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.
If and then ; and if , and then
Statement
Let .
- If and , then .
- If , and , then .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Integers .
and are coprime exactly when , and this holds exactly when for some (Coprime integers: , and are coprime if and only if for some integers ; and in that case the only common divisors of and are and , Common divisor, and the greatest common divisor , with the convention ).
Divisibility is reflexive and transitive; if and then for all ; and implies (Divisibility is reflexive and transitive on , and is linear: if and then for all integers ; also implies , and ).
means for some (Divisibility in : when for some integer ).
is a commutative ring: addition and multiplication are associative and commutative, , and multiplication distributes over addition (The integers form a commutative ring, Arithmetic on the integers).
Proof
Claim 1. Assume and , and fix with .
Claim 2. Assume , and . Write with .
Multiplying by gives , using associativity, commutativity and distributivity.
Now , hence by [L3]; and , hence by [L3]. Applying linearity to these two with coefficients and gives .
Then , and by [L2], so claim 1 applied with , , in place of , , gives .
Write ; then , so .
Remarks
-
No primality is used. Claim 1 is exactly the statement usually met as Euclid's lemma with prime; what the proof needs is coprimality of with , and primality of enters only later, as a way of guaranteeing that coprimality. This is why the lemma is homed here rather than with the primes.
-
Coprimality is essential in both claims. Without it, while divides neither factor ( while and : dividing a product does not force dividing a factor, and the coprimality hypothesis is what fails ↗); and , but .
Depends on
Coprime integers:
and are coprime if and only if for some integers ; and in that case the only common divisors of and are and
is symmetric and unchanged by signs: ; moreover , , , and unless
Common divisor, and the greatest common divisor , with the convention
Divisibility is reflexive and transitive on , and is linear: if and then for all integers ; also implies , and
Divisibility in : when for some integer
The integers form a commutative ring
Arithmetic on the integers