Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-31
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.

Refuted: convergence uniformly on every compact subset of R implies uniform convergence. The maps x↦x/(n+1) separate the two

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: if a sequence (gk) in C(X,R) converges to g uniformly on every compact subset of X, that is in the topology of compact convergence (The topology of compact convergence on C(X,Y) for metric X and Y: uniform convergence on each compact subset of X), then it converges to g uniformly (Uniform convergence, and the topology of uniform convergence: the metric topology of the uniform metric on YX and on C(X,Y)).

The witness is X=R with its usual metric and

gk(x):=xι(k+1)(k∈N, x∈R),

ι being the canonical natural of R (The canonical natural ι(n)=n⋅1F of a field), so that ι(k+1)≥1>0 and the quotient is defined. These converge to the constant function 0 uniformly on every compact subset of R and satisfy ρˉ(gk,0)=1 for every k, so they do not converge uniformly.

This is the strictness of the right-hand inclusion of On C(X,Y) with X and Y metric, uniform convergence is finer than compact convergence, which is finer than pointwise convergence; the left-hand one is separated on the companion example of this page. Note that the domain has to be non-compact for such a witness to exist, since on a compact domain the two topologies coincide.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: R with the usual metric d(s,t)=∣s−t∣ (The absolute value makes R a metric space: d(x,y)=∣x−y∣ is a metric, its open balls are the intervals (x−r,x+r), and it is unbounded), the maps gk(x)=x/ι(k+1), the constant function 0, and the truncated metric dˉ=min⁡{d,1} with the uniform metric ρˉ on RR (For a nonempty set X and a metric space (Y,d) the uniform metric ρˉ(f,g)=sup⁡xmin⁡{d(f(x),g(x)),1} is a metric on YX).

[L1]

ι is strictly increasing on N with ι(n)>0 for n≥1, and 0<u≤v gives 0<1/v≤1/u (The canonical natural ι(n)=n⋅1F of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing, Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order).

[L2]

For every real ε>0 there is a natural m≥1 with 1/ι(m)<ε (For every ε>0 in a complete ordered field there is a natural n≥1 with 1/n<ε).

[L5]

The sets BK(f,ε) centred at f form a neighbourhood base at f in the topology of compact convergence, and BK(f,ε)={ h:∣f(x)−h(x)∣<ε for every x∈K } (The topology of compact convergence on C(X,Y) for metric X and Y: uniform convergence on each compact subset of X, fact (U4)).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

Each gk is continuous, being Lipschitz with constant 1/ι(k+1), so gk∈C(R,R); and 0 is continuous, being constant.

L1L3
1.2

Let K⊆R be compact and let ε>0 be real; K is bounded, so fix a real r>0 with ∣x∣<r for every x∈K.

L4choose
1.3

On the other hand, for each k∈N the point xk:=ι(k+1) satisfies ∣gk(xk)−0(xk)∣=ι(k+1)/ι(k+1)=1, so dˉ(gk(xk),0(xk))=1 and therefore ρˉ(gk,0)≥1; since ρˉ≤1 always, ρˉ(gk,0)=1.

L1L6
2.1

By [L2] fix a natural m≥1 with 1/ι(m)<ε/r.

step 1.2L2choose
2.2

So no index K0 makes ρˉ(gk,0)<1/2 for all k≥K0, and (gk) does not converge to 0 in the uniform metric, that is not uniformly.

step 1.3L6
3.1

For every k≥m and every x∈K: ∣gk(x)−0(x)∣=∣x∣/ι(k+1)<r/ι(k+1)≤r/ι(m)<ε, using k+1>m and the monotonicity of ι and of reciprocals.

step 1.2step 2.1L1L3
4.1

Hence gk∈BK(0,ε) for every k≥m; as K and ε were arbitrary and the sets BK(0,ε) are a neighbourhood base at 0, the sequence (gk) converges to 0 in the topology of compact convergence.

step 3.1L5
5.1

The sequence (gk) therefore satisfies the hypothesis of the claim and violates its conclusion, so the claim is false.

step 4.1step 2.2∎

Remarks

  • What goes wrong is arbitrarily far out. On any fixed bounded region the maps gk do flatten to 0, and a compact subset of R is bounded; the discrepancy ∣gk(x)∣=∣x∣/(k+1) reaches 1 only at x=k+1, which escapes every compact set as k grows. Uniform convergence asks for control at every point at once, including those.

  • The same family shows the two topologies are different as topologies, not merely that one sequence behaves differently in them: the difference is already visible in a basic neighbourhood, since Bρˉ(0,1/2) contains no gk while every compact-convergence neighbourhood of 0 contains a tail of them.

  • The index shift is the usual one. N contains 0, so the family is written with ι(k+1); at k=0 this is 1 and g0 is the identity, which is exactly the intended first term. Writing x/ι(k) would divide by 0 at k=0.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

94 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