Alphabeta Math
False statementConstruction: 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.

FALSE: if the Cesaro means of a sequence converge then the sequence converges

Statement

False claim: if the Cesaro means (σn) of a sequence (xk) of reals converge (The Cesaro means σn=(x0+⋯+xn)/(n+1) and (C,1)-summability), then (xk) converges.

The implication in the opposite direction is true and is If xk→L then σn→L: convergence implies (C,1)-summability to the same value. The claim above asserts its converse, and it is refuted below by the alternating sequence sk=(−1)k, whose Cesaro means converge to 0 while the sequence itself does not converge at all.

That is the whole reason Cesaro summability is worth defining: it is a strictly larger notion than convergence, consistent with it where both apply.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The alternating sequence (sk) 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, together with the index maps e and o of that lemma; and its partial sums Sn:=∑k<nsk (Finite sums and finite products, by recursion), and its Cesaro means σn=(n+1)−1Sn+1 (The Cesaro means σn=(x0+⋯+xn)/(n+1) and (C,1)-summability).

[L1]

The alternating sequence: e and o are the unique maps with e0=0, eσ(j)=σ(σ(ej)), o0=σ(0), oσ(j)=σ(σ(oj)); both are strictly increasing; N is the disjoint union of their ranges; (sk) is the unique sequence with s0=1 and sσ(k)=−sk; ∣sk∣=1, sej=1 and soj=−1 (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).

[L2]

Finite sums: ∑k<0sk=0 and ∑k<n+1sk=∑k<nsk+sn (Finite sums and finite products, by recursion, Laws of finite sums and finite products).

[L3]
[L4]

Cesaro means: σn=(n+1)−1∑k=0nxk, and ∑k=0n=∑k<n+1 (The Cesaro means σn=(x0+⋯+xn)/(n+1) and (C,1)-summability, Finite sums and finite products, by recursion).

[L5]

The alternating sequence does not converge: it is bounded and divergent, which is the refutation of FALSE: every bounded sequence converges, carried out there for the very same sequence, the one determined by s0=1 and sσ(k)=−sk, which 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 shows is unique.

[L7]

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 and transitive (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property), Ordered field).

Refutation

technique · direct
1.1

By induction on j, oj=σ(ej) and eσ(j)=σ(oj): at j=0 one has o0=σ(0)=σ(e0), and eσ(j)=σ(σ(ej))=σ(oj) follows from the first identity at j, while oσ(j)=σ(σ(oj))=σ(eσ(j)) carries the first identity to σ(j).

L1L3
1.2

The partial sums satisfy S0=0 and Sσ(n)=Sn+sn, and σn=(n+1)−1Sσ(n).

L2L4L7
1.3

(sk) does not converge.

L5
2.1

By induction on j: Sej=0 and Soj=1. At j=0: Se0=S0=0 and So0=Sσ(0)=S0+s0=1. For the step, Seσ(j)=Sσ(oj)=Soj+soj=1+(−1)=0 and Soσ(j)=Sσ(eσ(j))=Seσ(j)+seσ(j)=0+1=1.

step 1.1step 1.2L1L3
3.1

Every natural number is ej for exactly one j or oj for exactly one j, so Sm∈{0,1} for every m; in particular 0≤Sσ(n)≤1 for every n.

step 1.1step 2.1L1
4.1

Hence 0≤σn=(n+1)−1Sσ(n)≤(n+1)−1 and so ∣σn∣≤(n+1)−1 for every n.

step 1.2step 3.1L7
5.1

Given a real ε>0, choose m≥1 with 1/m<ε; for every n≥m one has n+1>m and therefore ∣σn−0∣≤(n+1)−1<1/m<ε. So (σn) converges to 0, that is, (sk) is (C,1)-summable to 0.

step 4.1L4L6L7
6.1

So (sk) has convergent Cesaro means and does not converge, and the claim is false.

step 1.3step 5.1∎

Remarks

  • What averaging destroys. The Cesaro mean of the first n+1 terms of an alternating sequence is either 0 or 1/(n+1), because the terms cancel in pairs and at most one is left over. The oscillation is real and is not damped by any tail condition; it is simply invisible to the average. So the transform loses information, and no regular summability method can be expected to recover a limit that does not exist (The Cesaro matrix satisfies the Silverman-Toeplitz conditions, giving a second proof of the Cesaro mean theorem).

  • The worked computation of the means, with the values displayed, is The Cesaro means of (−1)k converge to 0 although the sequence diverges ↗.

  • A correct converse needs an extra hypothesis. The classical one is Tauberian: if the Cesaro means converge and in addition k(xk−xk−1) is bounded, then (xk) converges. No such theorem is proved in this library, and none may be cited from it; the statement is mentioned only to say what the repaired claim would look like.

  • The failure is not caused by unboundedness. The witness is bounded, with ∣sk∣=1 at every index. It is the same sequence that refutes the claim that bounded sequences converge (FALSE: every bounded sequence converges), and for the same underlying reason: boundedness forbids escaping, not oscillating.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

40 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