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: uniform integrability implies domination by one integrable function
Statement refuted
uniform integrability implies domination by one integrable function.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: On with Lebesgue measure, the pairwise disjoint intervals , where , and the functions .
Uniform integrability means that for every there is such that for every . (A uniformly integrable family)
Refutation
The intervals are pairwise disjoint and lie in because . Also
If and , then ; if , then and Therefore the family is uniformly integrable by [L1].
If an integrable function satisfied almost everywhere for every , then almost everywhere on . Since the intervals are pairwise disjoint, contradicting integrability of . Hence no single integrable majorant exists.
This uniformly integrable family is not dominated by any integrable function, so the claim is false.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
3 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
- Terence Tao, 245A Notes 4: Modes of convergence, Exercise 21.3 (standard reference, not scraped)