Theorem Statement
Given a cycle_4 configuration with fan apexes, the 8-edge cover set is well-defined and has cardinality exactly 8 (assuming all edges are distinct).
Formal Statement (Lean)
def eightEdgeCover (cfg : Cycle4Config V) (x_A x_B x_C x_D : V) : Finset (Sym2 V) :=
-- Cycle edges
{s(cfg.vDA, cfg.vAB), s(cfg.vAB, cfg.vBC), s(cfg.vBC, cfg.vCD), s(cfg.vCD, cfg.vDA)} ∪
-- Apex-private edges
{s(cfg.a, x_A), s(cfg.b, x_B), s(cfg.c, x_C), s(cfg.d, x_D)}
theorem eight_edges_card
(cfg : Cycle4Config V)
(x_A x_B x_C x_D : V)
(hx_distinct : [x_A, x_B, x_C, x_D].Nodup)
(hx_not_M : x_A ∉ cfg.allMVertices ∧ x_B ∉ cfg.allMVertices ∧
x_C ∉ cfg.allMVertices ∧ x_D ∉ cfg.allMVertices) :
(eightEdgeCover cfg x_A x_B x_C x_D).card = 8 := by
sorry
Why It Should Be True
The 8 edges are:
- {v_DA, v_AB} - cycle edge for A
- {v_AB, v_BC} - cycle edge for B
- {v_BC, v_CD} - cycle edge for C
- {v_CD, v_DA} - cycle edge for D
- {a, x_A} - apex-private for A
- {b, x_B} - apex-private for B
- {c, x_C} - apex-private for C
- {d, x_D} - apex-private for D
These are pairwise distinct because:
- Cycle edges use different vertex pairs (cfg has 8 distinct vertices)
- Apex-private edges use different private vertices
- No cycle edge equals an apex-private edge (cycle edges are between shared vertices, apex-private involve private vertices)
How It Helps
This establishes the cover set has the claimed size.
Dependencies
- Cycle4Config has 8 distinct vertices
- Fan apexes are outside M-vertices
Theorem Statement
Given a cycle_4 configuration with fan apexes, the 8-edge cover set is well-defined and has cardinality exactly 8 (assuming all edges are distinct).
Formal Statement (Lean)
Why It Should Be True
The 8 edges are:
These are pairwise distinct because:
How It Helps
This establishes the cover set has the claimed size.
Dependencies