Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-27
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.

The Cesaro means of (−1)k converge to 0 although the sequence diverges

Example

Let (sk) be the alternating sequence of The even and odd index maps and the alternating sequence: strictly increasing e,o with N their disjoint union, and the unique (sk) with s0=1, sσ(k)=−sk, which satisfies ∣sk∣=1, s∘e≡1 and s∘o≡−1, the unique sequence of reals with s0=1 and sσ(k)=−sk, usually written sk=(−1)k. Its Cesaro means (The Cesaro means σn=(x0+⋯+xn)/(n+1) and (C,1)-summability) are

σn  =  s0+⋯+snn+1  =  {1n+1n even,0n odd,

so the first few values are

σ0=1,σ1=0,σ2=13,σ3=0,σ4=15,σ5=0, …

and lim⁡nσn=0, while (sk) does not converge at all. So (sk) is (C,1)-summable to 0 and divergent: it is the standard witness that (C,1)-summability is strictly weaker than convergence, and the one used in FALSE: if the Cesaro means of a sequence converge then the sequence converges.

The value 0 is the one an average ought to give, since the sequence spends half its indices at 1 and half at −1; the classical way to say this is that the series 1−1+1−1+… has Cesaro sum 12, that being the Cesaro limit of its partial sums rather than of its terms.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The alternating sequence (sk) with s0=1 and sσ(k)=−sk, its partial sums Sn=∑k<nsk, and its Cesaro means σn=(n+1)−1Sn+1.

[L2]

Its partial sums satisfy Sej=0 and Soj=1, and consequently ∣σn∣≤(n+1)−1 and σn→0; this is proved in FALSE: if the Cesaro means of a sequence converge then the sequence converges, steps 2.1, 3.1, 4.1 and 5.1 there.

[L3]

(sk) is bounded and does not converge (FALSE: every bounded sequence converges).

[L6]

Order arithmetic: (n+1)⋅1R>0 (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing) hence invertible with positive inverse, and reciprocation reverses the order (Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order); ∣u∣=u for u≥0 (Basic properties of the absolute value); the order is total (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Ordered field).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Sm=0 when m is even and Sm=1 when m is odd, since N is the disjoint union of the ranges of e and o and Sej=0, Soj=1.

L1L2
1.2

(sk) does not converge.

L3
2.1

Hence σn=(n+1)−1Sn+1 equals (n+1)−1 when n is even, because n+1 is then odd, and equals 0 when n is odd; in particular σ0=1, σ1=0, σ2=1/3, σ3=0, σ4=1/5 and σ5=0.

step 1.1L4L6
2.2

∣σn∣≤(n+1)−1 for every n, and given a real ε>0 a natural m≥1 with 1/m<ε gives ∣σn∣≤(n+1)−1<ε for all n≥m; so lim⁡nσn=0.

step 1.1L2L5L6
3.1

(sk) is therefore (C,1)-summable to 0 and divergent.

step 1.2step 2.1step 2.2L4∎

Remarks

  • The means converge but are not monotone, and they are not even eventually of one shape: they alternate between 0 and a positive value shrinking like 1/(n+1). Convergence of a Cesaro transform therefore carries no monotonicity information, which is another way of seeing that the transform loses the oscillation rather than damping it.

  • Where the 1/2 comes from. The classical assertion "1−1+1−1+⋯=1/2" is about the partial sums Sm, which are 0,1,0,1,…; their Cesaro means tend to 1/2. This library has no theory of series yet, so nothing above asserts it; the sequence averaged here is (sk) itself, whose means tend to 0.

  • This is not a failure of the Cesaro matrix. That matrix is regular (The Cesaro matrix satisfies the Silverman-Toeplitz conditions, giving a second proof of the Cesaro mean theorem): it never changes a limit that exists. What it does here is assign a value where no limit exists, which is exactly what a summability method is for.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

37 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