Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-27
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.

xx2x \mapsto x^2 is continuous on R\mathbb{R} and not uniformly continuous, the pairs k+1k+1 and k+1+1/(k+1)k+1+1/(k+1) defeating every δ\delta

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: the function f:RRf : \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}, f(x):=x2f(x) := x^{2} (Integer powers ama^m), is uniformly continuous on R\mathbb{R} (Uniform continuity of f:ARf : A \to \mathbb{R}: one δ\delta serving every pair of points of AA).

ff is continuous on R\mathbb{R} (Continuity of f:ARf : A \to \mathbb{R} at a point of AA and on AA: the ε\varepsilon-δ\delta condition, its agreement with limxcf(x)=f(c)\lim_{x \to c} f(x) = f(c) at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point) and R\mathbb{R} is a closed subset of itself, so this is the complement of x1/xx \mapsto 1/x is continuous on (0,1)(0,1) and not uniformly continuous there, the pairs 1/(k+2)1/(k+2) and 1/(k+3)1/(k+3) defeating every δ\delta: there the domain was bounded and not closed, here it is closed and not bounded, and uniform continuity fails in both cases. Neither half of compactness suffices on its own, and Heine-Cantor in R\mathbb{R}: a continuous real function on a compact subset of R\mathbb{R} is uniformly continuous, proved R\mathbb{R}-natively from sequential compactness needs both (A subset of R\mathbb{R} is compact if and only if it is closed and bounded).

The refutation exhibits, for every δ>0\delta > 0, a pair of reals closer than δ\delta whose squares differ by more than 22. The pairs are

ak:=k+1,bk:=k+1+1k+1(kN),a_k := k+1, \qquad b_k := k + 1 + \frac{1}{k+1} \qquad (k \in \mathbb{N}),

and the shift by 11 is not cosmetic: N\mathbb{N} contains 00 here (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences is 00-indexed), so the reciprocal 1/k1/k would be undefined at the first index.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The function f:RRf : \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}, f(x):=x2f(x) := x^{2}. Naturals are identified with their canonical images in R\mathbb{R}.

[L1]

Uniform continuity on R\mathbb{R} fails as soon as some real ε0>0\varepsilon_0 > 0 admits, for every real δ>0\delta > 0, a pair x,xRx, x' \in \mathbb{R} with xx<δ|x - x'| < \delta and f(x)f(x)ε0|f(x) - f(x')| \ge \varepsilon_0 (Uniform continuity of f:ARf : A \to \mathbb{R}: one δ\delta serving every pair of points of AA, Ordered field).

[L3]

Archimedean property in reciprocal form: for every real η>0\eta > 0 there is a natural m1m \ge 1 with 1/m<η1/m < \eta; and 0<s<t0 < s < t implies 0<1/t<1/s0 < 1/t < 1/s (For every ε>0\varepsilon > 0 in a complete ordered field there is a natural n1n \ge 1 with 1/n<ε1/n < \varepsilon, Every complete ordered field is Archimedean, Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order).

[L4]

Ordered-field arithmetic: for kNk \in \mathbb{N} one has k+11>0k + 1 \ge 1 > 0, so 1/(k+1)1/(k+1) is defined and positive; the identity v2u2=(vu)(v+u)v^{2} - u^{2} = (v-u)(v+u); and u0|u| \ge 0 with u=u|u| = u for u0u \ge 0 (Ordered field, Basic properties of the absolute value, Integer powers ama^m).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

ff is continuous on R\mathbb{R}, being a polynomial function.

L2
1.2

For kNk \in \mathbb{N} put ak:=k+1a_k := k+1 and bk:=(k+1)+1/(k+1)b_k := (k+1) + 1/(k+1), both defined because k+11>0k + 1 \ge 1 > 0 by [L4]. At the first index, k=0k = 0, this reads a0=1a_0 = 1 and b0=2b_0 = 2.

L4
2.1

The separation of the arguments is akbk=1/(k+1)|a_k - b_k| = 1/(k+1). The separation of the values is, by [L4], f(bk)f(ak)=bkak(bk+ak)=1k+1(2(k+1)+1k+1)=2+1(k+1)2>2.|f(b_k) - f(a_k)| = |b_k - a_k|\,(b_k + a_k) = \frac{1}{k+1}\Bigl(2(k+1) + \frac{1}{k+1}\Bigr) = 2 + \frac{1}{(k+1)^{2}} > 2 .

step 1.2L4
3.1

Put ε0:=2>0\varepsilon_0 := 2 > 0 and let a real δ>0\delta > 0 be given. By [L3] fix a natural m1m \ge 1 with 1/m<δ1/m < \delta and take k:=mk := m; then k+1>m>0k + 1 > m > 0, so akbk=1/(k+1)<1/m<δ|a_k - b_k| = 1/(k+1) < 1/m < \delta by [L3], while step 2.1 gives f(ak)f(bk)>2=ε0|f(a_k) - f(b_k)| > 2 = \varepsilon_0.

step 2.1L3choose
4.1

So no real δ>0\delta > 0 serves ε0=2\varepsilon_0 = 2, and by [L1] the function ff is not uniformly continuous on R\mathbb{R}, although by step 1.1 it is continuous there: the refuted claim is false.

step 1.1step 3.1L1L5

Remarks

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 123 results over 29 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