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.
Localized energy estimate for nested Galerkin solutions
Statement
Assume Countable Choice, as in the Sobolev interpolation suppliers.
Let be conforming P1 meshes with exact Galerkin solutions . Let and let be the union of the vertex stars of cells in . Then where depends on shape regularity, , and the local interpolant constants.
Facts & Assumptions
Countable Choice is assumed in the cited Sobolev and reference-simplex suppliers (The Axiom of Countable Choice ()).
Given: Countable Choice, a nested matching refinement, exact conforming P1 Galerkin solutions, and the constant-convection model.
The coarse residual pairs the weak error with any function as the cell residual sum minus the outward flux jump sum (Element and edge residual representation for P1 Galerkin errors).
The local moment interpolant is P1-reproducing and satisfies local volume, gradient and edge estimates (Local approximation and reproduction of the P1 moment interpolant).
Galerkin orthogonality holds on both nested conforming spaces (Galerkin orthogonality for conforming approximations).
Proof
Define an auxiliary coarse moment map for this nested pair. At each interior vertex , choose the least-index incident coarse cell if one exists, otherwise the original selected cell , and use its dual affine moment ; at boundary vertices use zero. Set . The same conforming zero-boundary membership argument as in [F2] applies. Its bounds are uniform: on a cell use the patch mean when misses the boundary and otherwise. Then for interior vertices, while boundary coefficient differences are zero. Because and , the scaled dual bound gives . The hat bounds and patch Poincaré argument in the proof of [F2] therefore give and . Applying the same scaled trace inequality as in [F2] gives its edge bound as well. All these operations have input ; shifted functions enter only the local integrals.
Put . The fine Galerkin equation and coarse equation imply and . Since is constant and , , so . Also because and fine orthogonality kills the latter term paired with . Hence .
If , then is affine on . At every interior vertex of , the selected is also unchanged, so is affine and its dual moment equals the common nodal value ; boundary coefficients equal . Consequently on every unchanged cell. The trace of also vanishes on every edge incident to an unchanged cell. Thus [F1] applied to step 2.1 contains only volume residuals on and interior edges with both incident cells in . Use the volume and edge estimates proved in step 1.1. The surviving squared residual weights are bounded by , since each surviving edge contribution occurs in the indicators of its incident refined cells. Cauchy–Schwarz and uniformly bounded overlap of the coarse vertex patches bound the other factor by , giving . If this gradient norm is zero the claim is immediate; otherwise divide by it and square.
Depends on
- Residual indicators and data oscillation for P1 AFEM
- Compatible 2D newest-vertex-bisection meshes
- Element and edge residual representation for P1 Galerkin errors
- Local approximation and reproduction of the P1 moment interpolant
- Galerkin orthogonality for conforming approximations
- Continuous matching piecewise polynomials belong to W1p
- Zero-boundary conforming polynomials lie in W0 1p and satisfy Poincare
- The Axiom of Countable Choice ($\mathrm{AC}_\omega$)
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
36 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
- Ricardo H. Nochetto, Adaptive Finite Element Methods, Lecture 4 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Bonito, Canuto, Nochetto & Veeser, Adaptive Finite Element Methods (2024) (standard reference, not scraped)