enrichment compatible with the same finite biproducts is forced to equal the canonical one.
Depends on
Used by
- The uniqueness of the enrichment is an Eckmann-Hilton phenomenon Corollary
- FALSE: the addition on an additive category is extra structure that must be chosen False statement
- A functor between additive categories is additive exactly when it preserves finite biproducts Theorem
- A semiadditive category is preadditive exactly when every morphism has an additive inverse Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
4 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
- Merlin Christ, Tobias Dyckerhoff, and Tashi Walde, Lax Additivity, Section 2 (standard reference, not scraped)