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.

Semisimple Lie Algebras, Cohomology, and Levi Theory — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

These examples accompany semisimple-lie-algebras-cohomology-and-levi-theory. Direct adjoint-matrix and root-weight computations give the Killing forms of sl2 and the split classical families, including all low-rank orthogonal exceptions. The algebra gln then separates reductivity from nondegeneracy of the Killing form, while sl2⊕sl3 makes the simple-ideal decomposition and orthogonality concrete.

The cohomological examples identify trivial-coefficient first cohomology with the dual abelianization and construct the Heisenberg algebra from an explicit nonzero two-cocycle. Euclidean motions supply a fully computed Levi decomposition, and a semidirect product with a nontrivial sl2-action displays two distinct Levi factors joined by an explicit inner unipotent conjugation.

Quaternionic conjugation computes the double cover SU⁡(2)→SO⁡(3) and its differential, while nilpotent BCH coordinates give a global polynomial group law and an explicit Heisenberg multiplication. The affine algebra refutes “centerless implies semisimple,” and the line and circle separate isomorphic Lie algebras from isomorphic connected groups. The finite algebraic examples are choice-free; the global integration examples (the quaternionic double cover, the BCH group, and the line/circle pair) inherit exactly ACω from the covering and integration results they use.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

A reductive algebra with degenerate Killing form

Example

For n≥1 over a characteristic-zero field, gln is reductive but its Killing form is degenerate:

gln=kI⊕sln,K(I,X)=0(X∈gln).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The matrix Lie algebra gln(k), n≥1, over a characteristic-zero field.

[L1]

A finite-dimensional Lie algebra is reductive when it is the direct sum of its center and a semisimple ideal (Equivalent characterizations of reductive Lie algebras).

[L2]

Its Killing form is K(X,Y)=tr⁡(ad⁡Xad⁡Y) (Killing form).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1L1givenalgebra

Since n is invertible in k, every matrix has the unique decomposition X=tr⁡XnI+(X−tr⁡XnI), whose second term is traceless. Thus gln=kI⊕sln. The first summand is the center and the second is semisimple for n≥2; for n=1 it is zero, which is semisimple by convention. Hence [L1] makes gln reductive for every n≥1.

2.1L2step 1.1algebra∎

Since I is central, ad⁡I=0. Therefore [L2] gives K(I,X)=0 for every X. The nonzero vector I lies in the radical of the form, so it is degenerate; at n=1 it is identically zero. The calculation is finite and uses no choice.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Direct-sum decomposition of a semisimple Lie algebra

Example

Over a characteristic-zero field let g=sl2⊕sl3. Its summands are simple ideals, every ideal is a sum of a subcollection of them, and the Killing form is their orthogonal direct sum.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The componentwise bracket on the displayed direct sum.

[L1]

Relative to a decomposition of a finite-dimensional semisimple characteristic-zero Lie algebra into simple ideals, every ideal is the sum of a subfamily of the simple factors (Ideals and quotients of semisimple Lie algebras).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1givenalgebra

The standard matrix-unit commutator argument shows that sl2 and sl3 are nonabelian simple in characteristic zero. Hence sl2⊕0 and 0⊕sl3 are simple ideals whose direct sum is g.

2.1L1step 1.1

Applying [L1], the complete ideal list is 0,sl2⊕0,0⊕sl3,g. This includes the empty and full subcollections.

3.1step 1.1algebra∎

For x∈sl2 and y∈sl3, the two adjoint maps ad⁡(x,0) and ad⁡(0,y) act on opposite blocks, so their product is zero. Restriction to a block is its own adjoint trace. Thus Kg=Ksl2⊥Ksl3. Everything is finite and choice-free.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

First cohomology with trivial coefficients

Example

For the trivial g-module k there is a natural isomorphism

H1(g,k)≅Hom⁡k(g/[g,g],k)=(g/[g,g])∗.

No finite-dimensionality assumption on g is needed.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A Lie algebra g over k, with k carrying the trivial action.

[L1]

First cohomology is derivations modulo inner derivations (First cohomology is derivations modulo inner derivations).

[L2]

The quotient g/I consists of cosets, and its canonical projection q:g→g/I is linear (Quotient Lie algebras).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1L1givenalgebra

A linear map λ:g→k is a derivation precisely when λ([x,y])=x⋅λ(y)−y⋅λ(x)=0. Thus Z1(g,k) is exactly the space of linear forms vanishing on [g,g].

1.2L1algebra

Every inner derivation into the trivial module has the form x↦x⋅a=0, so B1(g,k)=0 and H1=Z1.

2.1L2step 1.1step 1.2algebra∎

Put I=[g,g]. If λ is in the space from step 1.1, define λˉ(x+I)=λ(x). This is well-defined because x+I=y+I implies x−y∈I and hence λ(x−y)=0; it is plainly linear and satisfies λ=λˉ∘q. Conversely every linear form on g/I pulls back along the linear map q from [L2] to a form vanishing on I. These constructions are linear and inverse, proving the displayed natural isomorphism together with steps 1.1–1.2. If the abelianization is zero, both sides are zero; no basis or choice is used.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

The Heisenberg algebra from a two-cocycle

Example

Let a=kx⊕ky be abelian and let kz be the trivial one-dimensional a-module. The alternating form determined by

ω(x,y)=z

is a 2-cocycle. Its associated abelian extension is the three-dimensional Heisenberg algebra

[x,y]=z,[x,z]=[y,z]=0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The displayed two-dimensional abelian algebra and trivial module over a characteristic-zero field.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1givenalgebra

Since both the bracket of a and its action on kz are zero, every term in the Chevalley–Eilenberg differential of a 2-cochain vanishes. Equivalently, the possible target C3(a,kz) is already zero because ⋀3a=0. Hence dω=0.

1.2givenalgebra

The same triviality makes the differential C1→C2 zero, so the nonzero form ω is not a coboundary. Indeed C2(a,kz) is one-dimensional, generated by x∗∧y∗⊗z.

2.1step 1.1algebra∎

On kz⊕a define [(a,u),(b,v)]=(ω(u,v),0); this is the usual cocycle-extension formula here because the action and the bracket of a are both zero. It is bilinear and alternating, and Jacobi holds because every bracket lies in kz⊕0, which brackets to zero. Its kernel kz⊕0 is abelian, its quotient is a, and the induced action is trivial, so it is the abelian extension represented by ω. Its only nonzero basis bracket is [(0,x),(0,y)]=(z,0). Renaming the three basis vectors gives exactly the displayed Heisenberg relations. This checks the zero and one-dimensional boundary spaces explicitly and uses no choice.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

A Levi decomposition of the Euclidean-motion algebra of R^3

Example

The Euclidean-motion algebra of three-space has the Levi decomposition

e(3)=R3⋊so(3),rad⁡(e(3))=R3,

where translations form the radical and rotations form a Levi factor.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The standard action of so(3) on R3 and the resulting semidirect-product bracket.

[L1]

A Levi decomposition is a vector-space semidirect sum of the radical and a semisimple subalgebra (Levi subalgebras and Levi decompositions).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1givenalgebra

Put V=R3. In the semidirect product, [(v,A),(w,B)]=(Aw−Bv,[A,B]). Hence V⊕0 is an abelian ideal, and the quotient by it is so(3).

1.2algebra

Under the vector-space identification u↦Au, Au(v)=u×v, one has [Au,Av]=Au×v. If an ideal of so(3) contains a nonzero Au, then the vectors u×v as v varies span u⊥, and a further bracket supplies the u-direction. Thus the ideal is all of so(3). The algebra is nonabelian and [so(3),so(3)]=so(3), so it is simple and not solvable.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2

Let I be a solvable ideal of e(3). Its image in the quotient is a solvable ideal of so(3), hence is zero by step 1.2. Thus I⊆V. Conversely V is itself a solvable ideal by step 1.1, so it is the radical.

3.1L1step 1.1step 1.2∎

The subalgebra 0⊕so(3) is semisimple, meets V in zero, and together with V spans the whole algebra. It is therefore a Levi factor by [L1]. The zero intersections and full quotient are explicit, and no choice is used.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Distinct conjugate Levi subalgebras

Example

Let V be a finite-dimensional sl2-module whose action is nontrivial, and set g=sl2⋉V. For a suitable v∈V, the standard factor s=sl2⊕0 and exp⁡(ad⁡(0,v))(s) are distinct Levi subalgebras, conjugate by the inner unipotent automorphism exp⁡(ad⁡(0,v)).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite-dimensional module with nonzero action and the displayed semidirect product over a characteristic-zero field.

[L1]

The semidirect-product bracket is [(x,v),(y,w)]=([x,y],xw−yv) (Semidirect products of Lie algebras).

[L2]

Levi factors are conjugate by finite products of automorphisms exp⁡(ad⁡n) with n in the nilradical (Malcev conjugacy of Levi subalgebras).

Verification

technique · explicit conjugation
1.1givenL1algebra

Since the action is nonzero, choose v∈V and x∈sl2 with xv≠0. By [L1], [(0,v),(y,w)]=(0,−yv) lies in 0⊕V, and [0⊕V,0⊕V]=0. Therefore (ad⁡(0,v))2=0 and exp⁡(ad⁡(0,v))=1+ad⁡(0,v).

2.1step 1.1algebra

In particular, exp⁡(ad⁡(0,v))(x,0)=(x,−xv). Its second component is nonzero for the chosen pair, so the image subalgebra is not s. An automorphism carries a Levi factor to a Levi factor, so both are Levi subalgebras.

3.1L2step 1.1step 2.1∎

This explicit automorphism is a one-factor instance of the finite products in [L2], with (0,v) in the abelian nilpotent ideal 0⊕V. Thus the example witnesses both literal nonuniqueness and Malcev conjugacy. Selecting one pair from “the action is nonzero” uses no choice family.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedaudited 2026-09-14Open item page →

The BCH group of a nilpotent Lie algebra

Example

Let n be a finite-dimensional nilpotent real Lie algebra. On its underlying vector space set x∗y=BCH⁡(x,y). The BCH series truncates to a polynomial group law with identity 0 and inverse −x; the group is connected and simply connected and has Lie algebra n.

This item is stated under ZF+ACω.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite-dimensional real nilpotent Lie algebra.

[L1]

In exponential coordinates, the BCH series gives the local multiplication wherever the local logarithm is defined (Baker–Campbell–Hausdorff theorem).

[L2]

Under countable choice, every finite-dimensional real Lie algebra has a connected simply connected integration (Lie's third fundamental theorem).

[L3]

The exponential map of a connected simply connected group with nilpotent Lie algebra is a global diffeomorphism; in these coordinates multiplication is the BCH polynomial, which terminates after finitely many bracket lengths (Exponential diffeomorphism for simply connected nilpotent Lie groups).

Verification

technique · global BCH coordinates
1.1L3givenalgebra

If n has class c, every Lie monomial of bracket length greater than c vanishes. Thus the BCH expression supplied globally by [L3] is a finite polynomial. Its universal identities give BCH⁡(x,0)=x=BCH⁡(0,x) and BCH⁡(x,−x)=0.

2.1L1L2L3step 1.1

Let N be the connected simply connected integration supplied by [L2]. By [L3], exp⁡:n→N is a diffeomorphism and the transported global product x∗y=log⁡(exp⁡xexp⁡y) is the truncated BCH polynomial; this agrees with the local formula in [L1]. Associativity, identity 0, and inverse −x follow from the laws of N.

3.1L1step 2.1algebra

The underlying manifold is n≅Rdim⁡n, hence is connected and simply connected, including dimension zero. The antisymmetric part of the quadratic BCH term is [x,y], so differentiating the commutator recovers the original bracket.

4.1L2L3step 3.1algebra∎

In the Heisenberg algebra, (ae+bf+cz)∗(a′e+b′f+c′z)=(a+a′)e+(b+b′)f+(c+c′+12(ab′−ba′))z, because brackets of length three vanish. This is a concrete nonabelian instance. The declared ACω is exactly that inherited through [L2]–[L3]; the finite calculation adds no choice.

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Centerless does not imply semisimple

Counterexample

The two-dimensional affine Lie algebra a=kx⊕ky with [x,y]=y is centerless but solvable. It therefore refutes Centerless implies semisimple.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The displayed nonabelian Lie algebra over a characteristic-zero field.

[L1]

The derived series defines solvability (Derived series and solvable Lie algebras).

[L2]

A finite-dimensional Lie algebra is semisimple when its solvable radical is zero (Semisimple Lie algebras).

Refutation

technique · counterexample
1.1givenalgebra

For u=ax+by, [u,x]=−by,[u,y]=ay. If u is central, both brackets vanish, so a=b=0. Hence Z(a)=0.

1.2L1L2algebra

On the other hand, a(1)=[a,a]=ky and a(2)=[ky,ky]=0. Thus a is solvable by [L1]. As a solvable ideal of itself, its radical is all of a, which is nonzero; by [L2] it is not semisimple.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2∎

Step 1.1 satisfies the proposed centerless hypothesis and step 1.2 fails the semisimplicity conclusion. The witness is nonzero, two-dimensional, and completely explicit; no choice is used.

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

The circle and line have the same Lie algebra but different Lie groups

Counterexample

The connected Lie groups (R,+) and S1 have isomorphic one-dimensional abelian Lie algebras, but they are not isomorphic Lie groups: S1 is compact and R is not.

This item is stated under ZF+ACω.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The usual additive real Lie group and the unit circle under multiplication.

[L1]

Connected integrations of a fixed Lie algebra are discrete central quotients of its simply connected integration (Lie algebras determine connected Lie groups only locally).

Refutation

technique · counterexample
1.1givenalgebra

Both groups are one-dimensional and abelian, so their tangent brackets at the identity are zero. Sending the tangent vector 1∈T0R to i∈T1S1 is therefore an isomorphism of their real Lie algebras. Concretely, the local homomorphism is t↦eit.

1.2givenalgebra

The circle is compact. The open cover {(−m,m):m∈N, m≥1} of R has no finite subcover, so R is not compact. A Lie-group isomorphism is a homeomorphism and preserves compactness. Therefore the groups are not isomorphic.

2.1L1step 1.1step 1.2∎

In the language of [L1], both arise from the simply connected group R: the line uses the zero kernel, while the circle uses the nonzero discrete central kernel 2πZ. Thus the same one-dimensional Lie algebra does not determine the connected group. The declared ACω is propagated from [L1]; the explicit witness and compactness argument introduce no additional choice.

Sources