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.
The relative root deletion set is the restricted-hyperplane union
Statement
Let be a finite-rank Coxeter system in its canonical real representation , with basis , dual , root system , contragredient action, and Tits cone . For put and . Fix and put , , and . Write , and . Every member of is a hyperplane in , and . The analogous equality holds with in place of .
Statement references
Facts & Assumptions
The Coxeter representation, root hyperplanes and cone are those of Tits cone geometry with its exact interior boundary.
Nonzero restricted evaluations have hyperplane kernels by Annihilators, relative hyperplanes and complexification.
Proof
Given: The objects and hypotheses of the statement. Goal: Establish its conclusion.
The definition of says exactly that evaluation at is nonzero on . Its kernel there is , which is a hyperplane by [F2].
Both and are subsets of . For any such subset , membership in equals membership in . Taking unions over proves both equalities; repeated traces do not change a union. If , the index set is empty and the same argument applies.
Depends on
Dependency tree · 2 levels
Each result is drawn at its shortest distance from this item. Arrows run from prerequisites to the items that use them; this item has a heavier outline. External source nodes link directly to the cited text. The view shows up to two dependency steps; open a prerequisite to continue.