Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-28
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.

The Dirichlet function on [0,1][0,1] has lower Darboux integral 00 and upper Darboux integral 11, so it is bounded and not Riemann integrable

Statement refuted

Refuted: that every bounded function on a closed bounded interval with distinct endpoints is Riemann integrable (FALSE: every bounded function on [a,b][a,b] is Riemann integrable, The lower and upper Darboux integrals of a bounded ff on [a,b][a,b] as supPL(f,P)\sup_P L(f,P) and infPU(f,P)\inf_P U(f,P), Darboux integrability as their equality, and the notation abf\int_a^b f).

The witness is the Dirichlet function 1Q\mathbf{1}_{\mathbb{Q}} restricted to [0,1][0,1] (The Dirichlet function 1Q1_{\mathbb{Q}}, and Thomae's function tt with t(x)=1/qt(x) = 1/q at a rational x=p/qx = p/q in lowest terms with q1q \ge 1 and t(x)=0t(x) = 0 at every irrational xx). It takes only the values 00 and 11, so it is bounded (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set); every lower Darboux sum is 00 and every upper Darboux sum is 11; hence

011Q  =  0    1  =  011Q,\underline{\int_0^1}\mathbf{1}_{\mathbb{Q}} \;=\; 0 \;\ne\; 1 \;=\; \overline{\int_0^1}\mathbf{1}_{\mathbb{Q}} ,

and the function is not Riemann integrable. The two Darboux integrals are as far apart as the range of the function allows.

Facts & Assumptions

[A1]

The refuted claim: every bounded function on such an interval is Riemann integrable (FALSE: every bounded function on [a,b][a,b] is Riemann integrable).

[L2]

For a partition P=(n,t)P = (n,t) of [0,1][0,1]: n1n \ge 1, ti<ti+1t_i < t_{i+1}, Δi>0\Delta_i > 0, i<nΔi=1\sum_{i<n}\Delta_i = 1, Ii=[ti,ti+1]I_i = [t_i,t_{i+1}], and (ti,ti+1)(t_i,t_{i+1}) is a nonempty open interval contained in IiI_i (Partition of [a,b][a,b] as a finite strictly increasing list a=t0<t1<<tn=ba = t_0 < t_1 < \dots < t_n = b, its subintervals and their lengths, its mesh, refinement, and the common refinement of two partitions, Intervals of R\mathbb{R}: the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).

[L3]

mi=infg[Ii]m_i = \inf g[I_i], Mi=supg[Ii]M_i = \sup g[I_i], L(g,P)=i<nmiΔiL(g,P) = \sum_{i<n}m_i\Delta_i, U(g,P)=i<nMiΔiU(g,P) = \sum_{i<n}M_i\Delta_i; 01g\underline{\int_0^1}g is the supremum of the lower sums and 01g\overline{\int_0^1}g the infimum of the upper sums; gg is integrable exactly when they agree (For bounded ff on [a,b][a,b] and a partition PP: the infimum mim_i and supremum MiM_i of ff on the ii-th subinterval, and the lower and upper Darboux sums L(f,P)=imiΔiL(f,P) = \sum_i m_i \Delta_i and U(f,P)=iMiΔiU(f,P) = \sum_i M_i \Delta_i, The lower and upper Darboux integrals of a bounded ff on [a,b][a,b] as supPL(f,P)\sup_P L(f,P) and infPU(f,P)\inf_P U(f,P), Darboux integrability as their equality, and the notation abf\int_a^b f).

[L4]

A set with a least element has it as its infimum and one with a greatest element has it as its supremum; the supremum and infimum of {c}\{c\} are both cc (Greatest lower bound (infimum), Maximum and minimum of a set, Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)).

[L5]

Finite sums: scaling and i<n0=0\sum_{i<n}0 = 0 (Finite sums and finite products, by recursion, Laws of finite sums and finite products).

[L6]

Ordered-field arithmetic: 010 \ne 1, and the order is total and transitive (Order is preserved by adding a constant and by adding inequalities, Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication, Ordered field, Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)). These order-arithmetic facts are stated by their sources for the strict order only; the nonstrict forms used below follow by adjoining the equality case, in which the two sides coincide.

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

gg is bounded, with 0g(x)10 \le g(x) \le 1 for every x[0,1]x \in [0,1], so its Darboux sums and integrals are defined by [L3].

givenL3
1.2

Let P=(n,t)P = (n,t) be any partition of [0,1][0,1] and i<ni < n. By [L2] the interval (ti,ti+1)(t_i,t_{i+1}) is nonempty and open, so by [L1] it contains a rational and an irrational, both lying in IiI_i. Hence g[Ii]={0,1}g[I_i] = \{0,1\} and, by [L4], mi=0m_i = 0 and Mi=1M_i = 1.

givenL1L2L4
2.1

Therefore L(g,P)=i<n0Δi=0L(g,P) = \sum_{i<n}0\cdot\Delta_i = 0 and U(g,P)=i<n1Δi=i<nΔi=1U(g,P) = \sum_{i<n}1\cdot\Delta_i = \sum_{i<n}\Delta_i = 1, for every partition PP of [0,1][0,1], by [L3], [L5] and [L2].

step 1.2L2L3L5
3.1

The set of lower sums is {0}\{0\} and the set of upper sums is {1}\{1\}, so 01g=0\underline{\int_0^1}g = 0 and 01g=1\overline{\int_0^1}g = 1 by [L4] and [L3]. Since 010 \ne 1 by [L6], gg is not Riemann integrable on [0,1][0,1].

step 2.1L3L4L6
4.1

So gg is bounded on [0,1][0,1], an interval with 0<10 < 1, and is not Riemann integrable: [A1] is refuted.

step 1.1step 3.1A1

Remarks

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 122 results over 27 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources