Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
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.

✓ 2 results · all verified · 1 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 1 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Vertex Modules, Rationality, and Logarithmic Regimes: Examples and Counterexamples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

Assuming the Axiom of Choice, the one-dimensional conformal vertex algebra verifies the chosen admissible-module definition of rationality directly. The dual-number example shows why a finite-label constant-field subcategory of vertex-algebra modules need not be semisimple. It has no conformal vector, so it is not a counterexample to any rationality theorem for conformal vertex operator algebras.

Companion: vertex-modules-rational-and-logarithmic-regimes.

Example boundary

The A-page module-construction and grading proofs supply An explicit logarithmic conformal Heisenberg module. It uses a genuine conformal rank-one Heisenberg VOA, with a0=I+N and LF(0)∣E=I/2+N on its lowest two-dimensional space. The full Jacobi identity, lower truncation and finite lower-bounded generalized weights are proved by its A-page suppliers; its Jordan block is calculated here. The unrelated dual-number example remains explicitly nonconformal and is not used to discharge this construction. Triplet/W-algebra classification and modularity remain separately bounded research context.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

An explicit logarithmic conformal Heisenberg module

Example

For the rank-one Heisenberg conformal VOA, take F1=C[x1,x2,…]⊗E with E=Ce0⊕Ce1, Ne1=e0, Ne0=0, and a0=I+N. The positive modes are ar=r∂xr and negative modes are a−r=xr. Its fields are the normal-ordered divided derivatives in the A-page construction, not constant dual-number fields. It is an admissible, grading-restricted logarithmic module, and on its lowest generalized weight space

a0∣E=(1101),LF(0)∣E=(121012).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The concrete zero-mode matrix and oscillator action above.

[F1]

The Heisenberg Jordan Fock family is grading-restricted; it is logarithmic exactly when λ is nonzero proves the full conformal-VOA module construction, module Jacobi, truncation, admissibility and generalized weight spaces, with LF(0)=D+I/2+N at λ=1.

[F2]

Logarithmic generalized module requires grading restriction and a nontrivial Jordan chain for LF(0).

Verification

1.1givenF1F2algebra

In the ordered basis e0,e1, N has matrix (0100) and square zero. Thus (I+N)2/2=I/2+N, giving the two displayed matrices by [F1]. In particular (LF(0)−1/2)e1=e0≠0 and (LF(0)−1/2)e0=0. These are an actual length-two conformal Jordan chain, not just a nonsemisimple action of an unrelated algebra element.

2.1givenF1F2step 1.1algebra∎

On a weighted-degree-d monomial p, LF(0)(p⊗e0)=(d+1/2)p⊗e0 and LF(0)(p⊗e1)=(d+1/2)p⊗e1+p⊗e0. The generalized weights are exactly d+1/2, with finite spaces Pd⊗E and lower bound 1/2, by [F1]. Therefore the module meets every grading restriction and is logarithmic by [F2]. Formally on this pair, exponentiating the nilpotent part terminates and gives zLF(0)(p⊗e1)=zd+1/2(p⊗e1+(log⁡z)p⊗e0); this explains the terminology while the module fields themselves remain the ordinary Laurent fields already proved in [F1].

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passOpen item page →

The one-dimensional vertex operator algebra is rational assuming Choice

Example

Let V=C1 with T=0, Y(1,z)=id⁡V, and conformal vector ω=0 (central charge 0). Assuming the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice), under the admissible-module rationality convention of Rationality in the admissible-module convention, V is rational.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice and the one-dimensional complex vector space V=C1, T=0, Y(1,z)=id⁡V, ω=0, and an arbitrary admissible V-module M.

[F1]

Vertex algebra in the state–field convention: for every a,v∈V, the state field is lower truncated on v.

[F2]

Vertex algebra in the state–field convention: Y(1,z)=id⁡V, T1=0, and Y(a,z)1=ezTa.

[F3]

Vertex algebra in the state–field convention: [T,Y(a,z)]=∂zY(a,z) for every a∈V.

[F4]

Vertex algebra in the state–field convention: for every a,b∈V, some N≥0 satisfies (z−w)N[Y(a,z),Y(b,w)]=0.

[F5]

Conformal vertex algebra of CFT type: the conformal modes satisfy the Virasoro relations, L(−1)=T, and V0=C1 in the CFT-type grading.

[F6]

Module for an ordinary vertex algebra: a module has vacuum action YM(1,z)=id⁡M and satisfies the module Jacobi identity.

[F7]

Admissible module for a vertex operator algebra: an admissible module has M=⨁n≥0M(n) and a(k)MM(n)⊆M(n+r−k−1) for homogeneous a∈Vr.

[F8]

Rationality in the admissible-module convention: rationality means every admissible module is a direct sum of irreducible admissible modules.

[F9]

Every vector space has a basis: assuming AC, every vector space over a field has a basis.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: every family of nonempty sets has a choice function.

