Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-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.

Segment intersections and the inversion bound

PDF p. 8: Lemma 3.5, proof paragraphs 2–7

Statement

Let (W,S) be a finite-rank Coxeter system with its real reflection representation on V, roots Φ, positive roots Φ+, dual space Θ, contragredient action, closed fundamental chamber C‾, Tits cone Cone=⋃u∈WuC‾, and set H={Hα:α∈Φ} of distinct root hyperplanes, where Hα={x∈Θ:x(α)=0}. Write ℓ(w) for Coxeter word length. For f,g∈Cone put [f,g]={(1−t)f+tg:0≤t≤1} and (f,g)=[f,g]∖{f,g}. A hyperplane separates f and g when the values of a defining linear functional at them have opposite strict signs.

A hyperplane H∈H separates f and g if and only if H∩(f,g) consists of one point and H does not contain [f,g]. If f∈C‾, g∈wC‾ and h∈(f,g), then ∣{Hα∈H:Hα∩(f,g)={h}}∣≤ℓ(w−1). For arbitrary f,g∈Cone, the set {h∈(f,g):H∩[f,g]={h} for some H∈H} is finite.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

The roots have exactly one of the signs Φ+ and −Φ+, and ∣{α∈Φ+:vα∈−Φ+}∣=ℓ(v) for every v∈W. Root-sign and inversion-length facts

[F2]

Every positive root is a nonnegative linear combination of simple roots. The closed chamber consists of functionals nonnegative on all simple roots, and Cone is the union of its W-translates. Reflecting hyperplanes, fundamental chamber and Tits cone Root-sign and inversion-length facts

[F3]

The dual action satisfies (ux)(v)=x(u−1v); the roots are stable under the W-action. Real Coxeter representation and contragredient notation

[F4]

Separation means opposite strict signs for a nonzero linear functional defining the hyperplane. Separation by a hyperplane

[F5]

The Tits cone is convex. Basic Tits-cone properties

Proof

Given: The finite-rank Coxeter system, representation, chamber, hyperplanes, endpoints and segment notation of the Statement.

Proof technique: direct.

Goal: Prove the separation equivalence, the length bound and finiteness of the specified intersection points.

1.1F4F5given

Segment criterion. If f=g, the open segment is empty and no hyperplane separates the two points, so the equivalence holds. Otherwise, for a defining nonzero linear functional a of H, its value along the segment is (1−t)a(f)+ta(g). This affine function has a zero at exactly one t∈(0,1) precisely when its endpoint values have opposite strict signs: if it is nonconstant, the zero is a(f)/(a(f)−a(g)), and this lies strictly between 0 and 1 exactly under that sign condition; if it is constant, it has either no zeros or all points as zeros. Thus the stated intersection condition is equivalent to separation. Convexity also ensures [f,g]⊆Cone.

2.1F1F2F3step 1.1given

Count all crossings between two specified chamber translates. Suppose f∈C‾ and g∈wC‾. For a separating hyperplane choose a positive root α defining it, possible by [F1]. By [F2], f(α)≥0, so the strict opposite-sign condition gives f(α)>0 and g(α)<0. Write g=wx with x∈C‾. By [F3], g(α)=x(w−1α). If w−1α were positive, [F2] would make this value nonnegative. The root-sign dichotomy therefore makes w−1α negative. Hence every separating hyperplane has a representative in the inversion set {α∈Φ+:w−1α∈−Φ+}. The map from that finite root set to its hyperplanes need not be invoked as injective: the number of separating hyperplanes is at most the number of roots in the set, namely ℓ(w−1).

3.1F2F3step 1.1step 2.1given∎

Fixed point and arbitrary endpoints. If h∈(f,g) and Hα∩(f,g)={h}, then Hα cannot contain [f,g], since f≠g and the open segment contains more than one point. By 1.1 it separates the endpoints, so 2.1 gives the stated bound. For arbitrary endpoints choose u,v∈W with f∈uC‾ and g∈vC‾, and put f′=u−1f, g′=u−1g, and w=u−1v. Then f′∈C‾ and g′∈wC‾. The invertible linear map u−1 carries segments to segments and permutes H: by [F3], u−1Hα=Hu−1α, and roots are stable under W. Consequently 2.1 gives only finitely many separating hyperplanes for f,g. Every point in the final displayed set arises from such a hyperplane by 1.1, and each such hyperplane contributes one point; hence that set is finite. This proves all assertions.

Source notes

The article is cited for attribution of the claims. The local proof counts all separating hyperplanes directly using inversions; it does not rely on the article proof's converse sign implication at boundary points or its induction on chamber length.

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.

Sources