Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)
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.

Calibration of an arbitrary family of simple-system entropies

Statement

Let I be a nonempty set of primitive simple-system labels containing a distinguished meter label m. Assume every finite separated product is explicitly represented by its finitely many tagged elementary factors; positive scaling and finite product are the only identifications. Suppose the join-closed family satisfies the hypotheses of Contact calibrators under explicit join coherence, and fix a strict meter pair z0≺≺z1 in Γm. Assume the Axiom of Choice. Then one can choose, for every i∈I, an additive constant and positive scale for its same-type entropy so that

S((t1i1,x1),…,(tnin,xn))=∑ℓ=1ntℓSiℓ(xℓ)

is additive, extensive, and characterizes every same-composition comparison on every finite separated product. No conclusion is asserted for transitions that change composition.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The explicit finite-factor family, common contact branch, strict meter pair, and Axiom of Choice.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: every family of nonempty sets admits a choice function; it selects the reference states, entropy representatives, and calibrator data used below.

[F1]

Contact calibrators under explicit join coherence: for each pair of simple types in the join-closed family, strict calibrator endpoints exist and their reversible pair relation identifies the two reference increments in signed comparison.

[F2]

Additive extensive representation of compound comparison: once a type and its scaled products have CH, a finite real additive extensive entropy represents their equal-mass comparisons.

[F3]

Signed comparison for forward-sector relations and Spectator cancellation without comparison completeness: signed comparison is translation-invariant and additive, agrees with ordinary comparison on nonnegative equal-mass maps, and permits common-spectator cancellation.

Proof

Given: [A1], [F1]–[F3].

1.1A1F1F2choose

Use the positive type normalization in Forward-sector hypotheses for a simple state domain whenever invoking [F2]; state entropies evaluate represented maps J(x), and their unit-label entropy density is Si(x)/wΓi. Apply [F2] to the meter type and choose its entropy Sm so Sm(z0)=0 and Sm(z1)=1. Set the meter reference to rm=z0, and use [A1] to choose a reference state ri and one same-type entropy representative for every i≠m. For each i≠m, use [F1] to choose calibrator states ai,bi∈Γi and ci,di∈Γm such that ai≺≺bi, ci≺≺di, and (ai,di)∼(bi,ci); also choose ri∈Γi. For the meter label set am=cm=z0 and bm=dm=z1; the two pairs (z0,z1) and (z1,z0) are the same two-copy meter compound up to permutation. Write Si0 for the selected entropy representative, with Sm0=Sm, and put Δi=Si0(bi)−Si0(ai)>0 and μi=Sm(di)−Sm(ci)>0. Define Si(x):=μiΔi(Si0(x)−Si0(ri)). Then Si(ri)=0 and Si(bi)−Si(ai)=μi, matching the meter entropy increment across the chosen calibrator endpoints. For i=m, Δm=μm=1, so this agrees with the fixed meter normalization.

2.1A1step 1.1construct

For a finite separated compound A with factors (tℓiℓ,xℓ), define S(A):=∑ℓtℓSiℓ(xℓ). The sum is finite and invariant under reordering; concatenating compounds adds the sums, and scaling every amount by t>0 multiplies it by t. The explicit-factor convention in the Statement therefore makes S well-defined, additive, and extensive.

3.1A1F1F2F3step 1.1step 2.1algebra

Fix a composition with amounts Mi for finitely many labels and let A,B be two states of that same composition. For a state x of type i, put si(x):=Si(x)−Si(ai)μi. The same-type entropy representation and the CH for type i show J(x)∼s(1−si(x))J(ai)+si(x)J(bi). Indeed, the signed difference has total coefficient zero and Si-value zero, so its positive and negative parts have equal mass and entropy and therefore compare both ways by [F2]. The calibrator relation gives (J(bi)−J(ai))∼s(J(di)−J(ci)) by taking the signed difference of (ai,di)∼(bi,ci) and canceling common terms with [F3]. Add and scale these identities over the finitely many factors of A. With qi(A):=∑ℓ: iℓ=itℓsi(xℓ), the resulting signed map is A∼s∑iMiJ(ai)+∑iqi(A)(J(di)−J(ci)), where the sums range over the finite support of the composition. The same holds for B. Since they have the same composition, the reference base cancels, and B−A is signed-equivalent to the finite meter map D:=∑i(qi(B)−qi(A))(J(di)−J(ci)). Extend the meter entropy linearly to raw finite signed coefficient maps using density Sm(z)/wΓm at a meter raw tag (Γm,z); in particular its value on J(z) is Sm(z). Then Sm(D)=∑i(qi(B)−qi(A))μi=S(B)−S(A). The positive and negative parts of D have equal mass. If S(A)≤S(B), the same-type entropy representation [F2] for finite meter products gives D−≺D+, hence D compares in the forward signed direction. Translation, addition, and ordinary-order compatibility [F3] transfer this to A≺B. Conversely, if A≺B, the same signed equivalences and translation in [F3] give D−≺D+. The meter representation in [F2] then forces Sm(D)=S(B)−S(A)≥0. Reversing the entropy inequality gives the reverse comparison. Thus S characterizes every same-composition comparison. Each particular comparison uses only finitely many labels; no infinite sum or uncountable product occurs.

4.1A1step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

The meter normalization fixes the multiplicative unit. Changing the chosen reference state for type i changes only its additive constant; on a finite compound these constants contribute amount-weighted conserved-type offsets. This proves the stated freedom and completes the construction.

Remarks

AC is used only for simultaneous reference-state, entropy-representative, and calibrator choices over the arbitrary label set I. Cross-composition monotonicity requires the additional cost and offset hypotheses developed later.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources