Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

Forward Euler on the scalar linear equation y′=y

Example

For the IVP y′=y, y(0)=1, the exact solution is y(t)=et. The forward Euler map is Ψh(t,z)=z+hz. Its local defect from the exact value is

δh(t;y)=et(1+h−eh).

For every fixed finite interval [0,T] with T>0, this defect is Θ(h2) uniformly in t∈[0,T−h] as h↓0, so the local order is exactly one. The one-step stability factor is 1+h.

Verification

Given: h>0, y(t)=et, and the Euler map Ψh(t,z)=z+hz. Verify the defect and its order.

[F1] One-step ODE methods, local defect, uniform order, and step stability: the local defect is Ψh(t,y(t))−y(t+h), and order one requires a uniform O(h2) bound.

[F2] Forward Euler has uniform local order one and a one-step Lipschitz bound: under its continuous-partial-derivative and uniform-bound hypotheses, Euler has a componentwise O(h2) local defect and one-step bound 1+Lh.

[F3] Multivariable Taylor formula with a Lagrange remainder along a line segment: for a C2 scalar function, Taylor's formula through degree one has a second-derivative Lagrange remainder at an interior point of the segment.

1.1givenF1F2algebra

Fix T>0, let R:=eT(1+T)+1, and take V=(−1,T+1)×(−R,R) and K=[0,T]×[−R+1,R−1]. These are an open domain with convex state fibers and a compact subset K⊂V. For f(t,z)=z, the bounds in [F2] hold throughout V with F1=R, Mt,1=0, M11=1, and L=1. The function y(t)=et solves the IVP, its graph on [0,T] lies in K, and for every 0<h≤T−t the Euler output state et(1+h) lies between 0 and eT(1+T)=R−1, so its input and output pairs lie in K. Starting from et, Euler returns et(1+h) and the exact endpoint is et+h=eteh. Therefore [F1] gives δh(t;y)=et(1+h−eh).

2.1givenF3step 1.1algebra

Apply [F3] to s↦es at 0 with increment h: there is θh∈(0,h) with eh=1+h+12eθhh2. Thus ∣δh(t;y)∣=12et+θhh2.

3.1F1step 2.1algebra

Since 0<θh<h, for 0≤t≤T−h we have 12h2≤∣δh(t;y)∣≤12eTh2. The lower and upper bounds establish uniform Θ(h2) error, hence order exactly one under [F1].

4.1F2algebra∎

For any scalar inputs u,v, ∣Ψh(t,u)−Ψh(t,v)∣=∣(1+h)(u−v)∣=(1+h)∣u−v∣. This verifies the stated stability factor; it also agrees with [F2] for f(t,z)=z and L=1.

Remarks

The exact calculation is local: it does not turn a local defect estimate into a global trajectory bound. The Taylor formula here is used only for this smooth scalar example.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

17 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