Alphabeta Math
CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Comparison and uniqueness for the bounded-cylinder heat problem

Statement

Let Q=Ω×(0,T] be a parabolic cylinder (Parabolic cylinder and parabolic boundary) with Ω bounded.

(i) If u,v∈C2,1(Q‾) satisfy ut−Δu≤vt−Δv in Q and u≤v on ∂pQ, then u≤v on Q‾.

(ii) If f∈C(Q) and g∈C(∂pQ) are real-valued, then there is at most one u∈C2,1(Q‾) with ut−Δu=f in Q and u=g on ∂pQ.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A bounded parabolic cylinder Q=Ω×(0,T], functions u,v∈C2,1(Q‾), and (for part (ii)) data f∈C(Q) and g∈C(∂pQ).

[F1]

The cylinder vocabulary and the class C2,1(Q‾) are those of Parabolic cylinder and parabolic boundary.

[F2]

Weak maximum principle: if w∈C2,1(Q‾) satisfies wt−Δw≤0 in Q, then max⁡Q‾w=max⁡∂pQw (Weak parabolic maximum principle).

Proof

Given: A bounded parabolic cylinder Q, u,v∈C2,1(Q‾), and data f,g for part (ii).

1.1F1F2F3given

For part (i) put w:=u−v; by [F3] w∈C2,1(Q‾) and wt−Δw=(ut−Δu)−(vt−Δv)≤0 in Q, while w=u−v≤0 on ∂pQ; [F2] therefore gives max⁡Q‾w=max⁡∂pQw≤0, that is, u≤v on Q‾.

2.1step 1.1F2F3given

For part (ii) let u1,u2∈C2,1(Q‾) both satisfy ut−Δu=f in Q and u=g on ∂pQ, and put w:=u1−u2; by [F3] w∈C2,1(Q‾) with wt−Δw=0 in Q and w=0 on ∂pQ. Applying part (i), proved in step 1.1, to the pair (w,0) gives w≤0 on Q‾, and applying it to the pair (0,w) gives w≥0; hence w≡0 and u1=u2, so there is at most one such solution.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1given∎

Steps 1.1 and 2.1 prove the comparison statement (i) and the uniqueness statement (ii) for the bounded-cylinder Dirichlet problem; no sign of the operator beyond the subsolution direction enters, and no additional hypotheses on ∂Ω are used.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

27 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