Alphabeta Math
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

8 results · all verified · 7 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 1 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Banach Valued Integration and the Radon Nikodym Property — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

Finite simple truncations calculate the Bochner integral of a countably valued function and the variation of its induced vector measure. In the opposite direction, the coordinate map tet into 2([0,1]) is weakly measurable because every functional sees only countably many coordinates, but its essential range remains uncountably separated and therefore cannot be strongly measurable.

The geometric examples place Hilbert spaces on the RNP side and calculate diameter two for every slice of the c0 unit ball. They also distinguish the separable dual sequence space 1, which has RNP under AC, from the nonatomic function space L1([0,1]), which does not, and separate this target property from the scalar Radon--Nikodym theorem.

Finally, Dunford--Pettis turns two elementary integral calculations into weak compactness tests: domination by one L1 function gives a uniformly integrable family, while the norm-one spikes n1(0,1/n) retain all their mass on shrinking sets and hence are neither uniformly integrable nor relatively weakly compact.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Bochner integral of a countably valued function

Example

Let (S,A,μ) be a measure space, let X be a real or complex Banach space, let (An)n1 be pairwise disjoint measurable sets, and let (xn)n1 be a sequence in X such that

n=1μ(An)xn<.

With the convention that the value is zero off nAn, the pointwise sum

f=n=1xn1An

is Bochner integrable. Its integral, and more generally every restricted integral, is the absolutely convergent vector series

Efdμ=n=1μ(EAn)xn(EA).

As in the simple-integral definition, a term with xn=0 is zero even when μ(An)=.

Facts & Assumptions

[L1]

Integrable Banach-valued simple functions have the stated finite-sum integral, and their integrals satisfy the norm inequality (Banach-valued simple function and integral, Bochner integral norm inequality).

[L2]

A strongly measurable function with integrable norm is Bochner integrable, and its integral is the limit obtained from any defining L1-simple approximation (Bochner integrability criterion, Bochner-integrable function).

[L3]

Monotone convergence calculates integrals of increasing nonnegative partial sums (Monotone convergence for the integral).

Verification

technique · direct

Given: the measure space, Banach space, disjoint sets, vectors, and finite weighted norm series in the Statement.

1.1

Form the finite simple approximants. For N1, put sN=n=1Nxn1An. If xn0, the finiteness of the displayed series forces μ(An)<; zero levels need no finite-measure hypothesis. Thus every sN is an integrable simple function in the precise sense of [L1]. Pairwise disjointness gives sN(t)f(t) for every t: at most one summand is nonzero at any point.

givenL1
2.1

Calculate the scalar approximation error. Pointwise disjointness gives fsN=n>Nxn1An. Applying monotone convergence in [L3] to its finite partial sums yields

givenL3step 1.1

SfsNdμ=n>Nμ(An)xn0.

The same calculation with N=0 shows Sf=nμ(An)xn<.

3.1

Establish Bochner integrability and identify the unrestricted integral. The everywhere simple convergence in step 1.1 proves strong measurability, and step 2.1 gives integrability of the norm. Hence [L2] makes f Bochner integrable. Moreover, (sN) is a defining L1-simple approximation, so

L1L2step 1.1step 2.1

Sfdμ=limNSsNdμ=limNn=1Nμ(An)xn.

This vector limit exists absolutely because the sum of the norms of its terms is the assumed finite scalar series; completeness of X is used here.

4.1

Calculate every restricted integral and audit the boundary cases. [L1, L2, step 2.1, step 3.1] For measurable E, the functions 1EsN approximate 1Ef in L1, since their error integral is at most the tail in step 2.1. The simple calculation from [L1] therefore gives Ef=nμ(EAn)xn. If E=, if every An is empty, or if every xn=0, both sides are zero. A single nonzero level reduces to the defining simple-function formula. Infinite-measure zero levels cause no undefined product, while a nonzero level automatically has finite measure.

givenL1L2step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Weakly measurable need not be strongly measurable

Statement refuted

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Put I=[0,1], give it the trace of the Lebesgue sigma-algebra and restricted Lebesgue measure, and define

H=2(I)={y:IK:supFI finitetFy(t)2<},

where K is either R or C and the norm is the square root of the displayed supremum. For tI, let et be the coordinate unit vector. Then the map

f:IH,f(t)=et,

is weakly measurable but is not strongly measurable.

Facts & Assumptions

Counterexample

technique · direct

Given: AC and the displayed scalar field, interval, normed function space, and map.

