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.
External geometric properties of the actual motivic comparison fiber
PDF p. 4: Motivic dimension vanishing
Statement
For a prime field and , define the actual comparison fiber It is a finitary Nisnevich sheaf, satisfies and pro-cdh descent on Noetherian -schemes, and for every -algebra and finitely generated nilpotent ideal one has
Source contract
Given: The actual complexes and comparison of External prime-field cdh comparison and cdh dimension bound, with prime field and nonnegative weight.
Goal: Import exactly the geometric hypotheses later normalized for the dimension criterion.
[F1] EM Proposition8.12, with its proof, gives all the stated properties of this specified fiber; Theorem8.2 is its pro-cdh ingredient.
External input
Import [F1] under the recorded hypotheses and reading limits. Throughout this package and its dimension-criterion application, pro-cdh descent means the explicit degreewise convention in EM Theorem 8.2, footnote 14: every cohomology group of the levelwise total fiber for an abstract blowup square and its infinitesimal thickenings is zero as a pro abelian group. The source's additional comparison with cartesianness in the unbounded category is not imported. The dimension criterion's proof needs only this degreewise condition. In particular, no degreewise extraction from vanishing K-groups is used. The characteristic-zero derived de Rham and characteristic- syntomic-rigidity arguments underlying the relative bound, and the pro-cdh machinery, remain explicit imported foundations. The local argument below checks their application and the shift required by the criterion instead of claiming to reprove them.
Depends on
- External prime-field cdh comparison and cdh dimension bound
- Elmanto–Morrow motivic complex input
- Elden Elmanto and Matthew Morrow, Motivic cohomology of equicharacteristic schemes · Proposition8.12 p.57 and its proof p.58; Theorem8.2 p.54, footnote14, and its proof p.55; Theorem8.7 p.55 for identification of the intended fiber
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.
External dependencies
For j≥0 and a prime field F, W(j)=fib(Z(j)_mot→Z(j)_cdh) is a finitary Nisnevich sheaf, has L_cdhW(j)=0, satisfies pro-cdh descent on Noetherian F-schemes, and W(j)(A,I)∈D≤j for every F-algebra A and finitely generated nilpotent ideal I.
Hypotheses: Prime-field F-schemes, weight j≥0. The nilpotent-relative statement is for F-algebras with finitely generated nilpotent ideal. In applying the criterion A is Noetherian, so finite generation holds automatically.
Reading limits: Read the full statement on p57 and its proof on p58. Also read the pro-cdh theorem statement p54 and its proof p55. The proof of8.12 cites characteristic-zero derived de Rham descriptions or characteristic-p syntomic rigidity; these substantial inputs and their pro-cdh foundations are imported, not reconstructed. Use the safe explicit proposition bound≤j, not a stronger bound suggested by isolated wording in its proof.
Sources
- Elden Elmanto and Matthew Morrow, Motivic cohomology of equicharacteristic schemes · Proposition8.12 p.57 and its proof p.58; Theorem8.2 p.54, footnote14, and its proof p.55; Theorem8.7 p.55 for identification of the intended fiber