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.
Equinumerous sets, and
Definition
Let and be sets (Injection, surjection, bijection for the terminology).
- and are equinumerous, written , if there exists a bijection .
- is dominated by , written , if there exists an injection .
- abbreviates: and not .
Remarks
-
behaves like an equivalence relation. It is reflexive ( is a bijection), symmetric (the inverse of a bijection is a bijection) and transitive (a composition of bijections is a bijection). The careful statement is that these three properties hold for all sets, and that restricted to any set of sets is an equivalence relation on that set. It is not a relation on "the set of all sets", which does not exist; the reflexivity, symmetry and transitivity statements are schemas about arbitrary sets, which is all any argument below uses.
-
is reflexive and transitive, for the same reasons, and implies both and . The converse, that and together give , is a theorem and not a triviality: it is The Schröder-Bernstein theorem, and it is proved without any use of choice.
-
Subsets. implies , since the inclusion map is injective. The reverse fails badly for infinite sets: the successor map is a bijection , being injective and never zero (The von Neumann naturals form a Peano system) and hitting every nonzero natural (Every nonzero natural number is a successor), so and a proper subset can be equinumerous with the whole.
-
is the library's substitute for "has the same number of elements", stated without introducing cardinal numbers. Everything on this page is phrased with , and alone, so no theory of cardinals is presupposed.