Explore related knowledge and questions →

Question 8905: Synthetic Formal-Statement Pipeline Stage and Coherence

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 45

← Question derivation index · Original question batch

R0016-08905 · q-20261013-advance-20261018-r07-lean-formal-statement-0005

Original question and givens

These are synthetic pipeline receipts, not actual Lean elaboration or kernel checks. The Chinese source pulse did not run Lean builds for these records. A formal statement and a checked proof are distinct states. environment_id="env-4"; flags [parsed,elaborated,type_known,type_is_prop]=[true, true, true, true]. Give (environment ID, flags, coherence?, stage label). Later-stage success requires earlier-stage success.

  • G001 — These are synthetic pipeline receipts, not actual Lean elaboration or kernel checks. The Chinese source pulse did not run Lean builds for these records. A formal statement and a checked proof are distinct states. environment_id="env-4"; flags [parsed,elaborated,type_known,type_is_prop]=[true, true, true, true]. Give (environment ID, flags, coherence?, stage label). Later-stage success requires earlier-stage success.

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

all pipeline flags,names and receipt fields are synthetic input data

After

no actual Lean run,digest verification,name resolution or kernel acceptance is claimed

Conditions: none

These are supplied synthetic receipts,not a Lean run.String fields,coherent flags or complete metadata do not establish actual elaboration,file-digest verification or kernel acceptance.The teaching candidate remains not formalized.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: synthetic_formal_receipt_not_execution · Uses: G001

S002 · implies

Before

stage1 success=Yes;prior stage success=Yes

After

later implies prior=Yes

Conditions: none

A declared later-stage success requires predecessor success.A false later-stage flag merely makes this implication true;it does not assert predecessor failure.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: formal_pipeline_predecessor_implication · Uses: G001, S001

S003 · implies

Before

stage2 success=Yes;prior stage success=Yes

After

later implies prior=Yes

Conditions: none

A declared later-stage success requires predecessor success.A false later-stage flag merely makes this implication true;it does not assert predecessor failure.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: formal_pipeline_predecessor_implication · Uses: G001, S002

S004 · implies

Before

stage3 success=Yes;prior stage success=Yes

After

later implies prior=Yes

Conditions: none

A declared later-stage success requires predecessor success.A false later-stage flag merely makes this implication true;it does not assert predecessor failure.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: formal_pipeline_predecessor_implication · Uses: G001, S003

S005 · implies

Before

environment=env-4;flags=[Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes];coherent=Yes

After

synthetic stage=formal statement

Conditions: none

Reject incoherent combinations first,then classify by the earliest unsuccessful stage.All true means only the synthetic formal-statement stage,not possession of a proof.

Step identifiers and dependencies

Rule: formal_pipeline_coherence_before_stage · Uses: G001, S004

Reverse checks

  • S005 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S004 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S003 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S002 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.
  • S001 · premise_and_result_audit — Check against the original data and this step's premises; a one-way implication is not an equivalence.

Result

(env-4, [Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes], Yes, formal-statement)

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: fb48b5edde11bcdec1f4729b77ac69d0bc027f0d0cfc972be09fa42d18eaac1c
  • candidate record SHA-256: d4525a2b6b49b0b7d1599d213352092637bea7d4188fdc82bdb3b2ab6abd63db
  • semantic review receipt SHA-256: 00fcddb10a9fb0f56697308976a52e68e2537472bd8e68ecbe96d3c4553f4ad2
  • question-first witness SHA-256: 198e04380b2d32aef2375b07ca0df1f8afa454d1184993173fad8a3c9187a3d1
  • Lean: NOT_RUN · human review: NOT_PERFORMED
Same-source full JSON