Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedaudited 2026-09-09
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.

A box is not a C1-boundary domain

Statement refuted

The claim that every finite piecewise C1 domain is a C1-boundary domain is false. For n2, the box Q=(0,1)n has a finite piecewise C1 presentation, but at any edge or vertex its boundary has no single regular one-sided C1 graph chart.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Take the unit box (0,1)n, n2, and a boundary point with at least two endpoint coordinates.

[F1]

Positive-length rectangular boxes have the explicit finite-face presentation. (Internal faces cancel for glued boxes).

[F2]

A C1 boundary is a regular one-sided graph. (Bounded C1 domains and their outward normals).

Counterexample

1.1

Present Q by its 2n closed coordinate faces with normals ±ei and the set E where at least two coordinates are endpoints. As in the explicit box verification F1, the parameter boundaries are finite unions of bounded coordinate hyperplanes and have measure zero, and every boundary point outside E has a single planar one-sided neighborhood. This verifies the finite piecewise hypotheses.

givenF1
2.1

Let p have at least two endpoint coordinates i and j. Approach p through relative interiors of the i-face, moving every other endpoint coordinate slightly into (0,1); also approach through relative interiors of the j-face. The outward normals along these two sequences are the distinct constants εiei and εjej, with εk=1 at endpoint 0 and +1 at endpoint 1. If a C1 graph chart as in F2 existed at p, its normal would be the continuous function (Dh,1)/1+Dh2, transformed by the chart rotation and given the unique outward sign. At neighboring planar points this normal must be the corresponding coordinate normal, since orthogonality to the plane and the outward side uniquely determine it. Continuity at p would force those two distinct constant vectors to have the same limit, a contradiction. This proves failure at every edge and vertex, including the origin.

step 1.1F2algebra

Source notes

Hunter Definition 1.35, printed pp. 13–14, and the piecewise-boundary comparison after Theorem 1.46, printed p. 18 (PDF pp. 19–20 and 24). The normal-limit contradiction is supplied here.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

8 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources