Tucker's lemma
combinatorial analog of the Borsuk-Ulam theorem

In mathematics, Tucker's lemma is a combinatorial analog of the Borsuk–Ulam theorem, named after Albert W. Tucker.
Let T be a triangulation of the closed n-dimensional ball
B
n
{\displaystyle B_{n}}
. Assume T is antipodally symmetric on the boundary sphere
S
n
−
1
{\displaystyle S_{n-1}}
. That means that the subset of simplices of T which are in
S
n
−
1
{\displaystyle S_{n-1}}
provides a triangulation of
S
n
−
1
{\displaystyle S_{n-1}}
where if σ is a simplex then so is −σ.
Let
L
:
V
(
T
)
→
{
+
1
,
−
1
,
+
2
,
−
2
,
.
.
.
,
+
n
,
−
n
}
{\displaystyle L:V(T)\to \{+1,-1,+2,-2,...,+n,-n\}}
be a labeling of the vertices of T which is an odd function on
S
n
−
1
{\displaystyle S_{n-1}}
, i.e.,
L
(
−
v
)
=
−
L
(
v
)
{\displaystyle L(-v)=-L(v)}
for every vertex
v
∈
S
n
−
1
{\displaystyle v\in S_{n-1}}
.
Then Tucker's lemma states that T contains a complementary edge - an edge (a 1-simplex) whose vertices are labelled by the same number but with opposite signs.
Proofs
The first proofs were non-constructive, by way of contradiction.
“Tucker's lemma” enters the record as combinatorial analog of the Borsuk-Ulam theorem. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Tucker's, lemma and combinatorial can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Tucker's lemma” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Tucker's, lemma and combinatorial provides the most credible route into that argument.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 13, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q7851042. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Tucker's lemma”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Tucker's lemma primary sources, Tucker's lemma archive and Tucker's research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Tucker's lemma”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Tucker's lemma” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.