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.
Assuming countable choice, every first countable space is Fréchet–Urysohn; in ZF every Fréchet–Urysohn space is sequential
Statement
Assume countable choice. Every first countable space is Fréchet–Urysohn. In ZF, every Fréchet–Urysohn space is sequential.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A topological space .
Under countable choice, first countability gives for every (Assuming Countable Choice, in a first countable space sequential closure equals closure and sequential continuity at a point equals continuity there, The Axiom of Countable Choice ()).
A space is Fréchet--Urysohn when for every subset , and it is sequential when every sequentially closed subset is closed (Fréchet–Urysohn spaces and sequential spaces).
Proof
Under countable choice, [L1] is exactly the defining equality for a first countable space to be Fréchet–Urysohn.
Now suppose is Fréchet–Urysohn and is sequentially closed. Then , because the constant sequence gives and sequential closedness gives the reverse inclusion.
Fréchet–Urysohnness gives , so is closed. Therefore is sequential.
Depends on
Fréchet–Urysohn spaces and sequential spaces
Assuming Countable Choice, in a first countable space sequential closure equals closure and sequential continuity at a point equals continuity there
The Axiom of Countable Choice ()
The sequential closure is contained in the closure, continuity implies sequential continuity, and sequential limits need not be unique