Proof

1.1givenF1F2F3F4algebra

Every state is a scalar multiple of 1. The identity field is lower truncated by [F1], and [F2] gives the vacuum and creation identities. Translation covariance holds because both sides are zero by [F3]; locality holds because the identity commutes with itself by [F4]. Thus V satisfies the vertex-algebra axioms.

1.2F6F7givenalgebra

Every state is a=λ1. Linearity and the vacuum property in [F6] give YM(a,z)=λid⁡M. Hence every graded subspace of M is a V-submodule, and each M(n) in [F7] is a submodule.

2.1givenF5step 1.1algebra

Since Y(ω,z)=0, all L(n)=0 and the Virasoro relations hold with central charge 0; also L(−1)=0=T. The grading is V0=V=C1 and Vn=0 for n>0, so V is conformal of CFT type by [F5].

3.1A1F7F8F9step 1.2step 2.1∎

If M=0, it is the empty direct sum of simple modules. Otherwise, for each n with M(n)≠0, [F9] gives a nonempty set of bases of M(n); [A1] chooses one basis in every such degree. Each basis line is a one-dimensional admissible submodule concentrated in degree n, hence is simple, and the direct sum of all these lines is M. Thus every admissible module is completely reducible, which is rationality by [F8].

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Finite simple labels alone do not imply a semisimple module category

Statement refuted

The statement “a finite number of simple-module isomorphism classes forces a semisimple module category” is false for vertex-algebra module subcategories.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The dual-number algebra A=C[ε]/(ε2) with its usual unital, commutative multiplication. Equip V=A with T=0 and Y(a,z)b=ab. A finite-dimensional unital left A-module means a finite-dimensional complex vector space M with a unital algebra homomorphism ρ:A→End⁡C(M). Let C be the full subcategory consisting of the constant-field V-modules obtained from these actions by YM(a,z)=ρ(a). Its morphisms are all V-module homomorphisms between these objects. Say that C is semisimple if every object is a direct sum of simple objects.

[F1]

Vertex algebra in the state–field convention: the vertex-algebra axioms are lower truncation, vacuum and creation, translation covariance, and locality.

[F2]

Module for an ordinary vertex algebra: a module has lower-truncated fields, vacuum action, and the formal module Jacobi identity.

[F3]

Formal delta substitution identity for module Jacobi: the difference of the first two module Jacobi delta expansions is the formal delta expansion on the right.

[F4]

Conformal vertex algebra of CFT type: CFT type requires a direct grading with V0=C1 and L(0)-eigenspaces defining the degrees.

[F5]

Module for an ordinary vertex algebra: a submodule is a linear subspace stable under every module mode; a simple module is nonzero with no proper nonzero submodule; semisimple means an internal direct sum of simple submodules.

Proof

1.1givenF1algebra

Since A is unital, commutative, and associative, the constant field assignment Y(a,z)b=ab has only the mode a(−1)b=ab and all other modes zero. It is lower truncated; the vacuum and creation identities hold because 1b=b; translation covariance holds because T=0 and the field is constant; and locality holds because multiplication operators commute. Thus V is a vertex algebra by [F1].

1.2F2F3givenalgebra

For any finite-dimensional unital A-module (M,ρ), set YM(a,z)=ρ(a), a constant field. It is lower truncated and satisfies the vacuum axiom. In its module Jacobi identity, associativity gives ρ(a)ρ(b)=ρ(ab)=ρ(b)ρ(a), so the left side is (α−β)ρ(ab), where α and β are the first two displayed delta terms; the right side is γρ(ab), where γ is the third term. Identity [F3] gives α−β=γ, so this is a V-module by [F2]. Conversely, by the definition of C, its objects are exactly these unital A-modules.

1.3givenF5algebra

For a constant-field object, the only potentially nonzero mode is a(−1)M=ρ(a), so its V-submodules are exactly its A-submodules. Let S be a nonzero simple object of C in the sense of [F5]. The subspace εS is an A-submodule. It cannot equal S, since then ε2S=εS=S would contradict ε2=0 and S≠0. Simplicity therefore gives εS=0, so the action factors through A/(ε)≅C. Every one-dimensional subspace is then a submodule; simplicity forces dim⁡S=1. Conversely, the one-dimensional module with ε acting by zero is simple. Hence C has exactly one simple isomorphism class.

2.1givenF5step 1.3algebra

In the regular module A, the subspace εA=Cε and quotient A/εA≅C are both the simple module just described, giving 0→Cε→A→C→0. If it split as A-modules, A would be a direct sum of two modules annihilated by ε, forcing multiplication by ε on A to be zero; but ε⋅1=ε≠0. Thus this extension does not split, and C is not semisimple by [F5].

3.1F4givenstep 1.1algebra∎

For every candidate conformal vector ω∈V, the field Y(ω,z) is constant, so in Y(ω,z)=∑nL(n)z−n−2 the only possibly nonzero mode is L(−2) and L(0)=0. Its zero eigenspace is all of V, which has dimension two, not C1; hence no conformal vector makes this a CFT-type algebra under [F4]. The example is therefore an algebraic module-category counterexample, not a counterexample to a rationality theorem for conformal vertex operator algebras.

Sources