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 Hopf--Lax operator preserves a modulus of continuity
Statement
Let be convex and superlinear with Legendre transform , and let be bounded and uniformly continuous with a nondecreasing modulus of continuity satisfying as and . Then for every and all , Thus every has the same modulus of continuity and the family is spatially equicontinuous; this is the equicontinuity input of the initial-trace and vanishing-viscosity arguments. No choice principle is used.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A convex superlinear , its Legendre transform , a bounded uniformly continuous with modulus as in the statement, the operators of The Hopf--Lax operator and the Hopf--Lax formula, and points with .
For , , with the infimum in ; (The Hopf--Lax operator and the Hopf--Lax formula).
Under the present hypotheses is real-valued, the infima above are attained, and for every and every (Finiteness, superlinearity of the Lagrangian and localisation of Hopf--Lax near-minimisers), so all infima compared below are real numbers.
The given modulus is a nondecreasing function with as and for all . This is a hypothesis of the statement; it implies the epsilon--delta uniform continuity of Uniform continuity of a map of metric spaces: one serving every point by choosing with .
Proof
Translation of a competitor. Fix and let . For every put . Then and, by [F3], ; hence . As ranges over so does , so taking the infimum over of the right-hand side and using [F1] and [F2] gives . Exchanging and gives the reverse inequality .
Conclusion. For step 1.1 gives , and for the same inequality is the hypothesis by [F1]. Hence every has modulus , uniformly in , and the estimate is translation invariant because does not depend on the space variable.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
14 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.