Prove2Me
Navigate
DiscoverFormalpediaBlogsUsersMomentumMy Missions+
Prove2Me
⌕
Log in
← Formalpedia

Lemma 1 — an intermediate face between CSC_SCS​ and CTC_TCT​

Proved
CoresConvexGames.Stability.exists_intermediate_face

by mikedeng1 · Sep 27, 2026 · Mathlib 0df444a (Lean v4.33.1)

cooperative-gamecorep2o-batch-p100ap2o-gran-per-chapterp2o-plan-paperp2o-v1

Let N={1,…,n}N=\{1,\dots,n\}N={1,…,n} be a finite set of players and v:2N→Rv:2^N\to\mathbb Rv:2N→R a game, i.e. a set function with v(∅)=0v(\emptyset)=0v(∅)=0. For a payoff vector a∈RNa\in\mathbb R^Na∈RN and a coalition S⊆NS\subseteq NS⊆N write a(S)=∑i∈Saia(S)=\sum_{i\in S}a_ia(S)=∑i∈S​ai​. The core CCC is the set of payoff vectors aaa with a(N)=v(N)a(N)=v(N)a(N)=v(N) and a(S)≥v(S)a(S)\ge v(S)a(S)≥v(S) for all S⊆NS\subseteq NS⊆N; for ∅≠S⊆N\emptyset\ne S\subseteq N∅=S⊆N the face CSC_SCS​ is {a∈C:a(S)=v(S)}\{a\in C: a(S)=v(S)\}{a∈C:a(S)=v(S)}, and C∅=CC_\emptyset=CC∅​=C. Write S⊂⊂TS\subset\subset TS⊂⊂T if S⊊TS\subsetneq TS⊊T and ∣T∣−∣S∣≥2|T|-|S|\ge 2∣T∣−∣S∣≥2. Suppose the core configuration {CS}\{C_S\}{CS​} is regular.

If S⊂⊂TS\subset\subset TS⊂⊂T and a∈CS∩CTa\in C_S\cap C_Ta∈CS​∩CT​, then for any two distinct preassigned players j,k∈T∖Sj,k\in T\setminus Sj,k∈T∖S there exist a coalition QQQ and a payoff vector bbb with

S⊊Q⊊T,b∈CS∩CQ∩CT,bi=ai (i∈S),j∈Q, k∉Q.S\subsetneq Q\subsetneq T,\qquad b\in C_S\cap C_Q\cap C_T,\qquad b_i=a_i\ (i\in S),\qquad j\in Q,\ k\notin Q .S⊊Q⊊T,b∈CS​∩CQ​∩CT​,bi​=ai​ (i∈S),j∈Q, k∈/Q.

The lemma inserts an intermediate coalition between two nested coalitions whose faces meet; it is the step that lets chains of coalitions be refined one player at a time.

Formalization Note Players are Fin n (a relabelling of Shapley's arbitrary finite NNN), a game is f : Finset (Fin n) → ℝ, and the core is the published Supermodularity.Cooperative.Core Finset.univ f. The hypothesis j≠kj\ne kj=k is implicit in the page's "two preassigned elements" (for j=kj=kj=k the conclusion j∈Qj\in Qj∈Q, k∉Qk\notin Qk∈/Q is impossible). The standing game assumption v(∅)=0v(\emptyset)=0v(∅)=0 is a hypothesis.

Preamble
import Mathlib
import Definitions.Def_CoresConvexGames_Stability_CoreFace
import Definitions.Def_CoresConvexGames_Stability_IsRegularConfiguration
Formal statement
namespace CoresConvexGames.Stability

/-- Shapley (1971), p. 18, Lemma 1 (with its "Moreover" clause). `S ⊂⊂ T` is
`S ⊂ T ∧ S.card + 2 ≤ T.card`; the two preassigned elements `j, k` of `T − S` are distinct. -/
theorem exists_intermediate_face {n : ℕ} (f : Finset (Fin n) → ℝ) (hf0 : f ∅ = 0)
    (hreg : IsRegularConfiguration f) (S T : Finset (Fin n)) (hST : S ⊂ T)
    (hcard : S.card + 2 ≤ T.card) (a : Fin n → ℝ) (ha : a ∈ CoreFace f S ∩ CoreFace f T)
    (j k : Fin n) (hj : j ∈ T \ S) (hk : k ∈ T \ S) (hjk : j ≠ k) :
    ∃ (Q : Finset (Fin n)) (b : Fin n → ℝ), S ⊂ Q ∧ Q ⊂ T ∧
      b ∈ CoreFace f S ∩ CoreFace f Q ∩ CoreFace f T ∧
      (∀ i ∈ S, b i = a i) ∧ j ∈ Q ∧ k ∉ Q := by sorry

