Alphabeta Math
CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-10-02
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.

Whole-space inequalities transfer through a Sobolev extension

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let k∈N0, 1≤p≤∞, K∈{R,C}, and let Ω⊆Rn be open. Let E:Wk,p(Ω;K)⟶Wk,p(Rn;K) be a bounded linear extension operator, so that (Eu)∣Ω=u almost everywhere on Ω for every class u, and let ∥E∥ be its operator norm. Suppose a whole-space functional N on Sobolev classes, together with its restrictions NΩ to the classes of Ω, satisfies NΩ(F∣Ω)≤N(F)andN(F)≤C∥F∥Wk,p(Rn) for every F∈Wk,p(Rn;K) and a constant C independent of F. Then NΩ(u)≤C ∥E∥ ∥u∥Wk,p(Ω)for every u∈Wk,p(Ω;K). In particular, if 1≤q≤∞ and a whole-space Sobolev inequality ∥F∥Lq(Rn)≤C∥F∥Wk,p(Rn) is available, then ∥u∥Lq(Ω)≤C∥E∥∥u∥Wk,p(Ω) for every u. The corollary is conditional on that whole-space inequality and asserts no embedding theorem itself; every bounded Ck domain supplies an admissible operator E through Bounded C^k domains admit integer-order Sobolev extension.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the Axiom of Choice; k∈N0; 1≤p≤∞; K∈{R,C}; an open Ω⊆Rn; a bounded linear extension operator E with right-inverse property and norm ∥E∥; a functional N with restrictions NΩ satisfying the two displayed hypotheses with constant C; and a class u∈Wk,p(Ω;K).

[F1]

Extension operator: E:Wk,p(Ω;K)→Wk,p(Rn;K) is bounded and linear with (Eu)∣Ω=u as an almost-everywhere class on Ω for every u, and its operator norm is ∥E∥=sup⁡{∥Eu∥:u∈Wk,p(Ω;K),∥u∥Wk,p(Ω)≤1} (Sobolev extension domains and extension operators).

[F2]

Restriction is a well-defined operation on Sobolev classes: F∣Ω∈Wk,p(Ω;K) with Dα(F∣Ω)=(DαF)∣Ω almost everywhere, and it is a contraction (Bounded restriction and cutoff localisation in Sobolev spaces).

[F3]

Restriction monotonicity of N: NΩ(F∣Ω)≤N(F) for every F∈Wk,p(Rn;K), and the whole-space bound N(F)≤C∥F∥Wk,p(Rn), both hypotheses of the statement.

[F4]

The Sobolev norm is the finite derivative sum of Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms, and ∥Eu∥≤∥E∥∥u∥ holds for every u by the definition of the operator norm in [F1].

[F5]

Bounded Ck domains: for k≥1 and every 1≤p≤∞ there is a bounded linear extension operator Wk,p(Ω;K)→Wk,p(Rn;K) for every bounded Ck domain in the graph sense, and extension by zero supplies the case k=0 on any open set (Bounded C^k domains admit integer-order Sobolev extension).

Choice use. The Axiom of Choice enters only through the published interfaces of [F2] and [F5], which invoke the Countable Choice they require; [F5] also invokes it for the chart and partition-of-unity steps of the extension construction. The three-line norm chain of the proof itself uses no choice.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1given

Fix u∈Wk,p(Ω;K) and put F:=Eu∈Wk,p(Rn;K). By the right-inverse property of [F1], F∣Ω=u as an almost-everywhere class on Ω.

2.1F3step 1.1

Apply the restriction monotonicity of [F3] to the pair (F,Ω): NΩ(u)=NΩ(F∣Ω)≤N(F)=N(Eu).

2.2F3step 1.1

Apply the whole-space bound of [F3] to F=Eu: N(Eu)≤C∥Eu∥Wk,p(Rn).

2.3F1F4step 1.1

Apply the operator-norm inequality of [F4] to u: ∥Eu∥Wk,p(Rn)≤∥E∥ ∥u∥Wk,p(Ω).

3.1step 2.1step 2.2step 2.3

Chaining steps 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 gives NΩ(u)≤C∥E∥∥u∥Wk,p(Ω) for the fixed class u; since u was arbitrary, the first assertion holds.

4.1F2F3step 3.1given

Lq instance. Let 1≤q≤∞ and set N(F):=∥F∥Lq(Rn) and NΩ(v):=∥v∥Lq(Ω), with the value +∞ when the class is not in Lq. The inclusion Ω⊆Rn gives ∫Ω∣F∣q≤∫Rn∣F∣q for q<∞ and ess sup⁡Ω∣F∣≤ess sup⁡Rn∣F∣ for q=∞; hence NΩ(F∣Ω)≤N(F), where the left side is interpreted through the class of [F2]. If the whole-space inequality ∥F∥Lq(Rn)≤C∥F∥Wk,p(Rn) is available, the remaining hypothesis of [F3] holds with that same constant, and step 3.1 yields ∥u∥Lq(Ω)≤C∥E∥∥u∥Wk,p(Ω).

5.1F5step 4.1∎

Domains. If Ω is a bounded Ck domain with k≥1, [F5] supplies an admissible operator E for every 1≤p≤∞, so step 4.1 transfers any available whole-space Lq inequality to Ω with the extension constant of that operator; for k=0 extension by zero supplies the analogous operator on any open set. No embedding is proved here: the implication is conditional on the whole-space inequality, and the conclusion is stated only for the functional N and the operator E that are given.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

30 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