Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Crossing sharpness and subcritical decay for square-lattice FK

Statement

Assume Countable Choice. For every real q≥1, put psd(q)=q/(1+q). The square-lattice free and wired cylinder-limit FK probability laws exist. For every p>psd(q), both have positive percolation probability. For every p<psd(q), there are C(p,q),c(p,q)>0 such that every arbitrary-boundary cylinder-limit FK state ϕ satisfies ϕ(x↔y)≤C(p,q)e−c(p,q)∥x−y∥2(x,y∈Z2). In particular, both percolation probabilities vanish below psd(q) and pc0(q)=pc1(q)=psd(q). These conclusions do not identify the free and wired measures at the critical parameter.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Real q≥1, parameters p∈(0,1), and the square-lattice model and percolation thresholds of Free, wired, and subsequential infinite-volume FK states on the square lattice.

[A1]

Countable Choice, in the sense of The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω), is assumed for the countably additive probability-law and countable coupling constructions below.

[F1]

Under [A1], free and wired finite-box FK laws have countably additive Borel cylinder-limit probability laws (Existence of the free and wired infinite-volume FK limits).

[F2]

Write Dr for the cylinder event of an origin path to ∂Λr within Λr, and πpb for the numerical cylinder weights. With Θb(p)=inf⁡rπpb(Dr), the numerical pressure comparison proves Θ1(t)≤Θ0(p) whenever t<p (Numerical FK cylinder limits and pressure comparison).

[F3]

The numerical threshold construction proves Θ1(t)>0 for every t>psd(q) (Wired FK annuli and the numerical self-dual threshold).

[F4]

Under [A1], the subcritical exponential-decay lemma gives the displayed two-point bound uniformly for every arbitrary-boundary cylinder-limit state whenever p<psd(q) (Subcritical FK exponential connectivity under Countable Choice).

Proof

1.1A1F1F2givenalgebra

By [A1] and [F1] the free and wired probability laws exist. In either law the events Dr decrease with r. Their intersection is precisely the event that the origin cluster is unbounded: connection to every box boundary is equivalent to an unbounded cluster, and every finite path reaching a farther boundary contains an initial path to the nearer boundary. Countable additivity gives continuity from above, hence θb(p,q)=inf⁡rπpb(Dr)=Θb(p). This uses actual existing probability laws, rather than inferring their existence from consistent numerical cylinder weights.

2.1F2F3step 1.1algebra

Fix p>psd(q) and set t=(p+psd(q))/2. Then psd(q)<t<p. By [F2] and [F3], Θ0(p)≥Θ1(t)>0, while [F3] directly gives Θ1(p)>0. Step 1.1 proves positive percolation for both laws at p. No equality of free and wired laws is used.

3.1F4givenstep 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

For p<psd(q) apply [F4]. In particular, each free or wired law satisfies the displayed bound. An origin path to ∂Λr reaches one of its 8r vertices, each of Euclidean norm at least r. A finite union bound gives ϕ(Dr)≤8rC(p,q)e−c(p,q)r→0. Step 1.1 then gives zero percolation. Both defining infima are psd(q), since every parameter above it belongs to each positive-percolation set and none below it does. The bound for all other cylinder-limit states is already exactly [F4].

Remarks

The finite numerical annulus construction and pressure comparison are choice-free. Countable Choice is stated explicitly where the proof requires actual infinite-volume Borel laws and the subcritical countable coupling process. Free/wired threshold coincidence is proved here by comparison across two distinct parameters, without an additional planar threshold-coincidence assumption.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources