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.
A fixed RATTLE residual budget allows an O(epsilon) drift envelope
Example
Fix compact phase tubes in a convex phase-coordinate chart with closure inside a regular chart, and . Put and suppose the exact-solve RATTLE iterates from the common initial state stay in for the grids considered. Suppose every finite RATTLE solve succeeds, its branch iterates stay in the selected local balls over , and its scaled residuals are bounded by a fixed sufficiently small . After each output apply the consistency retraction from Holonomic phase residuals control distance to the consistent phase manifold before the next step. For sufficiently small , the restored trajectory stays in and has an global error envelope relative to exact-solve RATTLE; refinement alone does not force this upper bound to vanish. If both scaled residual tolerances are instead , the global solver contribution is , while the unprojected solver outputs have position and tangency residuals and . These are upper bounds; they do not assert a matching lower bound or that residual tolerances alone certify forward error.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The compact phase tubes and fixed horizon in the Example, step , successful finite RATTLE solves with multiplier iterates in the selected branch balls, the consistency restoration specified there, and the scaled residual hypotheses.
Scaled RATTLE residuals bound the finite solve trajectory error: on a compact phase tube, for the restored trajectory per-step perturbations are bounded by ; scaled residuals yield an global error relative to exact-solve RATTLE.
Scaled RATTLE equations have unique local multiplier branches: on a compact phase tube the selected exact map is smooth in local coordinates with uniformly bounded derivatives and is the identity at .
On a convex open set, a uniform bound implies : a uniform derivative bound on a convex chart gives the corresponding Lipschitz bound.
Implicit residuals and their update and derivative units: a residual norm is not a forward-error estimate without a separate inverse or stability bound.
Verification
For at every step, [F1] gives, until a first exit from , the recurrence for the restored trajectory. Iteration yields . Choose so this is less than the coordinate distance from to the boundary of ; then no first exit occurs, and the uniform upper-bound envelope holds. It need not shrink as .
If instead , [F1] makes each additive perturbation at most , and the same sum gives global error ; for sufficiently small this is below the tube margin, so again there is no first exit. The unscaled residuals are and .
These bounds rely on the inverse and stability estimates in [F1]. As [F4] states, the residual-tolerance status alone is not a forward-error certificate; the explicit consistency restoration is also part of this repeated-step example.
Depends on
- Scaled RATTLE residuals bound the finite solve trajectory error
- Scaled RATTLE equations have unique local multiplier branches
- On a convex open set, a uniform bound $\|Df(z)v\|_2\le M\|v\|_2$ implies $\|f(y)-f(x)\|_2\le M\|y-x\|_2$
- Holonomic phase residuals control distance to the consistent phase manifold
- Implicit residuals and their update and derivative units
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
- Ernst Hairer, Christian Lubich, and Gerhard Wanner, Geometric Numerical Integration, 2nd ed., Chapter VII.1.4, pp. 245–247 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Robert I. McLachlan, Klas Modin, Olivier Verdier, and Matt Wilkins, Geometric Generalisations of SHAKE and RATTLE, Foundations of Computational Mathematics 14 (2014), 339–370, §4.3 (standard reference, not scraped)