Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-08-02 (claude-opus-5)
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.

Vandermonde's identity (m+nk)=∑i<k+1(mi)(nk−i)

Statement

For all m,n,k∈N, in N,

(m+nk)  =  ∑i<k+1(mi)(n k−i ),

the sum running over i=0,1,…,k and k−i being an ordinary difference throughout that range. No restriction relating k to m and n is needed: the terms with i>m or k−i>n vanish because the corresponding binomial coefficients are 0 (The set [A]k of k-element subsets and the binomial coefficient (nk):=∣[n]k∣).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Naturals m, n, k; the disjoint sets M:=m×{0} and N:=n×{1}; and σ(k)={0,1,…,k}.

[L1]

Binomial coefficients (The set [A]k of k-element subsets and the binomial coefficient (nk):=∣[n]k∣): ∣[X]j∣=(∣X∣j) for finite X, and [X]j is finite.

[L2]

Cardinality (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set): transport along a bijection; ∣X∣=∣Y∣ iff X≈Y for finite X, Y.

[L5]

Subsets (A subset of a finite set is finite, with ∣B∣≤∣A∣, and equality holds if and only if B=A): a subset of a finite set is finite with cardinality at most that of the set.

[L6]

Maps (Injection, surjection, bijection, Equinumerous sets, A≈B and A⪯B): a map with a two-sided inverse is a bijection.

[L7]

Arithmetic: if i+t=k then t=k−i, since ≤ is defined additively and addition is cancellative; and j<σ(k)  ⟺  j≤k for every j∈N, so σ(k)={0,1,…,k} (Order on the natural numbers, Addition is cancellative, On N the order is membership: m<n  ⟺  m∈n). The cardinalities ∣M∣=m and ∣N∣=n are not assumed here; they are computed in step 1.1.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

A disjoint pair with the right cardinalities. Put M:=m×{0} and N:=n×{1}. These are disjoint, since an element of M has second coordinate 0 and one of N has second coordinate 1; and x↦(x,0) and x↦(x,1) are bijections from m and n onto them, so ∣M∣=m and ∣N∣=n by [L2]. Hence ∣M∪N∣=m+n by [L3], and ∣[M∪N]k∣=(m+nk) by [L1].

L1L2L3L6L7construct
1.2

The partition. For i<σ(k) put Bi:={ S∈[M∪N]k:∣S∩M∣=i }. Every S∈[M∪N]k lies in exactly one Bi, because S∩M⊆S gives ∣S∩M∣≤k by [L5], that is ∣S∩M∣∈σ(k); and the Bi are pairwise disjoint since S determines ∣S∩M∣.

L1L5
2.1

Counting a block. Fix i<σ(k). The map S↦(S∩M, S∩N) sends Bi into [M]i×[N] k−i: for S∈Bi the sets S∩M and S∩N are disjoint with union S, since S⊆M∪N, so k=i+∣S∩N∣ by [L3] and ∣S∩N∣=k−i by [L7]. The map (U,V)↦U∪V is a two-sided inverse: U⊆M and V⊆N are disjoint, so ∣U∪V∣=i+(k−i)=k by [L3], and (U∪V)∩M=U, (U∪V)∩N=V. Hence Bi≈[M]i×[N] k−i and ∣Bi∣=(mi)(n k−i ) by [L1], [L2] and [L4].

step 1.1step 1.2L1L2L3L4L6L7construct
3.1

Adding the blocks. By step 1.2 the family (Bi)i∈σ(k) is a pairwise disjoint family of finite sets with union [M∪N]k, so [L3] gives (m+nk)=∣[M∪N]k∣=∑i∈σ(k)∣Bi∣=∑i<σ(k)(mi)(n k−i ), using step 2.1 and the bridge for an index set that is a natural number.

step 1.1step 1.2step 2.1L3
4.1

No range restriction is needed: if i>m then [M]i=∅ and (mi)=0, and if k−i>n then (nk−i)=0, so those blocks are empty and contribute nothing, exactly as the identity says.

step 2.1step 3.1L1∎

Remarks

  • Why disjointness is arranged rather than assumed. The counting argument needs M and N disjoint, and two arbitrary sets of cardinalities m and n need not be. Replacing them by m×{0} and n×{1} costs one line and the transport clause of The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set, and it is what makes the sum rule applicable.

  • Not by generating functions, and not by comparing coefficients. Both of the usual quick proofs need machinery that is far later in the reading order: formal power series in the first case, and a polynomial ring in the second. The double count needs neither.

  • Pascal's rule is the special case m=1, read through (10)=(11)=1 and (1i)=0 for i≥2: for k≥1 the identity collapses to (1+nk)=(nk)+(nk−1), while at k=0 the sum has the single term (10)(n0)=1=(n+10). The restriction k≥1 is not cosmetic: n−m is the truncated difference throughout this page (Finite sums and finite products of natural numbers, ∑k<nak and ∏k<nak in N), so writing the collapsed identity at k=0 would read (n0−1) as (n0)=1 and assert 1=1+1.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

39 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