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.

A Berge cycle bounds the union of its hyperedges

Statement

Let r≥2 and let e0,…,et−1 be the distinct edges of a Berge cycle of length t≥2 in a finite r-uniform hypergraph. Then ∣⋃i<tei∣≤(r−1)t.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

Berge cycles, incidence graphs and girth defines a Berge cycle using distinct vertices xi∈ei∩ei+1, cyclically. r-uniform hypergraphs and complete balanced r-partite r-graphs K⁽ʳ⁾_s,…,s gives ∣ei∣=r, and The cardinality | A| of a finite set interprets the finite cardinalities.

[F2]

Double counting: ∑_x ∈ X| Rₓ| = | R| = ∑_y ∈ Y| Rʸ| for a relation between finite sets states that for finite sets X,Y and a relation R⊆X×Y, the sum of the row-fibre cardinalities and the sum of the column-fibre cardinalities both equal ∣R∣. The sum ∑_i ∈ S aᵢ over a finite index set, and its product form defines these natural-valued sums independently of enumeration, with reindexing and constant-summand clauses.

[F3]

Clauses 1--4 of Laws of finite sums and products in ℕ, and ι(∑_k<n aₖ) = ∑_k<n ι(aₖ) give additivity, constant sums, splitting and monotonicity for finite sums of natural numbers. Applying them to an enumeration as in The sum ∑_i ∈ S aᵢ over a finite index set, and its product form gives the corresponding laws for a finite index set; a finite list may be extended by zeros to a sequence on N.

Proof

Given: The hypotheses of the statement.

Goal: Its asserted conclusion.

1.1F1F2

Put U=⋃i<tei and I={0,…,t−1}. These are finite, with ∣I∣=t. Define R={(v,i)∈U×I:v∈ei} and m(v)=∣{i∈I:v∈ei}∣ for v∈U. The row fibre at v has size m(v) and the column fibre at i is ei, of size r. Double counting therefore gives ∑v∈Um(v)=∣R∣=∑i∈Ir=rt.

2.1step 1.1F2F3algebra

Every v∈U lies in at least one displayed edge, so m(v)≥1 and d(v)=m(v)−1 is a natural number satisfying m(v)=1+d(v). Additivity and the constant-summand law yield rt=∑v∈U(1+d(v))=∣U∣+∑v∈Ud(v).

3.1F1F2F3step 2.1algebra∎

Each cycle vertex xi belongs to the two distinct edges ei,ei+1, so d(xi)≥1, also when t=2. Enumerate U with the t distinct cycle vertices first. By splitting the sum after these vertices, monotonicity and the constant-summand law give ∑v∈Ud(v)≥t, since the remaining terms are nonnegative. Thus ∣U∣+t≤rt=(r−1)t+t, and cancellation gives ∣U∣≤(r−1)t.

Depends on

Used by · 1

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.