Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-13
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.

The total Cartan-Eilenberg complex computes the derived composite

Statement

Let F:A→B and G:B→C be additive left-exact functors, with enough injectives in A,B, and suppose F sends injectives to G-acyclic objects. Supply an injective resolution datum I at A, write I∙=I(A)del, and supply a Cartan–Eilenberg resolution F(I∙)→J. Then the augmentation GF(I∙)⟶Tot⁡(GJ) is a quasi-isomorphism, and consequently Hn(Tot⁡(GJ))=RIn(GF)(A) via this canonical comparison. One may suppress the subscript and obtain resolution-independent naturality only under DC or with supplied change-of-resolution comparison maps and homotopies. All relative acyclicity assertions use the displayed supplied columns or their supplied comparison identifications.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The functors, acyclicity condition and supplied resolutions in the statement.

[F1]

F(I∙) is termwise G-acyclic and its cohomology computes the right derived objects of F relative to the displayed supplied resolution (Applying F gives a termwise G-acyclic complex).

[F2]

The first hypercohomology sequence computes the hyperderived total target from termwise derived objects (First hypercohomology spectral sequence).

[F3]

Its bottom edge is induced by the augmentation of the original functor-applied complex (Hypercohomology edge maps are canonical).

[F4]

RIn(GF)(A) is defined as Hn(GF(I∙)) for the named supplied injective datum I at A (Right derived objects relative to supplied injective resolution data).

Proof

1.1F1F2

Apply F2 to G and the complex F(I∙). Its first page is E1q,p=RpG(F(Iq)). F1 makes this zero for p>0; for p=0 left exactness identifies it with GF(Iq) and the d1 is its cochain differential. Thus the second page has only the row p=0, equal to Hq(GF(I∙)).

2.1F2F3step 1.1

Every differential from page two onward has zero source or target off that row, so the page is stationary. In target degree n its finite filtration has only one potentially nonzero quotient, at (n,0); all earlier successive quotients vanish and the last filtration term is zero. Therefore its bottom edge Hn(GF(I∙))→Hn(Tot⁡(GJ)) is an isomorphism. F3 identifies this exact edge with the augmentation map, proving that augmentation is a quasi-isomorphism.

3.1F2F4step 2.1∎

F4 identifies the source cohomology with RIn(GF)(A), and nowhere is F(I∙) treated as a resolution of F(A). Under DC, or when the relevant change-of-resolution comparisons and homotopies are supplied, this relative identification is independent of I and natural, so the subscript may then be suppressed. At n=0 it agrees with the left-exact augmentation kernel identification, and zero terms or zero complexes satisfy the same one-row argument.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources