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.

Signed Quiver Flag Convolution And Klr Ext Realization Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

Objective. This companion page works the two smallest cases in which the signs of the signed quiver-flag presentation are visible. In the one-vertex case with no arrows and β=2αi, the incidence variety is P1, its self-fiber-product is P1×P1, and the elementary correspondence acts by the divided difference (f−s1f)/(x1−x2); the square is zero and the mixed relations have signs +1 and −1, so the one-corner convolution algebra is the rank-two nil-Hecke algebra (Equal-color quiver-flag correspondence is nilHecke). For the two-vertex quiver with hij=2, hji=1 and ν=(i,j,i), both arrow directions and a parallel arrow enter the same triple product: subtracting the two sides of the braid relation gives the nonzero native correction −[(x1−x2)2+(x1−x2)(x3−x2)+(x3−x2)2], computed by exact expansion of the crossing operators (Signed two-direction multiedge quiver-flag crossing). Both examples use the definition and relation theorem on signed-quiver-flag-convolution-and-klr-ext-realization; the equal-color presentation isomorphism also uses the geometric PBW theorem.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passOpen item page →

Equal-color quiver-flag correspondence is nilHecke

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice as inherited from the definition and relation suppliers. Take the one-vertex loopless quiver with no arrows, β=2αi and the unique word ν=(i,i). Then E={0}, Fν=Xν=Flag⁡(C2)=P1, dν=1, Zν,ν=P1×P1, and the elementary correspondence τ1 acts on the shifted polynomial summand Pν=k[x1,x2] (unit in degree −1) by the divided difference τ1(f)=f−s1fx1−x2. In particular τ1 is homogeneous of degree −2=−aii, and τ12=0, τ1x1−x2τ1=1, τ1x2−x1τ1=−1; the one-corner convolution algebra is the rank-two nil-Hecke algebra.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the Axiom of Choice; the one-vertex quiver with no arrows; the dimension vector β=2αi; the unique word ν=(i,i); the incidence data of Quiver full-flag incidence varieties and signed geometric KLR generators.

[F1]

Assume AC. Quiver full-flag incidence varieties and signed geometric KLR generators defines Xν={(x,F)∈E×Fν:xh(Fir)⊆Fjr}, dν, Zν,ν, and the normalized elementary generator σ1=τ1=−[Cν,ν]standard in the equal-color case, with Qii=0 and the equal-color mixed relations.

[F2]

Assume AC. Quiver-flag convolution generators satisfy the signed KLR relations supplies, for every finite loopless quiver and every β, the equal-color operator formula τr(f)=(f−srf)/(xr−xr+1), the degree deg⁡τreν=−aii=−2, the square relation τr2eν=Qiieν and the mixed relations τrxr−xr+1τr=1, τrxr+1−xrτr=−1.

[F3]

Relative-position incidence strata give a faithful geometric PBW basis proves faithfulness and the free polynomial basis of elementary crossing products.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice is present only because the consumed definition and relation suppliers inherit it; the explicit P1 cell and localization computations below are finite and choice-free (The Axiom of Choice).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1F1F3given

The data. For this quiver E=⨁h:i→jHom⁡(Vi,Vj)={0}, so Xν=Fν=Flag⁡(C2)=P1 with dν=dim⁡CXν=1 and Zν,ν=Xν×EXν=P1×P1. The convolution algebra is therefore the single corner HBM,G(P1×P1;k), a free module over the polynomial ring k[x1,x2] generated by the diagonal class and the elementary class, by [F3] with S2={1,s1}.

2.1F1F2step 1.1

The normalized elementary action. The relative-position-s1 stratum in P1×P1 is the complement of the diagonal, and it is dense, so its closure is all of P1×P1; at the two torus-fixed points of a P1 fiber the tangent Euler classes are x1−x2 and x2−x1. Hence the standard fundamental class acts by (s1f−f)/(x1−x2), and the normalized class τ1=−[C]standard acts by the displayed divided difference (f−s1f)/(x1−x2), which is polynomial because f−s1f is antisymmetric in x1,x2; this is the finite cellwise localization computation over a characteristic-zero field, using the cellular model of P1.

3.1A1F2F3step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

Direct evaluation gives τ12=0 because D1f is symmetric and hence killed by another divided difference; it also gives τ1x1−x2τ1=1 and τ1x2−x1τ1=−1. The degree is −2. In the abstract nil-Hecke presentation, these mixed relations move dots left and the square relation removes every repeated crossing, so it is spanned by f+gτ1 for f,g∈k[x1,x2]. The two polynomial summands map independently and onto the geometric corner by [F3] and step 1.1. Thus this presentation is isomorphic to the corner, which proves the asserted nil-Hecke identification.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Signed two-direction multiedge quiver-flag crossing

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice as inherited. Take the loopless quiver with two vertices i,j and arrow multiplicities hij=2, hji=1, the dimension vector β=2αi+αj and the word ν=(i,j,i). Then Qij(u,v)=(u−v)3, and the dimension differences are ds1ν−dν=hij−hji=1 and ds2ν−dν=hji−hij=−1. The two triple products of the native braid relation act on the ν-summand by τ2τ1τ2eν=(x2−x3)2s2 D1 (x2−x3)s2eν,τ1τ2τ1eν=(x1−x2)s1 D2 (x1−x2)2s1eν, where D1=(1−s1)/(x1−x2) acts on the word (i,i,j) and D2=(1−s2)/(x2−x3) acts on the word (j,i,i), while the distinct-color crossings act by (x1−x2)2s1 or (x2−x3)s2 on (i,j,i) and by (x2−x3)2s2 or (x1−x2)s1 on the intermediate words. Since ν1=ν3=i, their difference equals the native correction Qij(x1,x2)−Qij(x3,x2)x3−x1=−[(x1−x2)2+(x1−x2)(x3−x2)+(x3−x2)2], a nonzero polynomial whenever hij+hji≥1. Both oriented crossing factors (x1−x2)2 and (x2−x3) occur, so the multiedge multiplicities and both arrow directions enter the correction.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the Axiom of Choice; the two-vertex quiver with hij=2, hji=1; the dimension vector β=2αi+αj; the word ν=(i,j,i); the incidence data, generators and presentation of Quiver full-flag incidence varieties and signed geometric KLR generators.

[F1]

Assume AC. Quiver full-flag incidence varieties and signed geometric KLR generators fixes dν=∑iβi(βi−1)/2+∑a>bhνaνb, the normalized elementary generators σr,τr with τreν=(−1)hνrνr+1σreν for distinct colors, aij=−hij−hji, Qij(u,v)=(−1)hij(u−v)hij+hji and the braid correction [Qνrνr+1(xr,xr+1)−Qνrνr+1(xr+2,xr+1)]/(xr+2−xr) when νr=νr+2.

[F2]

Assume AC. Quiver-flag convolution generators satisfy the signed KLR relations supplies the action formulas: τr(f)=(xr−xr+1)hijsr(f) for distinct colors i=νr≠j=νr+1 and τr(f)=(f−srf)/(xr−xr+1) for equal colors, with sr swapping both the two variables and the two letters.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice is present only because the consumed definition and relation suppliers inherit it; the displayed polynomial expansion is finite and choice-free (The Axiom of Choice).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1F1given

Dimensions and normalizations. With hij=2, hji=1 the defining polynomial is Qij(u,v)=(−1)2(u−v)3=(u−v)3, and the dimension formula gives d(i,j,i)=1+(hji+hij)=4, d(j,i,i)=1+2hij=5 and d(i,i,j)=1+2hji=3; hence ds1ν−dν=1 and ds2ν−dν=−1. The unequal crossing normalization exponent dsrν−dim⁡CCsrν,ν=hνrνr+1 is instead 2 for r=1 and 1 for r=2; it must not be identified with the dimension difference dsrν−dν.

2.1F2step 1.1

The crossing operators. The action formulas of [F2] give, on the relevant words, τ1e(i,j,i)=(x1−x2)2s1, τ2e(i,j,i)=(x2−x3)s2, τ2e(i,i,j)=(x2−x3)2s2, τ1e(j,i,i)=(x1−x2)s1, together with the equal-color divided differences D1 on (i,i,j) and D2 on (j,i,i); this exhibits the two triple products as the displayed composite operators on k[x1,x2,x3].

3.1A1F1F2step 2.1algebra∎

Put x=x1, y=x2, z=x3 and w0=s2s1s2=s1s2s1. In the skew group algebra the two composite operators of step 2.1 expand to A=[(y−z)2(z−y)−(y−z)2(x−y)w0]/(x−z) and B=[(x−y)(y−x)2−(x−y)(y−z)2w0]/(x−z). Their w0 coefficients coincide. Thus A−B=((z−y)3−(x−y)3)/(x−z)=−[(x−y)2+(x−y)(z−y)+(z−y)2], exactly the native correction. It is nonzero of total polynomial degree 2, since its x2 coefficient is −1. This explicit expansion retains both the square factor from hij=2 and the linear factor from hji=1; all divisions represent polynomial operators by [F2].

Sources