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.

✓ 1 result · all verified · 0 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.

Equivariant Constructible Perverse Foundations Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

Objective. This companion page works the smallest nontrivial instance of the equivariant constructible calculus of equivariant-constructible-perverse-foundations: the multiplicative group C× acting trivially on a point. The finite Stiefel approximations identify the equivariant Ext groups with the cohomology of the complex projective spaces PN−1 in the stable range, so Ext⁡Gm(k,k) is k in every nonnegative even degree and zero otherwise: degreewise finite, with infinite-dimensional total Ext, and the forgetful restriction to the ordinary point is not derived fully faithful.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

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

Equivariant Ext of a point is degreewise finite and not total finite

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice) and let G=C×=GL⁡1(C) act trivially on the point X=pt⁡, in the setting of Equivariant constructible derived category of complex varieties (Invertible matrices and the general linear group GL⁡n(F), Algebraic group actions, orbit maps, orbit subschemes and scheme-theoretic stabilizers). Let k be a field of characteristic zero and let k also denote the constant equivariant object. Then Ext⁡Gm(k,k)≅{k,m≥0 even,0,otherwise. Hence the Ext groups are degreewise finite-dimensional but their total direct sum ⨁mExt⁡Gm(k,k) is infinite-dimensional. The forgetful restriction to the ordinary point is not derived fully faithful.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice; the coefficient field k of characteristic zero; the group G=C× acting trivially on the point; the finite Stiefel approximations of General linear Stiefel approximations stabilize bounded constructible Hom with UN=CN∖{0}, BN=Gr⁡1(CN), rN=2(N−1) and XN=UN/C×.

[F1]

For the trivial action on the point, UN=Inj⁡(C,CN) is the full-rank frame space and XN=(UN×pt⁡)/G=UN/C× is the associated quotient; the map UN→XN is the C×-bundle of the construction, and QN(k) is the constant sheaf kXN (General linear Stiefel approximations stabilize bounded constructible Hom, Equivariant constructible derived category of complex varieties).

[F2]

The bounded Hom comparison gives Ext⁡Gm(k,k)≅Hom⁡XN(QN(k),QN(k)[m]) whenever m≤rN (General linear Stiefel approximations stabilize bounded constructible Hom).

[F3]

The graph charts identify Gr⁡1(CN) with PN−1 (Stiefel spaces, Grassmannians, and tautological bundles, Complex projective space and its holomorphic charts). The cell construction needed by CW complex with closure finiteness and weak topology is given explicitly in step 1.2; it is not supplied by either definition.

[F4]

Cellular cochains with local coefficients compute singular cohomology (Cellular cochains compute cohomology with local coefficients); on a CW complex with cells only in even dimensions the cellular cochain differential is zero, so Hm(PN−1;k)≅k for even m with 0≤m≤2(N−1) and vanishes otherwise.

[F5]

The equivariant Ext theorem gives degreewise finiteness and vanishing in sufficiently negative degrees for bounded constructible objects, and its range bookkeeping is the same finite-resolution comparison (Equivariant constructible Ext is degreewise finite and compatible with characteristic zero scalars).

[F6]

On the ordinary point, Hom⁡Db(pt⁡)(k,k[m])≅k for m=0 and vanishes otherwise: a bounded complex of finite-dimensional vector spaces concentrated in degree zero has Hom complex concentrated in degree zero.

[F7]

For a metric space with contractible-open neighbourhood basis, constant k-sheaf cohomology agrees with singular cohomology (Locally contractible metric spaces have singular constant sheaf cohomology). Also Hom⁡(kX,F)=Γ(X,F): a sheaf map is determined by the image of 1, and that section gives a map by locally constant scalar multiplication. Applying a k-linear injective replacement therefore gives Hom⁡D(X)(kX,kX[m])=Hm(X,kX) (Analytic field sheaves have injective derived models).

[A1]

AC is present only because the consumed suppliers [F1], [F2], [F4], [F5] and [F7] assume it; the projective-space cell computation is finite and choice-free (The Axiom of Choice).

Proof technique: direct.

Verification

1.1F1

The group C× acts trivially on pt⁡, and the frame space is UN=CN∖{0}; the quotient UN/C× is the space of complex lines in CN, i.e. PN−1. Under the resolution triple, the constant equivariant object k corresponds to the pair (k, kPN−1) because the pullback of k along UN→pt⁡ is the constant sheaf kUN, which descends along the C×-bundle to kPN−1. So QN(k)=kXN=kPN−1.

1.2F3F4F7

The finite cells. Use the filtration P0⊂P1⊂⋯⊂PN−1 by coordinate subspaces. For j≥1, the map from the closed unit ball in Cj to Pj given by v↦[v:1−∥v∥2] sends its boundary to Pj−1 by v↦[v:0], and is a homeomorphism on the interior to the affine chart complementary to Pj−1; its inverse chart coordinate is z↦z/1+∥z∥2. The adjunction space formed by attaching this ball to Pj−1 maps continuously and bijectively to Pj. It is compact and the target is Hausdorff by [F3], so this map is a homeomorphism. Induction gives a finite CW structure with one cell in each degree 0,2,…,2(N−1) and no odd cells. Its cellular cochain differentials vanish; [F4] consequently gives singular cohomology k in those even degrees and zero otherwise. Projective space is metrizable (embed a line as its orthogonal projection matrix) and its smooth ball charts give contractible-open bases; [F7] identifies this computation with constant-sheaf cohomology and hence with Hom⁡(k,k[m]).

2.1F2F4F5F7step 1.2

Fix m≥0. Choose N with rN=2(N−1)≥m, so that the comparison range of [F2] applies; then Ext⁡Gm(k,k)≅Hom⁡PN−1(k,k[m])≅Hm(PN−1;k) by [F7] and step 1.2, which is k for even m and 0 for odd m. For m<0 choose any N with 2(N−1)≥∣m∣; the same comparison applies and Hm(PN−1;k)=0 because a CW complex has no negative cohomology. Hence Ext⁡Gm(k,k)≅k for even m≥0 and vanishes otherwise, which is the displayed computation.

3.1F5step 2.1

The computation of step 2.1 is degreewise finite: each group is either k or 0. Infinitely many even degrees are nonzero, namely all m=2j with j≥0, so the total direct sum ⨁mExt⁡Gm(k,k) contains a copy of k in infinitely many degrees and is infinite-dimensional.

4.1givenA1F6step 2.1∎

On the ordinary point, [F6] gives Hom⁡Db(pt⁡)(k,k[2])=0, while the equivariant group Ext⁡G2(k,k) is k by step 2.1. The restriction functor to the ordinary point would have to induce the comparison map Ext⁡G2(k,k)→Hom⁡pt⁡(k,k[2]) on these Hom groups, and this map cannot be injective because its target is zero and its source is nonzero; hence restriction is not derived fully faithful. This proves all three assertions. AC is present only as recorded in [A1].

Remarks

  • The example exhibits exactly the two phenomena the equivariant Ext theorem separates: degreewise finiteness holds, while total finiteness fails already for the trivial action of C× on a point, where Ext⁡G2j(k,k)≅k for every j≥0.

  • Restriction to the ordinary point is conservative but not derived fully faithful; the class in Ext⁡G2(k,k) is invisible after forgetting the group action.

Sources