Explore related knowledge and questions →

Question 35784: Explicit Evaluation of an Algebraic Expression

On this page
  1. Original question and givens
  2. Definition and scope
  3. Step-by-step derivation
  4. Reverse checks
  5. Result
  6. This question review and source binding

Return to catalogue page 179

← Question derivation index · Original question batch

R0070-35784 · q-20260914-variable-expression-evaluation-0004

Original question and givens

In N, let x=9. Evaluate the algebraic expression x+4; this is an expression, not an equation.

  • G001 — In N, let x=9. Evaluate the algebraic expression x+4; this is an expression, not an equation.

Definition and scope

Use the original question domain, assumptions and cited MKO definitions. This item has second-context mathematical and bilingual review, with the model, answer and every arithmetic step independently recomputed from the original parameters; the source question remains a candidate.

Step-by-step derivation

S001 · implies

Before

source roles = [qf-variable-expression-evaluation, [assigned_value, constant, expression_form, number_system, operator, variable]]

After

derived = [variable, null, null]

Conditions: none

Use THIS bank’s actual fields,operation/domain and types.BASE retains permissible extra metadata.Do not import LDL SAFE/set limits or a different bank’s deduplication rules.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: R70_SOURCE_bank_specific_interface · Uses: G001

S002 · implies

Before

source roles = [9, 4]

After

derived = [x := 9, x + 4]

Conditions: none

Substitute the GIVEN assignment into x+constant.The variable already has a value;this is not solving an unknown equation or proving a universal identity from one example.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: Variable_GIVEN_assignment_not_equation_solving · Uses: G001, S001

S003 · calculation

Before

Variable ORIGINAL assignment plus constant := sum(9, 4)

After

Variable ORIGINAL assignment plus constant = 13

Conditions: none

This step displays the exact original operands and operation.Mul/sub/div have EXACTLY TWO inputs.Keep rational values exact and derived BigInts unbounded;do not force an answer by approximation.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: exact_rational_arithmetic · Uses: G001, S002

S004 · implies

Before

source roles = [9, 4]

After

derived = [13]

Conditions: none

Both terms lie in N,so their exact sum remains in N.Retain the NUMBER type of the numerical answer.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: Variable_substituted_nonnegative_sum · Uses: G001, S003

Reverse checks

  • S004 · premise_and_result_audit — Reverse-audit THIS question’s original operands,roles and necessary premises;reconstruct the next step,without reversing a one-way implication.Numerical/finite-table checking is not formal proof of an arbitrary theorem.Original Q,bilingual sources,MKO,AST,status and history remain preserved.
  • S003 · premise_and_result_audit — Recompute Variable ORIGINAL assignment plus constant with exact rational arithmetic, not rounded decimals.
  • S002 · premise_and_result_audit — Reverse-audit THIS question’s original operands,roles and necessary premises;reconstruct the next step,without reversing a one-way implication.Numerical/finite-table checking is not formal proof of an arbitrary theorem.Original Q,bilingual sources,MKO,AST,status and history remain preserved.
  • S001 · premise_and_result_audit — Reverse-audit THIS question’s original operands,roles and necessary premises;reconstruct the next step,without reversing a one-way implication.Numerical/finite-table checking is not formal proof of an arbitrary theorem.Original Q,bilingual sources,MKO,AST,status and history remain preserved.

Result

13

The full substitutions and premise checks give the original answer; source identity,format and status are unchanged.

This question review and source binding

Review date: 2026-10-26

Original questions, answers, step expressions, numeric ASTs and historical records are retained. Source candidate labels remain historical and are not overwritten as formal proof.

Source hashes and review receipts
  • input commit: 0f7be61e2c22317a4075561dc822c87d881a50db
  • original question SHA-256: 4a7a61f28e43070e827e80064729c13410cd33d68f83324cf42b1edacd07fd68
  • candidate record SHA-256: 99d1f6b45004977cc390914ff13fd746cd75ee56fd8c1bf4c009a74823795310
  • semantic review receipt SHA-256: 9820ac6529139bd53d516c8bfdfdd41184b0cd52dad69fa433344010db37af80
  • question-first witness SHA-256: c9c939762bbd4d3ea3403084c8e95541dc2c7e56eb82fc74eaba8c80a4517dab
  • Lean: NOT_RUN · human review: NOT_PERFORMED
Same-source full JSON