1.1

Verify that the target is a Banach space. Finite-dimensional Cauchy--Schwarz gives the triangle inequality after taking the supremum over finite F; homogeneity and definiteness are immediate, so the displayed formula is a norm. If (yn) is Cauchy in this norm, then every coordinate sequence (yn(t)) is Cauchy. Let y(t)=limnyn(t). Given ε>0, choose N such that ymyN<ε for mN. For every finite F, passage to the scalar limit gives tFy(t)yN(t)2ε2. Taking the supremum shows yyNH with norm at most ε. Hence yH and yny, so [L3] makes H Banach. This also proves directly that eset=2 whenever st.

givenL3
2.1

Every scalar evaluation of the range has countable support. Fix φH and put at=φ(et). For a finite FI, apply φ to tFatet (with conjugation trivial over R) to obtain

A1L1step 1.1

tFat2φ(tFat2)1/2,

and therefore tFat2φ2. For each m1, the set Cm={t:at1/m} is finite, since arbitrarily large finite subsets would violate this bound. The support of (at) is mCm, which is countable by [L1].

3.1

Prove weak measurability. The trace measure space on I is complete: any subset of a trace-null set is an ambient subset of a Lebesgue-null set and hence is Lebesgue measurable by [L1]. For the fixed φ, the scalar function φf:tat vanishes off the countable null support from step 2.1. The inverse image of an open scalar set is either a subset of that support or the complement of such a subset, according as the open set omits or contains zero. Completeness makes every such inverse image measurable. Since φ was arbitrary, f is weakly measurable.

L1step 2.1
4.1

Rule out an essentially separable range. Suppose there were a null NI and a separable closed subspace YH containing every et for tIN. The set IN is uncountable: if it were countable, [L1] would make both it and N null, contrary to μ(I)=1. Let D be an at most countable dense subset of Y. For each tIN, assign the first member of a fixed enumeration of D lying within 2/3 of et. The assignment is injective, because one point of D cannot lie within that radius of two vectors at distance 2. This would make IN countable, a contradiction. Thus the range is not essentially separably valued.

A1L1L2step 1.1step 3.1discharge-contradiction
5.1

Conclude failure of strong measurability and audit boundaries. [A1, L2, step 1.1, step 3.1, step 4.1] The trace measure is complete, H is Banach, and step 3.1 proves weak measurability, but step 4.1 disproves the other necessary condition in [L2]. Hence f is not strongly measurable. Every coordinate vector has norm one; the zero functional has empty support and gives the constant zero scalar map; the real and complex cases are both covered by the finite coefficient calculation. The positive-measure interval, rather than a singleton or a null domain, is essential to the failed conclusion. AC is used through [L1], [L2], and the displayed simultaneous countability arguments only.

givenA1L1L2step 1.1step 3.1step 4.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Vector measure induced by an L-one function

Example

Let (S,A,μ) be a measure space, let X be a real or complex Banach space, and let f:SX be Bochner integrable. Then

νf(E)=Efdμ(EA)

is a norm-countably additive X-valued measure, satisfies νfμ, and has variation

νf(E)=Efdμ.

In particular, if f=n1xn1An for pairwise disjoint measurable An and nμ(An)xn<, then

νf(E)=n=1μ(EAn)xn,νf(E)=n=1μ(EAn)xn.

Facts & Assumptions

[L1]

A Bochner density induces an absolutely continuous vector measure whose variation has density equal to its pointwise norm (A Bochner density defines an absolutely continuous vector measure).

[L2]

Finite Banach-valued simple integrals have their defining finite-sum formula; monotone convergence calculates scalar norm tails; and the Bochner criterion and definition identify the integral of an L1-simple limit (Banach-valued simple function and integral, Monotone convergence for the integral, Bochner integrability criterion, Bochner-integrable function).

Verification

technique · direct

Given: the measure space, Banach target, and Bochner density in the first claim, and the disjoint countably valued data in the special case.

