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.
Limit superior and limit inferior of a real sequence as and in
Definition
Let be a sequence of reals (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences). For let
be the -th tail range of , a nonempty subset of since . Regard as a subset of (The extended real line , its order, and the arithmetic that is left undefined) and put
the supremum and infimum taken in , which exist for every and for every sequence by Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in . The limit superior and limit inferior of are then
again taken in and again existing by Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in , since and are subsets of on which no hypothesis is needed. Both are elements of , and either may be or . The notations , and all denote the first of them elsewhere; this library writes .
Every quantity written here exists, and that is why the extended line was introduced. Each of the four operations above is an application of Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in to a subset of carrying no hypothesis whatever. Written with the real supremum of Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property) and the real infimum of Every nonempty set bounded below has an infimum instead, the definition would be available only for sequences that are bounded (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set): needs bounded above, and needs nonempty, bounded below, and made of real numbers (Greatest lower bound (infimum)). None of those is automatic, and the discipline recorded in Conventions: , unbounded sets, and the extended reals forbids papering over the gap with a convention. The extended supremum is a different operation in a different ordered set, and it is total.
Values, when the sequence is bounded. If is bounded, say for every , then each is a nonempty subset of bounded above by and below by , so by the agreement clause of Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in each and each is the real supremum or infimum of , and lies in . The family is then a nonempty set of reals bounded below by , so is likewise the real infimum of and lies in ; dually for . So for a bounded sequence both quantities are ordinary real numbers computed with the ordinary real supremum and infimum, and the extended line is doing no work. It is only for unbounded sequences that the values occur.
Remarks
-
The order of the two operations is not symmetric and must be kept straight. is an infimum of suprema and a supremum of infima. Taking them in the other order gives and , which are the extreme values of the whole sequence and carry no information about its behaviour at large indices. The point of the definition is that the inner operation looks at a tail and the outer one lets the tail recede.
-
Why tails at all. Each is a bound on the whole tail from index on, so it forgets the first terms; letting grow forgets any fixed finite number of them. That is what makes and tail quantities in the sense of Convergence depends only on the tail, and it is the reason they can characterise convergence, which is itself a tail property.
-
Neither quantity is a limit, and neither is claimed to be one. The symbols and are single pieces of notation for the two displayed expressions, exactly as "" is a single abbreviation in Divergence to and to . That the family does decrease to in a precise sense is a theorem, not part of this definition; the monotonicity half is The tail suprema of any real sequence are nonincreasing in , so the limit superior exists for every sequence.
-
The tail ranges are sets, not sequences. is the range of the -th tail, so repetitions and order are forgotten (Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences). That is harmless here, since a supremum depends only on the set of values, and it is what lets the whole definition be phrased with the order-theoretic operations of Every subset of has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in , agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in and nothing else.
Depends on
- The extended real line $\overline{\mathbb{R}} = \mathbb{R} \cup \{-\infty, +\infty\}$, its order, and the arithmetic that is left undefined
- Sequences of reals: bounded, eventually, frequently, tails, subsequences
- Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)
- Every nonempty set bounded below has an infimum
- Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set
- Greatest lower bound (infimum)
- Every subset of $\overline{\mathbb{R}}$ has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound in $\overline{\mathbb{R}}$, agreeing with the real supremum and infimum on nonempty sets bounded in $\mathbb{R}$
Used by
- Kummer with ζₖ = 1 recovers the ratio test Corollary
- Raabe is Kummer with ζₖ = k+1: for positive terms, liminf (k+1)(aₖ/aₖ₊₁ - 1) > 1 gives convergence and limsup < 1 gives divergence Corollary
- The limit inferior is the least subsequential limit in overlineℝ Corollary
- Whenever the ratio test decides, the root test decides the same way, and the converse fails Corollary
- ∑ k^-1/2 diverges and ∑ k⁻² converges, and both have root limit exactly 1 Counterexample
- A sequence with limsup = +∞: the greatest subsequential limit exists only in overlineℝ Counterexample
- aₖ = 2^-k+(-1)ᵏ has ratio limsup 2 and liminf 1/8, so the ratio test fails, while the root test gives convergence Counterexample
- xₖ = (-1)ᵏ, yₖ = (-1)ᵏ⁺¹ give limsup(xₖ + yₖ) = 0 < 2 = limsup xₖ + limsup yₖ Counterexample
- xₖ = 1 + (-1)ᵏ, yₖ = 1 + (-1)ᵏ⁺¹ give limsup(xₖ yₖ) = 0 < 4 Counterexample
- (-1)ᵏ has liminf = -1 and limsup = 1, so it does not converge Example
- A positive sequence making all three inequalities of the ratio-to-root chain strict Example
- A series with ratio limit exactly 1 that Raabe decides Example
- aₖ = 2^-k + (-1)ᵏ has liminf aₖ₊₁/aₖ = 1/8, limsup aₖ₊₁/aₖ = 2 and lim aₖ^1/k = 1/2 Example
- The block sequence 1/1; 1/2, 2/2; 1/3, 2/3, 3/3; … has subsequential limit set exactly [0,1] Example
- FALSE: limsup |aₖ₊₁/aₖ| ≥ 1 implies the series diverges False statement
- FALSE: limsup aₖ^1/k = limsup aₖ₊₁/aₖ for every positive sequence False statement
- FALSE: limsup(xₖ + yₖ) = limsup xₖ + limsup yₖ False statement
- For finite L: L = limsup xₖ iff for every ε > 0 one has xₖ < L + ε eventually and xₖ > L - ε frequently Lemma
- If xₖ ≤ yₖ eventually then limsup xₖ ≤ limsup yₖ and liminf xₖ ≤ liminf yₖ Lemma
- liminf xₖ ≤ limsup xₖ for every real sequence Lemma
- limsup(-xₖ) = -liminf(xₖ), with the reflection of overlineℝ exchanging ±∞ Lemma
- The tail suprema of any real sequence are nonincreasing in overlineℝ, so the limit superior exists for every sequence Lemma
- How the nonnegative tests are ordered by strength, and which of them this page cannot state without the logarithm Remark
- Which extended-real operations this library leaves undefined, and where each limsup statement needs the hypothesis Remark
- A real sequence converges to L ∈ ℝ iff liminf xₖ = limsup xₖ = L, and diverges to ±∞ iff both equal ±∞ Theorem
- Cauchy-Hadamard for complex power series, including zero and infinite radius Theorem
- Cauchy–Hadamard: the reciprocal radius is limsup_k→∞|aₖ₊₁|^1/(k+1), with the zero and infinite cases included Theorem
- For aₖ > 0: liminf aₖ₊₁/aₖ ≤ liminf aₖ^1/k ≤ limsup aₖ^1/k ≤ limsup aₖ₊₁/aₖ Theorem
- For bounded nonnegative sequences, limsup(xₖ yₖ) ≤ (limsup xₖ)(limsup yₖ) Theorem
- Gauss: for positive terms, if aₖ/aₖ₊₁ = 1 + h/k + rₖ with |rₖ| ≤ C k^-1-ε for k ≥ 1, some constant C and some rational ε > 0, the series converges iff h > 1 Theorem
- Kummer: for positive terms aₖ and weights ζₖ > 0, liminf(ζₖ aₖ/aₖ₊₁ - ζₖ₊₁) > 0 gives convergence, and if ∑ 1/ζₖ diverges while that expression is eventually ≤ 0 the series diverges Theorem
- limsup(xₖ + yₖ) ≤ limsup xₖ + limsup yₖ whenever the right-hand side is defined in overlineℝ, and dually for liminf Theorem
- Ratio test: limsup |aₖ₊₁/aₖ| < 1 gives absolute convergence and hence convergence, and liminf |aₖ₊₁/aₖ| > 1 gives divergence Theorem
- Root test: limsup |aₖ|^1/k < 1 gives absolute convergence and hence convergence, > 1 gives divergence, and = 1 decides nothing Theorem
- The limit superior is itself a subsequential limit in overlineℝ and is the greatest one Theorem
- The Riemann series theorem: a conditionally convergent real series has, for every c ∈ ℝ, a rearrangement with sum c, and rearrangements diverging to +∞, to -∞, and oscillating with any prescribed liminf ≤ limsup in overlineℝ Theorem
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 39 results over 13 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Limit superior and limit inferior (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- W. Rudin, Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 3rd ed., Ch. 3 (3.16) (standard reference, not scraped)
- T. Tao, Analysis I, 3rd ed., §6.4 (standard reference, not scraped)
- J. Lebl, Basic Analysis I, §2.3 (standard reference, not scraped)