Alphabeta Math
DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26
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.

Boundary presentations adapted to a simple solid region in a coordinate direction

Definition

Let (k,D,γ1,γ2) be a simple description of a solid E⊆R3 in the direction k (Simple solid regions in a coordinate direction and their cyclic coordinate projection), and write

Γ2:={p:πk(p)∈D, pk=γ2(πk(p))},Γ1:={p:πk(p)∈D, pk=γ1(πk(p))}

for the upper and lower graph of the description. Let Σ=((D1,φ1),…,(DP,φP)) be a compatible finite patch presentation in the sense of Finitely patched regular surfaces, their area, scalar integrals, and flux, each (Dj,φj) a regular parametrized surface patch of Regular parametrized surface patches on compact Jordan parameter regions, whose patch images cover ∂E and are contained in ∂E. Write φj,u,φj,v for the two parameter derivatives, and φj,u×φj,v for the oriented area vector of Unit normal fields, orientations, and flux through a regular surface patch, whose coordinates are those of The cross product in R3.

The presentation Σ is adapted to the description (k,D,γ1,γ2) when the index set {1,…,P} is partitioned into three sublists Σ+, Σ− and Σ0, supplied with the presentation, such that all of the following hold.

  1. Upper faces. For j∈Σ+, the image of φj lies in the graph of γ2 and the kth coordinate of φj,u×φj,v is positive on the interior of Dj.
  2. Lower faces. For j∈Σ−, the image of φj lies in Γ1 and the kth coordinate of φj,u×φj,v is negative on the interior of Dj.
  3. Lateral faces. For j∈Σ0, the kth coordinate of φj,u×φj,v vanishes on the interior of Dj.
  4. The graph faces cover the base. Writing Vj:=πk[φj[Dj∘]] for the projected image of the jth patch, the projected images of the upper sublist are pairwise disjoint and fill D up to content zero, and the same holds for the lower sublist: for each of Σ+ and Σ− the sets Vj with j in that sublist are pairwise disjoint and D∖⋃Vj has content zero in the sense of Measure zero and content zero in Rm by countable and finite cube covers.
  5. Both graph sublists are nonempty. Σ+≠∅ and Σ−≠∅; the lateral sublist Σ0 may be empty.

The partition into the three sublists is part of the supplied data, exactly as the description (k,D,γ1,γ2) is; nothing here is inferred from the set E or from the unordered collection of patch images. Interiors are those of Interior, closure, boundary, limit point, isolated point and dense subset of a metric space and integrals over the projected images are those of The Riemann integral of a bounded function over a bounded Jordan measurable set.

Remarks

  • The conditions are on the sign of one coordinate, not on outwardness. Clauses 1 to 3 are analytic: by Each coordinate of the oriented area vector is the Jacobian determinant of the matching cyclic projection the kth coordinate of the oriented area vector is the Jacobian determinant of πk∘φj, so clause 1 says that the projection of an upper patch is orientation-preserving on the parameter interior and clause 3 says that a lateral patch projects with vanishing Jacobian determinant. That the induced normals of the graph faces then point out of E is a theorem, At interior base points, the graph faces of an adapted presentation induce the outward unit normal, rather than part of this definition.

  • A graph face is not required to be a graph patch. Clause 1 asks only that the patch image lie in Γ2; it does not ask that φj be the map w↦(w,γ2(w)) read in the projected coordinates. That is what admits the eight spherical octants and the four quarter-cylinders: their graph functions have unbounded gradient at the equator or at the silhouette, so they are not C1 on a neighbourhood of the closed base and could not parametrize a patch, while the octants and quarters themselves are patches in every direction at once.

  • Why the lateral condition is imposed on the interior. The parameter region of a patch is the closure of its interior, and the kth coordinate of the oriented area vector is continuous on the whole region, so a vanishing condition on the interior already forces vanishing everywhere on the region. Stating it on the interior keeps the three clauses in the same form and matches where clauses 1 and 2 can be stated at all, since the oriented area vector may vanish on a parameter boundary.

  • What clause 4 is for. It is the only clause that ties the presentation to the base quantitatively: without it, one tiny upper patch in Γ2 together with one tiny lower patch in Γ1 could satisfy clauses 1, 2, 3 and 5 while covering almost none of either graph. Pairwise disjointness and the content-zero residue are what make the sum of the graph-face fluxes an integral over the whole of D.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

40 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