Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31
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.

Under choice, Ornstein's second construction turns a point-finite metric open cover into a locally finite open refinement

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Every point-finite open cover of a metric space has a locally finite open refinement. Consequently every metric open cover has a locally finite open refinement.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Choice, a metric space X, and a point-finite open cover {Cα}α∈A.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice permits the cover to be well ordered and used to select its first eligible member (The Axiom of Choice, The well-ordering theorem).

[F1]

Metric balls are open, and every point has a positive-radius ball inside some cover member (The metric topology: a set is open when every one of its points has a ball around it inside the set; closed means open complement).

[F2]

A locally finite open refinement is the paracompactness refinement of Refinements, locally finite families, point-finite families, and star refinements.

[L1]

Under choice every metric open cover has a point-finite open refinement (Under choice, every open cover of a metric space has a point-finite open refinement).

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1A1F1construct

Well order the point-finite cover. For x∈X let ρx=sup⁡{r>0:B(x,r)⊆Cα for some α}. Put mx=min⁡{1,ρx/4} when ρx<∞, and mx=1 otherwise. Then 0<mx≤1 and B(x,2mx) lies in some cover member: its radius is strictly below ρx. Assign x to the first Cα containing B(x,2mx), and let Cα′ be the union of all B(x,mx) assigned to α.

2.1step 1.1

The selected smaller balls cover X and each lies in its assigned Cα, so {Cα′} is an open refining cover.

2.2step 1.1

Fix x. If Cα′ meets B(x,mx/8), choose a ball B(y,my)⊆Cα′ meeting it. We claim x∈Cα. Otherwise x∉B(y,2my), while intersection gives d(x,y)<my+mx/8; hence my<mx/8≤1/8. Thus the truncation in step 1.1 is inactive at y and ρy=4my. But B(y,5my)⊆B(x,2mx), because d(x,y)+5my<6my+mx/8<7mx/8; the right-hand ball lies in some cover member by step 1.1. This contradicts the definition of ρy. Thus x∈Cα.

3.1step 2.2F2

The input cover is point-finite, so x belongs to only finitely many Cα. Step 2.2 shows that B(x,mx/8) meets only the corresponding finitely many Cα′; hence the new cover is locally finite.

4.1L1F2step 2.1step 3.1discharge-construct∎

Hence {Cα′} is a locally finite open refinement of the point-finite cover. For an arbitrary metric open cover, first apply [L1] and then this construction; refinement is transitive, so the result refines the original cover.

Remarks

In the primary paper, part (B) is applied to the point-finite cover obtained in part (A), with that cover renamed {Cα}. Its local-finiteness test concludes that every new set meeting a fixed small ball has an index α for which x∈Cα; point-finiteness of the input is exactly what turns this conclusion into finiteness. Thus part (B) upgrades part (A) rather than restarting from the original arbitrary cover.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources