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 maximal ODE solution need not have a closed interval domain
Statement
False claim: a maximal solution of an ODE has a closed interval as its domain of definition.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The solution of with .
Every IVP has a unique maximal solution on an open interval (Every Picard–Lindelöf initial value problem has one maximal solution on an open interval).
The maximal solution domain is open in the time-state variables (The maximal solution domain is open).
Refutation
The explicit solution solves for all and [given] cannot be extended through , so its maximal interval is .
This domain is open and not closed. That matches [L1] and [F1], and it [F1, L1, step 1.1] directly refutes the false claim.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
7 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
- Nigel Hitchin, Differentiable Manifolds, Appendix §10.2 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Chin-Lung Wang, Banach Calculus, §4.2 (standard reference, not scraped)