The article argues that modern mathematical literature contains subtle but significant gaps—ranging from reliance on non-canonical constructions to unstated signThe article argues that modern mathematical literature contains subtle but significant gaps—ranging from reliance on non-canonical constructions to unstated sign

Formal Proof Systems Reveal Overlooked Ambiguities in Advanced Mathematics

2025/12/12 02:00

Abstract

  1. Acknowledgements & Introduction

2. Universal properties

3. Products in practice

4. Universal properties in algebraic geometry

5. The problem with Grothendieck’s use of equality.

6. More on “canonical” maps

7. Canonical isomorphisms in more advanced mathematics

8. Summary And References

Summary And References

Whilst I am not making any claims about errors in the literature or holes in arguments which cannot be filled in after some work, I am arguing that these holes do exist, and that new mathematics might need to be done by formalisers in order to fill in these holes in an efficient way. The holes are of two kinds. Firstly there is the issue of people making constructions or proving theorems which make essential use of a model of a mathematical object which is defined up to unique isomorphism; the hole here is that it needs to be checked that the argument does not depend on the explicit details of the model.

\ Mathematicians are well aware of this when it comes to, say, picking a basis for a vector space and then checking that nothing important depended on the choice, or picking a representative for an equivalence class and then checking that nothing important depends on the representative. However they seem to be less careful when doing more advanced mathematics, confusing “a” localisation with “the” localisation or “a” pullback with “the” pullback, and leaving to the reader the details of checking that many diagrams commute.

\ One useful trick is to abuse the equality symbol, making it mean something which it does not mean; this can trick the reader into thinking that nothing needs to be checked. Sometimes such checks can be surprisingly painful, and it may be easier to restructure a mathematical argument than to actually make these checks. The second kind of hole is the issue of various maps (like boundary maps in exact sequences) being regarded as “canonical” where now they are in fact not unique, and there are implicit choices of sign being made.

\ Unfortunately it is not at all difficult to point to explicit examples in the literature where an author does not state precisely which convention they are using when it comes to things like the theory of Shimura varieties, or homological algebra. This puts an unnecessary burden on the careful mathematician (for example Conrad, or a computer theorem prover) who is attempting to use or verify the work. Both of these issues have shown up in my formalisation work, and I expect them to show up more often as we go deeper into the formalisation of modern mathematics.

References

[AX23] David Kurniadi Angdinata and Junyan Xu, An Elementary Formal Proof of the Group Law on Weierstrass Elliptic Curves in Any Characteristic, 14th International Conference on Interactive Theorem Proving (ITP 2023) (Dagstuhl, Germany) (Adam Naumowicz and Ren´e Thiemann, eds.), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 268, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum f¨ur Informatik, 2023, pp. 6:1– 6:19.

[BCM20] Kevin Buzzard, Johan Commelin, and Patrick Massot, Formalising perfectoid spaces, Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Certified Programs and Proofs, CPP 2020, New Orleans, LA, USA, January 20-21, 2020 (Jasmin Blanchette and Catalin Hritcu, eds.), ACM, 2020, pp. 299–312.

[BPL21] Anthony Bordg, Lawrence Paulson, and Wenda Li, Grothendieck’s schemes in algebraic geometry, March 2021, https://isa-afp.org/entries/Grothendieck_Schemes.html, Formal proof development.

[Buz] Kevin M. Buzzard, Grothendieck’s approach to equality, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OjCMsqZ9ww, Accessed: 12-08-2023. [Buz19] Buzzard, Kevin, The inverse of a bijection, 2019, [Online; accessed 12-Aug-2023].

[Con00] Brian Conrad, Grothendieck duality and base change, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1750, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2000. MR 1804902

[dFF23] Mar´ıa In´es de Frutos-Fern´andez, Formalizing Norm Extensions and Applications to Number Theory, 14th International Conference on Interactive Theorem Proving (ITP 2023) (Dagstuhl, Germany) (Adam Naumowicz and Ren´e Thiemann, eds.), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 268, Schloss Dagstuhl – LeibnizZentrum f¨ur Informatik, 2023, pp. 13:1–13:18.

[Gro60] A. Grothendieck, El´ements de g´eom´etrie alg´ebrique. I. Le langage des sch ´ ´emas, Inst. Hautes Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. (1960), no. 4, 228. MR 217083 ´

[Lan97] R. P. Langlands, Representations of abelian algebraic groups, Pacific J. Math. (1997), 231–250, Olga Taussky-Todd: in memoriam. MR 1610871

[Liv23] Amelia Livingston, Group Cohomology in the Lean Community Library, 14th International Conference on Interactive Theorem Proving (ITP 2023) (Dagstuhl, Germany) (Adam Naumowicz and Ren´e Thiemann, eds.), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 268, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum f¨ur Informatik, 2023, pp. 22:1–22:17.

[mC20] The mathlib Community, The lean mathematical library, Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Certified Programs and Proofs, ACM, jan 2020.

[Mil80] James S. Milne, Etale cohomology ´ , Princeton Mathematical Series, No. 33, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1980. MR 559531

[Sta18] The Stacks Project Authors, Stacks Project, https://stacks.math.columbia.edu, 2018.

[Wei59] Andr´e Weil, Correspondence [signed “R. Lipschitz”], Ann. of Math. (2) 69 (1959), 247–251, Attributed to A. Weil. MR 100637 [Wik04a] Wikipedia contributors, Monoidal category — Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2004, [Online; accessed 12-Aug-2023].

[Wik04b] , Ordered pair — Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2004, [Online; accessed 20- May-2023].

[Zha23] Jujian Zhang, Formalising the Proj Construction in Lean, 14th International Conference on Interactive Theorem Proving (ITP 2023) (Dagstuhl, Germany) (Adam Naumowicz and Ren´e Thiemann, eds.), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 268, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum f¨ur Informatik, 2023, pp. 35:1– 35:17.

[ZM23] Max Zeuner and Anders M¨ortberg, A univalent formalization of constructive affine schemes, 2023. Email address: k.buzzard@imperial.ac.uk Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London

:::info Author: KEVIN BUZZARD

:::

:::info This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license.

:::

\

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Tether's value surges over 40-fold, with a $500 billion valuation hinting at both capital and narrative ambitions.

Tether's value surges over 40-fold, with a $500 billion valuation hinting at both capital and narrative ambitions.

By Nancy, PANews News that Tether is in talks to raise funds at a $500 billion valuation has propelled it to new heights. If the deal goes through, its valuation would leap to the highest of any global crypto company, rivaling even Silicon Valley unicorns like OpenAI and SpaceX. Tether, with its strong capital base, boasts profit levels that have driven its price-to-earnings ratio beyond the reach of both crypto and traditional institutions. Yet, its pursuit of a new round of capital injection at a high valuation serves not only as a powerful testament to its profitability but also as a means of shaping the market narrative through capital operations, building momentum for future business and market expansion. Net worth soared more than 40 times in a year, and well-known core investors are being evaluated. On September 24, Bloomberg reported that stablecoin giant Tether is planning to sell approximately 3% of its shares at a valuation of $15 billion to $20 billion. If the deal goes through, Tether's valuation could reach approximately $500 billion, making it one of the world's most valuable private companies and potentially setting a record for the largest single financing in the history of the crypto industry. By comparison, in November 2024, Cantor Fitzgerald, a prominent US financial services firm, acquired approximately 5% of Tether for $600 million, valuing the company at approximately $12 billion. This means Tether's value has increased more than 40-fold in less than a year. However, since Cantor Fitzgerald's former CEO, Howard Lutnick, is currently the US Secretary of Commerce, the deal was interpreted as a "friendship price" that could potentially garner more political support for Tether. Tether's rapid rise in value is largely due to its dominant market share, impressive profit margins, and solid financial position. According to Coingecko data, as of September 24th, USDT's market capitalization exceeded $172 billion, setting a new record and accounting for over 60% of the market share. Furthermore, Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino recently admitted that Tether's profit margin is as high as 99%. The second-quarter financial report further demonstrates Tether's robust financial position, with $162.5 billion in reserve assets exceeding $157.1 billion in liabilities. "Tether has about $5.5 billion in cash, Bitcoin and equity assets on its balance sheet. If calculated based on the approximately $173 billion USDT in circulation and a 4% compound yield, and if it raises funds at a valuation of $500 billion, it means that its enterprise value to annualized return (PE) multiple is about 68 times," Dragonfly investor Omar pointed out. Sources familiar with the matter revealed that the disclosed valuation represents the upper end of the target range, and the final transaction value could be significantly lower. Negotiations are at an early stage, and investment details are subject to change. The transaction involves the issuance of new shares, not the sale of shares by existing investors. Paolo Ardoino later confirmed that the company is actively evaluating the possibility of raising capital from a number of prominent core investors. Behind the high valuation of external financing, the focus is on business expansion and compliance layout Tether has always been known to be "rich." The stablecoin giant is expected to generate $13.7 billion in net profit in 2024, thanks to interest income from U.S. Treasury bonds and cash assets. For any technology or financial company, this profit level is more than enough to support continued expansion. However, Tether is now launching a highly valued external financing plan. This is not only a capital operation strategy, but also relates to business expansion and regulatory compliance. According to Paolo Ardoino, Tether plans to raise funds to expand the company's strategic scale in existing and new business lines (stablecoins, distribution coverage, artificial intelligence, commodity trading, energy, communications, and media) by several orders of magnitude. He disclosed in July this year that Tether has invested in over 120 companies to date, and this number is expected to grow significantly in the coming months and years, with a focus on key areas such as payment infrastructure, renewable energy, Bitcoin, agriculture, artificial intelligence, and tokenization. In other words, Tether is trying to transform passive income that depends on the interest rate environment into active growth in cross-industry investments. But pressure is mounting. With the increasing number of competitors and the Federal Reserve resuming its interest rate cut cycle, Tether's main source of profit faces downward risks. The company has previously emphasized that its external investments are entirely sourced from its own profits. A decline in earnings expectations would mean a shrinking pool of funds available for expansion. However, the injection of substantial financing would provide Tether with ample liquidity for its investment portfolio. What truly necessitates Tether's capital and resources is expansion into the US market. With the implementation of the US GENIUS Act, stablecoin issuance enters a new compliance framework. This presents both a challenge and an opportunity for Tether. This is especially true after competitor Circle's successful IPO and capital market recognition, with its valuation soaring to $30 billion, further magnifying Tether's compliance shortcomings. On the one hand, USDT has long been on the gray edge, walking on the edge of regulation. Tether has successfully attracted public attention through extremely small equity transactions and huge valuations, and has also used this to enhance the market narrative, thereby breaking the negative perception of the outside world and significantly enhancing its own influence. On the other hand, unlike Circle's IPO, Tether has chosen a different path to gain mainstream market acceptance. In September of this year, Tether announced that it would launch a US-native stablecoin, USAT, by the end of the year. Unlike the widely circulated USDT, USAT is designed specifically for businesses and institutions operating under US regulations. It is issued by Anchorage Digital, a licensed digital asset bank, and operates on Tether's global distribution network. This allows Tether to retain control over its core profits while meeting regulatory compliance requirements. The personnel arrangements also make this new card intriguing. USAT's CEO is Bo Hines (see also: 29-Year-Old Crypto Upstart Bo Hines: From White House Crypto Liaison to Rapid Assignment to Tether's US Stablecoin ). In August of this year, Tether appointed him as its Digital Asset and US Strategy Advisor, responsible for developing and executing Tether's US market development strategy and strengthening communication with policymakers. As previously reported by PANews, Hines previously served as the White House Digital Asset Policy Advisor, where he was responsible for promoting crypto policy and facilitating the passage of the GENIUS Act, a US stablecoin, and has accumulated extensive connections in the political and business circles. This provides USAT with an additional layer of protection when entering the US market. Cantor Fitzgerald, the advisor to this financing round, is also noteworthy. As one of the Federal Reserve's designated principal dealers, Cantor boasts extensive experience in investment banking and private equity, building close ties to Wall Street's political and business networks. Furthermore, Cantor is the primary custodian of Tether's reserve assets, providing firsthand insight into the latter's fund operations. For external investors, Cantor's involvement not only adds credibility to Tether's financing valuation but also provides added certainty for the launch of USAT in the US market.
Share
PANews2025/09/24 15:52