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.
Constant-term period of the triangle lattice potential
Example
In , take . With the coefficient of , its formal classical period is This computation is only a Laurent constant-term identity. It makes no Gromov-Witten or mirror-equality claim, and the unmarked value is not asserted to converge.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Laurent polynomial ring over , the potential , and the formal variable .
Intrinsic mirror algebra data and classical period: for a Laurent algebra with basis and unit , the trace coefficient is the Laurent constant-term operator, so .
The three summands of are , , and , each occurring with coefficient .
Proof
A term in the expansion of is determined by nonnegative integers counting the choices of , , and , with . That term is .
The term contributes to exactly when and , hence exactly when . This forces ; if , the constant term is zero.
For , the multinomial theorem gives ordered choices with copies of each summand, and each choice contributes the constant monomial with coefficient . Thus , including ; substituting these coefficients into [F1] gives the displayed period.
Remarks
The first nonconstant terms are . They are finite coefficient checks of the formula; no geometric interpretation is being asserted here.