Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-09-09 (Codex)
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.

Riemann-integrable half-space extensions of chart coefficients

Statement

Let n≥1, Hn={x∈Rn:xn≥0}, and let U be relatively open in Hn. If f is smooth on U with compact support K⊂U, set f~=f on U and f~=0 on Rn∖U. Then f~ is bounded, compactly supported, smooth away from {xn=0}, and Riemann integrable. Its Euclidean integral is independent of the bounding rectangle and of any auxiliary smooth extension. For an interior chart U⊂Rn, the zero extension is smooth everywhere.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

Compact support of a differential form: Let M be a smooth manifold, possibly with boundary, and k≥0. For ω∈Ωk(M) define supp⁡ω={p∈M:ωp≠0}‾ M,Ωck(M)={ω∈Ωk(M):supp⁡ω is compact}. The closure and compactness are in M, including its genuine boundary. Zero is the intrinsic zero of each exterior-power fiber, so this definition is independent of trivialization. The zero form has empty support.

[F2]

Smooth functions on relatively open half-space sets: Near each point of U, the function agrees on U with a smooth function on a Euclidean-open neighbourhood. In particular it is continuous on U and smooth on its Euclidean interior. No double or simultaneous selection of extensions is needed.

[F4]

Lebesgue's criterion in Rm: a bounded function on a closed nondegenerate rectangle is Riemann integrable iff its discontinuity set is null: A bounded real function on a closed nondegenerate rectangle in Rm, m≥1, is Riemann integrable if and only if its discontinuity set is null.

[F5]

Measure zero and content zero in Rm by countable and finite cube covers: Fix m≥1. A closed cube is a rectangle ∏j<m[aj,aj+ℓ] with ℓ≥0; its volume is ℓm. A set E⊆Rm is null when, for every ε>0, it is covered by a sequence of closed cubes whose nonnegative volume series converges with sum at most ε. It has content zero when such a cover can be finite. The series and finite sums are def-series and def-finite-sum, and their nonnegative bounds use thm-nonnegative-series-bounded-partial-sums and lem-finite-sum-laws. Both properties pass to subsets. Padding a finite cover with degenerate zero-volume cubes proves that content zero implies null. This terminology defines only cover-nullity; it does not define a measure on arbitrary sets.

[F6]

For every ε>0 in a complete ordered field there is a natural n≥1 with 1/n<ε: Let F be a complete ordered field (def-complete-ordered-field) and let ε∈F with ε>0. Then there is a natural number n≥1 such that 1n⋅1F<ε, where n⋅1F is the canonical natural of F (thm-of-archimedean) and 1/(n⋅1F) is its multiplicative inverse (def-field). As is standard we abbreviate n⋅1F to n and write the conclusion 1/n<ε. This is the reciprocal form of the Archimedean property. thm-of-archimedean on its own delivers only the assertion that the canonical naturals are cofinal, x<n⋅1F; the form actually used in analysis, that the reciprocals of the naturals get below every positive bound, is the statement above, and it is recorded separately so that no proof has to reconstruct the inversion step in passing.

[F7]

The Riemann integral of a compactly supported function is independent of its bounding rectangle: Let n≥1 and let f:Rn→R have compact support. If f is Riemann integrable on one closed rectangle whose interior contains its support, then it is integrable on every such rectangle, and all the resulting integrals are equal. This includes the empty-support case.

Proof

Given: The objects and hypotheses in the statement above.

1.1F1F2F3

The support convention [F1] for functions, regarded as zero-forms, gives f=0 on U∖K. By [F3], K is compact and closed in Rn. Continuity from [F2] makes the sets {x∈K:∣f(x)∣<j}, for positive integers j, an open cover of K. A finite subcover bounds ∣f∣ on K, hence bounds f~ everywhere. Off K, the extension is locally zero. At a point of U with xn>0, relative openness supplies a Euclidean neighbourhood contained in U, on which the extension is smooth by [F2]. Points with xn<0 are outside K. Thus f~ is smooth away from the genuine face, and its support lies in the closed compact set K. Empty K gives the identically zero function.

1.2F3F5F6

The increasing open cubes (−j,j)n cover K, so [F3] gives R>0 with K⊂(−R,R)n. Divide each of the first n−1 intervals [−R,R] into m equal pieces of length δ=2R/m. Over every resulting face cell take its product with [−δ/2,δ/2]. These are mn−1 closed n-cubes covering [−R,R]n∩{xn=0}, of total volume mn−1δn=(2R)n/m. By [F6] this is arbitrarily small, proving content zero. For n=1 use the one interval [−δ/2,δ/2]. This construction uses only finite covers for each prescribed error.

2.1givenF2step 1.1

The defining rule for f~ uses only f on U and zero elsewhere. Local Euclidean extensions in [F2] are used only to check smoothness at a fixed point. Two choices agree on U wherever both are being used, so they cannot change this rule. In particular, when any auxiliary extension is restricted back to the given coefficient and then extended by zero as stated, it produces exactly f~. There is no assertion that arbitrary auxiliary values outside Hn have the same integral.

2.2F4F5step 1.1step 1.2

The discontinuities of f~ in [−R,R]n lie in that content-zero, hence null, face. Boundedness and the null-discontinuity criterion imply Riemann integrability. Only the sufficient direction of [F4] is used: its proof uses compactness and finite covers, not the countable-choice step in its converse. No countable choice or general smooth-cutoff existence is used here.

3.1F7step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2∎

The compact-support integral lemma makes the value independent of any larger bounding rectangle. Every auxiliary extension after restriction to Hn gives the same zero-extended function, hence the same integral. With an interior chart there is no genuine face, so the artificial-edge argument proves smoothness everywhere.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

50 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