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.
Split two-group interval gluing with a nontrivial action
Example
Let , , , and . Let be the ordered interval with vertices and edges , decomposed into those two edges with intersection the vertex . Give every field unit weight. Each edge and the full interval have higher gauging sum . Each relative edge amplitude at the unique boundary field is . The gluing contraction has boundary mass and gives again; discarding that second gauge stabilizer would change the contraction.
Example references
Facts & Assumptions
Given: the split finite data, interval decomposition and unit weights.
Finite 2-group homotopy gauging and cochain gluing gives , relative factor , and higher gluing.
Verification
A single edge has , hence and two edge-label backgrounds, giving . The full two-edge interval has , hence and four independently chosen edge-label backgrounds, again giving . There are no faces or tetrahedra imposing further conditions.
The shared point has and one background. Each relative edge has two extensions, with relative normalizer , so its amplitude is . The boundary contraction is , equal to the full sum. The sign action remains in the gauge transformations; the count uses the complete higher formula, which applies to this nontrivial action.