Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

A double-exponential envelope bounds the omitted trapezoid tails

Statement

Let A,B,κ>0, T≥0, and let Φ:R→C be continuous with ∣Φ(t)∣≤Aexp⁡(−Bexp⁡(κ∣t∣))(∣t∣≥T). For h>0 and nonnegative integers N−,N+ with N−h,N+h≥T, one has ∫∣t∣>N−h on the left, N+h on the right∣Φ(t)∣ dt≤AκB(e−BeκN−h+e−BeκN+h), where the left and right integral means ∫−∞−N−h+∫N+h∞. The omitted trapezoid samples obey the same bound: h∑k<−N− or k>N+∣Φ(kh)∣≤AκB(e−BeκN−h+e−BeκN+h).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A,B,κ>0, T≥0, a continuous Φ satisfying the stated envelope, h>0, and N±h≥T.

Proof

1.1givenF1F3F4algebra

For u0=BeκS, finite-interval substitution from [F3] gives ∫SRe−Beκtdt=1κ∫u0BeκRe−uu du. For u≥u0>0, 1/u≤1/u0, so the right side is at most e−u0/(κu0) after taking R→∞; the endpoint limit follows from [F4]. Since S≥0, eκS≥1, and each continuous one-sided tail is bounded by e−BeκS/(κBeκS)≤e−BeκS/(κB).

2.1givenstep 1.1algebra

Apply step 1.1 with S=N−h to t↦∣Φ(−t)∣ and with S=N+h to t↦∣Φ(t)∣, using the envelope. Adding proves the asserted integral bound and absolute integrability of both tails.

2.2givenF1F2step 1.1algebra

The function g(t)=Ae−Beκt is nonincreasing for t≥0, since its derivative is −ABκeκte−Beκt<0 by [F1]–[F2]. For every integer k>N+, hg(kh)≤∫(k−1)hkhg(t)dt; summing finite partial tails and taking their increasing limit bounds the right omitted samples by ∫N+h∞g(t)dt. The same comparison for g(−t) bounds the left tail, and step 1.1 gives the stated sum bound.

3.1step 2.1step 2.2∎

The two bounds in steps 2.1 and 2.2 are finite and have the displayed right-hand side, proving both claims.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

34 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