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.
Compactly supported distributions extend to smooth functions
Statement
Give the topology generated by for compact and . A compactly supported distribution has a unique continuous complex-linear extension to this space, given by where is any cutoff equal to one near . The result is independent of . The extension vanishes on every smooth function zero near the support. No Hahn–Banach or choice axiom is needed.
Facts & Assumptions
A compactly supported distribution has a finite-order bound on one compact neighborhood for all tests (Compactly supported distributions have global finite order).
Tests vanishing near the support have zero pairing; the empty-support distribution is zero (Support of a distribution).
Compact subsets admit smooth compact cutoffs equal to one on a neighborhood (Test function cutoffs and euclidean localization).
Proof
Given: a compactly supported distribution , with support .
Take from F3. For any smooth , is a test. If is another such cutoff, is a test vanishing near , so F2 gives equal pairings. Thus the formula is well-defined, linear, and agrees with on tests because vanishes near . If vanishes near , so does , proving the additional vanishing assertion.
Apply F1 to . Let be its fixed estimate and put , compactly inside . The finite product formula gives , where . Hence , proving continuity in the stated smooth topology.
Tests are dense in that topology. Indeed a basic neighborhood of a smooth imposes finitely many derivative bounds on compacts . Use F3 on their finite union to take near that union. Then the test has exactly the same derivatives as on all these compacts, so it lies in the neighborhood. If there are no constraints, the zero test suffices. If two continuous linear extensions agree on tests, their difference has a closed zero kernel (the scalar target is Hausdorff) containing this dense set, hence vanishes on all smooth functions. This proves uniqueness without selecting a sequence of cutoffs. For empty take the zero extension; empty has only the zero function.
Depends on
Used by
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
- Semyon Dyatlov, Lecture notes for 18.155 (2022) (standard reference, not scraped)