Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-21
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.

Borel-Cantelli for the shrinking intervals (0,2−k) under a dyadic atomic measure

Example

On the Borel subsets of R, define

μ:=∑j=0∞2−(j+1)δ2−j,Ek:=(0,2−k).

Then μ(Ek)=2−(k+1), so ∑kμ(Ek)=1 and the first Borel-Cantelli lemma gives μ(lim sup⁡kEk)=0. In fact lim sup⁡kEk=∅.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The dyadic atomic set function μ and intervals Ek displayed above.

[L1]

Dirac set functions are probability measures (A Dirac set function is a probability measure), and nonnegative countable weighted sums of measures are measures (Nonnegative scalar multiples and countable weighted sums of measures are measures).

[L3]

If the sum of the measures is finite, the first Borel-Cantelli lemma makes the set limsup null (The first Borel-Cantelli lemma for measures).

[L4]

The set limsup is the intersection of the tail unions (Limit superior and limit inferior of a sequence of sets), and (0,b)={x:0<x<b} (Intervals of R: the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1givenL1L4

By [L1], μ is a measure. For fixed k, the atom 2−j lies in (0,2−k) exactly when j>k, so μ(Ek)=∑j>k2−(j+1).

1.2givenL2L4

The intervals decrease. No x≤0 belongs to any of them, and for x>0, convergence 2−k→0 supplies k with 2−k≤x, so x∉Ek; hence their intersection, and therefore their limsup, is empty.

2.1step 1.1L2algebra

The tail geometric sum in step 1.1 is 2−(k+1), and therefore ∑k=0∞μ(Ek)=∑k=0∞2−(k+1)=1. At k=0, this gives μ((0,1))=1/2.

3.1step 2.1step 1.2L3∎

Borel-Cantelli applied using step 2.1 gives μ(lim sup⁡kEk)=0, while step 1.2 independently identifies that limsup as ∅.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

42 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.