Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-11-05 (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.

Double contragredient of a grading-restricted generalized module

Statement

Let M be a grading-restricted generalized module for a conformal vertex algebra, and let M′ be its restricted contragredient from the Definition on this page. The restricted double contragredient M′′=(M′)′ is naturally isomorphic to M as a generalized module; under the evaluation identification on each finite-dimensional generalized weight space, the module actions agree.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The module and restricted contragredient in the unchanged Statement, including the page's joint finite-component convention when it is used.

[F1]

Contragredient construction preserves generalized VOA modules supplies the contragredient module and the unchanged finite-dimensional generalized weight spaces, or joint weight spaces in the component convention.

[F2]

The restricted dual with opposite action is a contragredient module proves that componentwise evaluation eM:M→M′′ is a module isomorphism in the single-module setting, using the actual involution of the opposite-state operator.

[F3]

Restricted contragredient of a generalized VOA module fixes precisely that opposite formula, while Grading-restricted generalized module supplies finite-dimensionality and finite weight support.

Proof

1.1givenF1F3algebra

For every finite-dimensional generalized-weight block, evaluation identifies M[h] with M[h]∗∗. Taking their algebraic direct sum gives a bijection eM:M→M′′, characterized by ⟨eM(m),λ⟩=⟨λ,m⟩. In the joint convention the same construction on M[λ] is a bijection of joint-weight direct sums, by F1. No full algebraic dual of an infinite direct sum is substituted for this restricted dual.

2.1F1F2step 1.1algebra

For a single module F2 proves equivariance for this exact evaluation map. For a joint module, fix j and all the other joint eigenvalues β as in F1's fibre construction. F2 applied to Mj,β says that the restriction of eM commutes with every jth field. The direct-sum formula in step 1.1 is the same fibre evaluation for every j and β, so eM commutes with every component field; it is therefore a module isomorphism in the component convention too.

3.1F1F3step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

For a module map f:M→N, commutation with each Lj(0) means that f preserves each generalized or joint weight block. Thus its restricted transpose f′:N′→M′ is defined, and its double transpose obeys ⟨f′′eM(m),ν⟩=⟨eM(m),f′(ν)⟩=⟨ν,f(m)⟩=⟨eNf(m),ν⟩ for every restricted functional ν. Such functionals separate each weight block, hence f′′eM=eNf. This proves naturality of the module isomorphism.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources