Proof for mathd_algebra_513 - #189
Open
aleph-prover-dev[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Automated commit at 20260306_161009
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Proven lemmas: 1/1
The goal is to prove that if real numbers a and b satisfy the linear system 3·a + 2·b = 5 and a + b = 2, then necessarily a = 1 and b = 1 (i.e., the unique solution is (1,1)). The proof is decomposed by splitting the final conjunction into two subgoals: first show a = 1, and then show b = 1. Lean does this with
constructor, producing exactly 2 sub-problems from the original goal. Both subgoals are then solved automatically usinglinarithwith the hypotheses h₀ and h₁, which eliminates variables in linear equalities/inequalities and derives the needed equalities. So progress is complete: 2 out of 2 sub-problems are solved, and nothing remains. An interesting aspect is that this is a standard “solve a 2×2 linear system” situation; automation (linarith) is sufficient, but a manual fallback strategy would be to solve for b from a + b = 2, substitute into 3·a + 2·b = 5, and then back-substitute. The system’s coefficient matrix has nonzero determinant, so the solution is unique, which matches the derived result.