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.
An indefinite quadratic has a unique boundary trust-region minimizer
Example
Take , , , and . The model Hessian is indefinite. The exact global trust-region minimizer is a unique boundary point, while the Cauchy step is a different feasible boundary point with a strictly smaller predicted decrease.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The trust-region model of Quadratic trust-region models and the actual-to-predicted reduction ratio, the optimality characterization of Global trust-region minimizers satisfy the shifted-Hessian conditions, including the hard case, and the Cauchy procedure of The Cauchy step for a quadratic trust-region model.
The model is and feasibility is (Quadratic trust-region models and the actual-to-predicted reduction ratio).
A feasible satisfying the shifted-Hessian equation, positive semidefiniteness, and multiplier complementarity is a global minimizer (Global trust-region minimizers satisfy the shifted-Hessian conditions, including the hard case).
For , the Cauchy step is (The Cauchy step for a quadratic trust-region model).
Proof
Set . Then , , and is positive definite. With , complementarity holds at the boundary, so [F2] gives a global minimizer. For any other feasible , expansion gives because the first term is strictly positive and the second nonnegative; hence the minimizer is unique.
The global minimizer has and , so its predicted reduction is . For the Cauchy step, and , hence [F3] gives and . Its model value is , so its predicted reduction is ; the strict inequality follows from .
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
12 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.