1.1

Obtain the vector-measure conclusions. Apply [L1] to f. It gives norm countable additivity of Eνf(E), absolute continuity with respect to μ, and the equality νf(E)=Ef for every measurable E. This is an equality of finite positive measures, not merely an upper estimate on νf(E).

givenL1
2.1

Calculate the countably valued special case. Put sN=nNxn1An. These are integrable simple functions and converge pointwise to f. Pairwise disjointness and monotone convergence in [L2] give fsN=n>Nμ(An)xn0, so [L2] makes f Bochner integrable. Restricting the same approximation to E and using the finite simple formula gives νf(E)=nμ(EAn)xn. Also f=nxn1An pointwise, so [L1] and the same scalar monotone-convergence calculation give νf(E)=nμ(EAn)xn.

givenL1L2step 1.1
3.1

Audit the examples at the boundaries. [L1, L2, step 1.1, step 2.1] For E= both measures vanish. For f=0, the induced vector measure and its variation are both zero. With one nonzero level the two formulas read νf(E)=μ(EA)x and νf(E)=μ(EA)x, exhibiting equality even when cancellation would make the norm of a multi-level vector sum smaller. A zero coefficient on an infinite-measure level contributes zero under the established simple-integral convention.

givenL1L2step 1.1step 2.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Hilbert spaces have the Radon--Nikodym property

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Every real or complex Hilbert space has the Radon--Nikodym property.

Facts & Assumptions

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice holds and implies the Axiom of Countable Choice (The Axiom of Choice, AC supplies the countable and dependent choices used in Banach integration).

[L1]

Under Countable Choice, every complete real or complex inner-product space is reflexive (Hilbert spaces are reflexive by Riesz representation).

[L2]

Under AC, every real or complex reflexive Banach space has the Radon--Nikodym property (Reflexive spaces have the Radon--Nikodym property).

Verification

technique · direct

Given: AC and a real or complex Hilbert space H.

1.1

Propagate the choice assumption to the reflexivity supplier. By [A1], the assumed AC supplies the Countable Choice required by [L1]. No separate choice assumption is introduced.

givenA1
2.1

Pass from Hilbert structure to RNP. A Hilbert space is complete for its inner-product norm, so [L1] makes H reflexive. It is therefore a reflexive Banach space, and [L2], under the same AC hypothesis, gives the Radon--Nikodym property.

A1L1L2step 1.1
3.1

Audit the scope and degenerate cases. [A1, L1, L2, step 1.1, step 2.1] The argument applies to both real and complex scalar fields and to Hilbert spaces of arbitrary dimension and separability. For the zero Hilbert space, reflexivity and RNP are included in the two suppliers and the density condition is vacuous at zero vector measures. Completeness is essential to the word ``Hilbert'' here; no assertion is made for an incomplete inner-product space. The only choice propagation is AC to Countable Choice in step 1.1 and AC into [L2].

givenA1L1L2step 1.1step 2.1
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

The closed unit ball of c-zero is not dentable

Statement refuted

Over either R or C, every slice of the closed unit ball Bc0 has norm diameter exactly two. Consequently Bc0 is not dentable.

Facts & Assumptions

[L1]

The real and complex sequence spaces c0 carry the supremum norm and are Banach spaces (The sequence spaces c_0 and ell-infinity, Real and complex c0 are Banach).

[L2]

Every functional on c0 has a unique bilinear representation ϕ(x)=n0anxn with a1, and finite truncations of a converge in 1 (The continuous dual of c0 is ell-one, Finite truncations approximate null and summable sequences).

[L3]

Slices in a complex space use real parts, and dentability asks for slices of arbitrarily small norm diameter (Dentable bounded set and slice).

Counterexample

technique · counterexample

Given: one scalar field and the closed unit ball B=Bc0.

1.1

Fix an arbitrary slice with a strict margin. Let S=S(B,ϕ,α) be a slice. By [L2], write ϕ(x)=nanxn. One has supxBReϕ(x)=ϕ: the upper bound is the dual-norm inequality, while multiplying any almost norming vector by a scalar of modulus one makes its value real and nonnegative. Choose xS and set

givenL2L3

δ=Reϕ(x)(ϕα)>0.

2.1

Construct two points in the slice at distance two. The 1 truncation convergence in [L2] implies ak0, so take k with 2ak<δ. Retain all coordinates of x except put yk=1 and zk=1. A one-coordinate change preserves convergence to zero, and y,z1, so y,zB. Moreover,

L1L2step 1.1construct

Reϕ(y)Reϕ(x)ak1xk>ϕα,

and the identical estimate using 1xk2 puts z in S. Their kth coordinates differ by two, hence yz=2.

3.1

Compute the diameter and deduce nondentability. The triangle inequality bounds the diameter of B, and thus of S, above by two. Step 2.1 attains two, so every slice has diameter exactly two. In particular no slice has diameter below one, and [L3] says that B is not dentable. The set B is nonempty, bounded, closed, and convex in the Banach space from [L1].

L1L3step 2.1
4.1

Audit zero, strict-boundary, and complex cases. [L2, L3, step 1.1, step 2.1, step 3.1] If ϕ=0, then the slice is all of B and ek,ek are direct witnesses. For nonzero ϕ, the positive δ and strict inequality 2ak<δ keep both witnesses inside the slice rather than only on its boundary; a zero remote coefficient is harmless. In the complex case [L2] uses the bilinear pairing and [L3] uses Reϕ, so no conjugation is inserted. A singleton zero ball is not involved: c0 contains every ek.

givenL1L2L3step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1
RemarkRemark: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Sequence ell-one versus nonatomic L-one for the RNP

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Over either R or C, the sequence space 1 has the Radon--Nikodym property, whereas the nonatomic function space L1([0,1],λ) does not. Thus the notation ``one'' in the two norms does not determine the RNP.

Facts & Assumptions

[L2]

The bilinear coefficient map identifies 1 isometrically with the continuous dual c0, and continuous duals are Banach (The continuous dual of c0 is ell-one, If (Y) is Banach then (\mathcal B(X,Y)) is Banach).

[L3]

Under AC, every norm-separable continuous dual has RNP (Separable dual spaces have the Radon--Nikodym property).

[L4]

Under AC, real and complex L1([0,1],λ) fail RNP (L1[0,1] fails the Radon--Nikodym property).

Proof

technique · direct

Given: AC and either scalar field.

1.1

Verify norm separability of the sequence space. Over R, let D be the finite-support sequences with rational coordinates; over C, use coordinates in Q+iQ. For each support length the coordinate choices form a finite product of countable sets, and the union over all lengths is countable by [L1]. Given a1 and ε>0, first choose a finite truncation within ε/2 in 1, then approximate its finitely many coordinates so that the sum of coordinate errors is below ε/2. Thus D is countable and dense, and 1 is norm separable.

A1L1
2.1

Put the sequence-space side under the separable-dual theorem. By [L2], 1 is isometrically the continuous dual c0 and is Banach. Step 1.1 supplies norm separability, so [L3], under the assumed AC, gives RNP to 1.

A1L2L3step 1.1
3.1

Contrast the nonatomic function space and audit scope. [A1, L4, step 2.1] The theorem [L4] gives the opposite conclusion for the real and complex Lebesgue quotient spaces L1([0,1],λ). This is not a contradiction: 1 consists of summable scalar sequences and is the separable dual c0, whereas the second space is built over a nonatomic measure and has the explicit nondifferentiable indicator curve used in [L4]. The zero sequence and zero function occur in both spaces but do not determine a global geometric property. Both scalar fields are covered, and AC is propagated to [L3] and [L4], with Countable Choice used in the countability calculation of step 1.1.

givenA1L1L2L3L4step 1.1step 2.1
RemarkRemark: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

The RNP is not the scalar Radon--Nikodym theorem

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. The scalar Radon--Nikodym theorem is a theorem about absolutely continuous signed measures and scalar measurable densities. The Radon--Nikodym property is instead an additional property of a Banach target: it requires every norm-countably additive vector measure of bounded variation, absolutely continuous with respect to a finite scalar measure, to have a Bochner-integrable density. The scalar theorem proves the real scalar special case, but it does not prove that an arbitrary Banach space has RNP.

Facts & Assumptions

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice holds (The Axiom of Choice).

[L1]

Under AC, the scalar Radon--Nikodym theorem gives a measurable real density to an absolutely continuous signed measure under its stated common finite-exhaustion hypotheses; finite total variation makes that density integrable (A sigma-finite signed measure that is absolutely continuous with respect to a sigma-finite positive measure has a unique almost-everywhere density).

[L2]

For a scalar measure represented by f, total variation is represented by f (The total variation of an absolutely continuous signed or complex measure has density the absolute value of the Radon-Nikodym derivative).

[L3]

RNP quantifies over Banach-valued norm-countably additive measures of bounded variation and asks for Bochner densities on every measurable set (Radon--Nikodym property, Banach-valued vector measure and variation).

Proof

technique · direct

Given: AC and the two stated Radon--Nikodym assertions.

1.1

Isolate what the scalar theorem supplies. For a real signed measure νμ satisfying [L1]'s common finite-exhaustion hypotheses, [L1] supplies a scalar measurable f with ν(E)=Efdμ for every measurable E. When ν has finite variation, fL1, and [L2] identifies ν(E)=Efdμ. Thus existence, uniqueness up to almost-everywhere equality, and scalar variation all live inside the ordered scalar theory.

givenA1L1L2
2.1

Compare the vector quantifiers and density notion. For a Banach target X, [L3] begins with a norm-countably additive map ν:AX, not a signed scalar measure. Its bounded variation is the supremum of sums of vector norms over finite partitions. The requested density is an X-valued strongly measurable, norm-integrable Bochner function, and its integral must recover ν(E) for every E. None of these target-valued existence assertions follows merely by replacing absolute values with norms in step 1.1.

