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.
Differentiation under an improper integral can fail without uniform domination
Statement refuted
Pointwise differentiability of an integrand and convergence of every parameter slice suffice to pass a derivative through an improper integral.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: For and , let and .
On an open domain and open parameter interval, if and are continuous, one slice is absolutely improperly integrable, and has an integrable bound uniform on each compact parameter interval, then (Differentiation under an improper multiple integral under an integrable derivative bound).
A monotone differentiable substitution preserves a convergent improper integral under the stated compact-truncation hypotheses (Change of variable in an improper integral).
The derivative of the exponential is the exponential (The exponential function is smooth and ).
The improper integral is the finite limit of as , when that limit exists (Improper integrals over unbounded intervals).
If on a compact interval and is integrable, then is the endpoint difference of (The second fundamental theorem: if is differentiable on with and is integrable, then ).
One has as , and the exponential is normalized by (The exponential tends to at and to at , The power-series, product-limit, IVP, functional-equation, and Picard definitions agree).
The one-variable chain rule gives (The chain rule, in one line from Carathéodory: if is differentiable at and is differentiable at , then is differentiable at with ).
Counterexample
By [L3], [L5], [L6], and [L7], and . If , the substitution in [L2] therefore gives ; at , the integrand is identically zero, so [L4] gives . Thus for every real .
By [L3], , so for every and its improper integral is .
Step 1.1 gives , while step 1.2 gives . Restricting the witness to the open domain changes none of these integrals; there and are continuous and the zero base slice is absolutely integrable. Thus every hypothesis of [L1] except a parameter-uniform integrable derivative bound holds, differentiation under the sign fails, and no such dominator can exist near .
Depends on
- Differentiation under an improper multiple integral under an integrable derivative bound
- Improper integrals over unbounded intervals
- The power-series, product-limit, IVP, functional-equation, and Picard definitions agree
- The exponential function is smooth and $(\exp)'=\exp$
- The exponential tends to $+\infty$ at $+\infty$ and to $0$ at $-\infty$
- The chain rule, in one line from Carathéodory: if $g$ is differentiable at $c$ and $f$ is differentiable at $g(c)$, then $f \circ g$ is differentiable at $c$ with $(f \circ g)'(c) = f'(g(c))\,g'(c)$
- The second fundamental theorem: if $G$ is differentiable on $[a,b]$ with $G' = f$ and $f$ is integrable, then $\int_a^b f = G(b)-G(a)$
- Change of variable in an improper integral
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
51 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
- W. F. Trench, Functions Defined by Improper Integrals, Example 3 (standard reference, not scraped)