Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
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.

Smooth sliceness and four-ball genus obstructions — Examples and Counterexamples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Logical flowchart

3 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

4 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)verified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

E8 as the lattice input to a conditional sliceness obstruction

Example

Let K⊂S3 be a smooth oriented knot and suppose its double branched cover bounds a compact simply connected positive-definite smooth four-manifold W whose boundary intersection lattice is isometric to LE8. Then this particular filling lattice has rank eight and has no isometric full-rank embedding into the standard lattice Z8. This verifies the algebraic nonembedding input for the conditional KT-26 sliceness obstruction. It does not assert that a specified knot has such a filling, that every slice-disk branched cover satisfies boundary normal generation, or that the conditional obstruction proves any further numerical four-ball-genus bound.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A knot K and a positive-definite filling W with boundary intersection lattice isometric to LE8.

[F1]

The E8 lattice is rank eight, positive definite, has determinant one, and admits no isometric full-rank embedding into Z8. The E8 lattice is even unimodular and is not diagonal

Verification

1.1givenF1construct

An isometry QW≅LE8 identifies the rank of QW with eight and transports any proposed isometric full-rank embedding QW↪Z8 to one from LE8.

2.1F1step 1.1∎

Such an embedding is excluded by [F1]. Thus the algebraic nonembedding premise holds for this filling. No knot-level conclusion follows without the separate branched-cover gluing and gauge-theory hypotheses.

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)verified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

The topological E8 manifold does not satisfy the smooth diagonalization conclusion

Statement refuted

Under full AC, every closed connected simply connected oriented topological four-manifold with positive-definite integral intersection form has that form isometric over the integers to the standard diagonal lattice.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Full AC and the topological-category assertion in the Statement refuted.

[F1]

There is a closed connected simply connected oriented topological four-manifold YE8 with intersection form LE8. The supplier explicitly applies Freedman's external realization theorem under the run-specific TOP exception; no local reconstruction of that existence theorem is claimed. Topological realization of the E8 intersection form

[F2]

The E8 form is positive definite and unimodular but not isometric over the integers to the standard diagonal rank-eight lattice. The E8 lattice is even unimodular and is not diagonal

Counterexample

Given: Full AC, the asserted topological extension and the realization/lattice facts [F1]–[F2].

1.1F1

Take the manifold YE8 furnished by [F1]. It is closed, connected, simply connected, oriented and topological, so it meets the asserted manifold hypotheses.

2.1F1F2step 1.1∎

Its intersection form is positive definite by [F2], but the same local lattice result proves it is not isometric to the standard diagonal form. Thus YE8 satisfies every hypothesis of the refuted assertion and violates its conclusion.

Remarks

Donaldson's diagonalization theorem assumes a smooth four-manifold. This topological realization does not meet that hypothesis, and the lattice calculation alone does not give a knot nonsliceness certificate.

Sources