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 be a finite subintegral morphism of separated finite-type schemes over a field, and let be a set-valued cdh sheaf. For every , its pullbacks along the two projections agree. The fibre product represents pairs of maps to with the same composite to .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , and as stated.
Goal: Prove equality of the two pullbacks.
The diagonal is a cdh covering singleton. The diagonal of a finite subintegral map is a cdh cover
Restriction of a sheaf along a covering singleton is injective. A sheaf restricts injectively to a covering singleton
Proof
Each projection composed with is . Consequently the two pullbacks of restrict along to the same element .
By [F1] and [F2], restriction along 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.