Alphabeta Math
DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablePipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-sol)audited 2026-09-27
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.

Banach star-algebra without a required unit

Definition

A complex Banach ∗-algebra without a required unit is a possibly nonunital complex Banach algebra A together with a map a↦a∗ of A into itself, its involution, such that:

  1. A is a complex vector space with an associative complex-bilinear multiplication and a submultiplicative norm under which A is complete (C star algebra, Banach space, A norm on a real vector space, the induced metric, and the dictionary with the metric axioms);
  2. the involution is conjugate-linear, (αa+βb)∗=α‾a∗+β‾b∗ for all α,β∈C and a,b∈A;
  3. the involution is involutive, (a∗)∗=a for every a∈A;
  4. the involution reverses products, (ab)∗=b∗a∗ for all a,b∈A;
  5. the involution is continuous; when in addition ∥a∗∥=∥a∥ for every a∈A one says the involution is isometric.

No multiplicative identity is assumed, and none is asserted to exist; when A does have a two-sided identity 1 with ∥1∥=1, A is a unital Banach algebra in the sense of Unital Banach algebra and the involution axioms above turn it into a unital Banach ∗-algebra.

No C∗-identity. The defining identity ∥a∗a∥=∥a∥2 of a C∗-algebra (C star algebra) is not imposed here and is not available for the algebras covered by this definition: L1(G) for a non-discrete G fails it, and its proof below uses only the axioms 1–5. Two properties of this definition are deliberately weaker than the C∗ case: the involution is not assumed isometric, and no norm-uniqueness statement is imported.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

21 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