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 Eilenberg–Moore forgetful functor strictly creates every limit that exists in the base
Statement
For every monad on , the forgetful functor strictly creates every limit that exists in . No preservation hypothesis on is required.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A diagram with algebra structures , and a limiting cone in .
Strict creation requires a unique lifted limiting cone with exactly the supplied apex and legs (Preservation, reflection, and creation of limits and colimits; continuous and cocontinuous functors).
A limit admits a unique mediating arrow from every cone (Limits and colimits as terminal cones and initial cocones, with existence and uniqueness in their universal properties).
Proof
The maps form a cone because every arrow of is an algebra homomorphism. By [L2] there is a unique with for every .
After composition with every , the equations and become the corresponding algebra laws for by naturality; the limit legs are jointly monic by uniqueness in [L2], so both equations hold and is a -algebra.
If a cone from an algebra has underlying mediating arrow , then composing and with every gives the same map because each cone leg is an algebra homomorphism; joint monicity makes an algebra homomorphism. Its uniqueness and the uniqueness of follow from the base limit, giving exactly the strict lift required by [L1], including when is empty.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 17 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, 2nd ed., Theorem 5.6.5(i) (standard reference, not scraped)
- B. Richter, From Categories to Homotopy Theory, Theorem 6.5.1 (standard reference, not scraped)