L3step 1.1
3.1

Locate the overlap without overclaiming. When X=R, a norm-countably additive vector measure is a signed measure, bounded variation is finite scalar total variation, and scalar measurability/integrability is the real Bochner notion. On a finite control measure the constant exhaustion meets [L1], so the scalar theorem supplies this special RNP case, with [L2] supplying its variation formula. For a general X, [L3] remains a genuine extra geometric requirement.

A1L1L2L3step 1.1step 2.1
4.1

Audit the boundaries and assumptions. [A1, L1, L3, step 3.1] The empty measurable space and zero scalar measure give zero densities in both settings. The zero Banach target has RNP trivially, but this says nothing about nonzero targets. The cited scalar theorem is real; no complex scalar theorem is silently extracted from it. Its sigma-finite-style common exhaustion is more general than the finite control measures in the RNP definition, while finite variation is what makes its scalar density L1. AC is stated because [L1] requires it.

givenA1L1L2L3step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14Open item page →

Dunford--Pettis: dominated and concentrating families

Example

Assume the Axiom of Choice, and let I=[0,1] carry restricted Lebesgue measure. Two contrasting families in real L1(I) are as follows.

  1. If gL1(I) is nonnegative and Kg{fL1(I):fg almost everywhere}, then Kg is uniformly integrable and relatively weakly compact.
  2. The concentrating sequence fn=n1(0,1/n), n1, is bounded in L1(I) but is neither uniformly integrable nor relatively weakly compact.

Facts & Assumptions

[L2]

Real L1 consists of almost-everywhere classes with the integral norm, and the integral of a nonnegative simple function is its finite weighted sum (The space Lp(μ) as the quotient by null functions, The Lp norm descends to the quotient and makes Lp a normed space for 1p, The integral of a nonnegative simple function).

[L3]

Every individual L1 function has absolutely continuous integral (Absolute continuity of the integral).

[L4]

Under AC, a family in real L1 on a finite measure space is relatively weakly compact exactly when it is uniformly integrable, equivalently norm bounded with uniformly absolutely continuous integrals (Dunford--Pettis for real L1 on a finite measure space).

Verification

technique · counterexample

Given: AC, the restricted Lebesgue interval, a nonnegative gL1, a dominated family Kg, and the displayed spike sequence.

1.1

Fix the finite quotient-space model. Let λI(E)=λ(EI) on the ambient Lebesgue sigma-algebra. By [L1] this is a finite measure with λI(I)=1. We use the quotient L1(λI) from [L2], so changes outside I or on null endpoints do not change a class.

givenA1L1L2
2.1

Prove uniform integrability of the dominated family. For fKg, domination gives f1Ig, uniformly in f. Given ε>0, [L3] supplies δ>0 such that λI(E)<δ implies Eg<ε. Then EfEg<ε for every fKg. Thus the two conditions in [L4] hold, so Kg is uniformly integrable and relatively weakly compact.

L2L3L4step 1.1
2.2

Calculate the concentrating sequence. For every n1, the nonnegative simple-integral formula and interval length give

L1L2step 1.1construct

fn1=nλI((0,1/n))=n1n=1.

Hence (fn) is L1 bounded. But for En=(0,1/n) one has λI(En)=1/n0 while Enfn=1.

3.1

Fail uniform integrability and weak compactness. Taking, for example, ε=1/2, step 2.2 shows that no single δ>0 works for the uniform absolute-continuity condition: choose n>1/δ. Therefore the family {fn:n1} is not uniformly integrable. The reverse implication in [L4] then shows that it is not relatively weakly compact.

A1L4step 2.2
4.1

Audit the endpoints and degenerate families. [A1, L1, L2, L3, L4, step 1.1, step 2.1, step 2.2, step 3.1] If Kg=, both conclusions in part 1 are vacuous. If g=0, every dominated L1 class is zero, so the conclusion is the compact singleton case. Open, closed, or half-open spike intervals define the same class because their endpoint differences are null. The spikes are real and nonnegative; their obstruction is concentration on shrinking positive-measure sets, not unbounded L1 norm. AC is used exactly through [L4] and to supply the Countable Choice in the Lebesgue model [L1].

givenA1L1L2L3L4step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2step 3.1

Sources