Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-generatedProof: 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.

Sections match across a finite subintegral cover

PDF p. 5: HK18 Theorem 1.4

Statement

Let p:T→X be a finite subintegral morphism of separated finite-type schemes over a field, and let F be a set-valued cdh sheaf. For every s∈F(T), its pullbacks along the two projections T×XT⇉T agree. The fibre product represents pairs of maps to T with the same composite to X.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: p, F and s as stated.

Goal: Prove equality of the two pullbacks.

[F1]

The diagonal Δ:T→T×XT is a cdh covering singleton. The diagonal of a finite subintegral map is a cdh cover

[F2]

Restriction of a sheaf along a covering singleton is injective. A sheaf restricts injectively to a covering singleton

Proof

technique · Compare after restriction to the diagonal
1.1given

Each projection composed with Δ is id⁡T. Consequently the two pullbacks of s restrict along Δ to the same element s.

2.1F1F2step 1.1∎

By [F1] and [F2], restriction along Δ is injective. The two pullbacks are therefore equal.

Depends on

Used by · 1

Dependency tree · 3 levels

Arrows run from prerequisites to the items that use them. External source nodes link directly to the cited text. The view shows up to three dependency steps; open a prerequisite to continue.