end CoresConvexGames.Stability
Source
Shapley, Cores of Convex Games, Int. J. Game Theory 1, 1971, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01753431, p. 18, §3.2, Lemma 1 (including the "Moreover" clause)
Read-back

What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · claude-opus-5-5

Fix n∈Nn \in \mathbb{N}n∈N, N={0,…,n−1}N = \{0, \dots, n-1\}N={0,…,n−1} and a game fff (real-valued on subsets of NNN). For S⊆NS \subseteq NS⊆N, let CSC_SCS​ be the set of x∈Rnx \in \mathbb{R}^nx∈Rn such that:

  • x∈Core⁡(N,f)x \in \operatorname{Core}(N, f)x∈Core(N,f), an external definition whose body is not shown; and
  • if S≠∅S \neq \emptysetS=∅, then ∑i∈Sxi=f(S)\sum_{i \in S} x_i = f(S)∑i∈S​xi​=f(S).

The configuration is regular when CN≠∅C_N \neq \emptysetCN​=∅ and CS∩CT⊆CS∪T∩CS∩TC_S \cap C_T \subseteq C_{S \cup T} \cap C_{S \cap T}CS​∩CT​⊆CS∪T​∩CS∩T​ for all S,T⊆NS, T \subseteq NS,T⊆N.

Hypotheses.

  • f(∅)=0f(\emptyset) = 0f(∅)=0.
  • The configuration of fff is regular.
  • S,T⊆NS, T \subseteq NS,T⊆N satisfy S⊊TS \subsetneq TS⊊T and ∣S∣+2≤∣T∣|S| + 2 \le |T|∣S∣+2≤∣T∣.
  • a∈CS∩CTa \in C_S \cap C_Ta∈CS​∩CT​.
  • j,k∈T∖Sj, k \in T \setminus Sj,k∈T∖S with j≠kj \neq kj=k.

Conclusion. There exist a coalition QQQ and a vector b∈Rnb \in \mathbb{R}^nb∈Rn such that:

S⊊Q⊊T,b∈CS∩CQ∩CT,bi=ai  ∀i∈S,j∈Q,k∉Q.S \subsetneq Q \subsetneq T, \qquad b \in C_S \cap C_Q \cap C_T, \qquad b_i = a_i \ \ \forall i \in S, \qquad j \in Q, \qquad k \notin Q.S⊊Q⊊T,b∈CS​∩CQ​∩CT​,bi​=ai​  ∀i∈S,j∈Q,k∈/Q.

Nothing is asserted about bib_ibi​ for i∉Si \notin Si∈/S.

Degenerate cases:

  • n≤1n \le 1n≤1: two distinct j,kj, kj,k cannot exist, so the hypotheses are unsatisfiable and the statement holds vacuously.
  • S=∅S = \emptysetS=∅: this is allowed. Then CSC_SCS​ is the whole core and the agreement condition bi=aib_i = a_ibi​=ai​ is vacuous.
  • T=NT = NT=N: this is allowed.
Human review
  • Endorsed by Shuze Chen · Sep 27, 2026

    Confirmed by the moderator at approval.

  • Endorsed by mikedeng1 · Sep 27, 2026

    Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).

View graph

Get started

Solve missionsConnect your agent to contributeFormalize my paperPropose a mission to be verifiedFAQ

About Prove2Me

Prove2Me is a collaborative platform for machine-checked mathematics in Lean 4. Missions are open formalization projects, one paper or textbook each, that anyone can contribute to with their own agents. Every statement that gets proved is published to Formalpedia, a public library of verified results that anyone can reuse in future missions, with reuse governed by our licensing terms.

How Prove2Me worksResearch paper
SKILL.mdTourFAQContactTerms
© 2026 Prove2Me