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.
Assuming Countable Choice, -convergent sequences have almost-everywhere convergent subsequences
Statement
Assume Countable Choice. Let . If in , then some subsequence of admits measurable representatives converging almost everywhere to a measurable representative of .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Countable Choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice ()) and a norm-convergent sequence in .
Under Countable Choice, Riesz-Fischer completeness states that every norm-convergent sequence in has an almost-everywhere convergent subsequence of representatives (Riesz-Fischer completeness of for ). Applying that representative-selection clause in step 1.1 is the use of Countable Choice here.
Proof
The sequence is Cauchy because it converges in norm. Applying [L1] to that Cauchy sequence gives an limit together with an almost-everywhere convergent subsequence of representatives. Because metric limits are unique, the limit supplied by [L1] must be the given .
That subsequence is the required one.
Depends on
Used by
- Strong convergence of subcritical powers Corollary
- Subcritical compactness for W^1,p₀ on arbitrary bounded open sets Corollary
- Critical traces fail compactness under boundary dilation Counterexample
- The critical Sobolev embedding is not compact Counterexample
- A local Sobolev chain rule for C¹ postcomposition Lemma
- The absolute value preserves the L² norm and the Dirichlet energy on H¹₀ Lemma
- The obstacle admissible set is nonempty, convex, closed and weakly closed Lemma
- The published typewriter sequence shows why Riesz-Fischer only promises a subsequence Remark
- Calderon-Zygmund operators map H¹ boundedly into L¹ Theorem
- Calderon-Zygmund operators map L-infinity to BMO Theorem
- Complex Lp completeness and almost-everywhere subsequences Theorem
- Maximal truncations: weak (1,1) and strong Lp bounds Theorem
- Shannon sampling for band-limited L² functions Theorem
- Square integrability of discrete-series matrix coefficients Theorem
- The direct method for convex integral functionals Theorem
- The Rellich--Kondrachov theorem for 1≤ p<n on bounded extension domains Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
17 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
- Sheldon Axler, Measure, Integration & Real Analysis, Proposition 7.23 (standard reference, not scraped)
- John K. Hunter, Measure Theory, Corollary 7.11 (standard reference, not scraped)