Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

The elliptic form is well defined and bounded on H1

Statement

Assume Countable Choice. Let L and a be as in Uniformly elliptic divergence-form operators and their sesquilinear forms with coefficient bounds Ma,Mb,Mc (measurability and essential boundedness only; uniform ellipticity is not needed for this lemma). Then every term of a(u,v)=∫Ω(aijDjuDiv‾+biDiuv‾+cuv‾)dx is absolutely convergent for u,v∈H1(Ω), the value depends only on the H1 classes, and a is a bounded sesquilinear form on H1(Ω) with ∣a(u,v)∣≤(nMa+nMb+Mc)∥u∥H1∥v∥H1. The same bound holds for the restriction of a to H01(Ω). The listed coefficient exponents are the whole hypothesis: no extra integrability of products is assumed.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice; an open Ω⊆Rn, n≥1; coefficients aij,bi,c:Ω→K measurable and essentially bounded with ∣aij∣≤Ma, ∣bi∣≤Mb, ∣c∣≤Mc almost everywhere; and classes u,v∈H1(Ω)=W1,2(Ω;K) with weak derivatives Dju,Div.

[F1]

Coefficient hypotheses: each coefficient is a measurable, essentially bounded class with the stated a.e. bounds; the divergence-form operator and its form are those of Uniformly elliptic divergence-form operators and their sesquilinear forms (The essential supremum of a measurable function with respect to a measure, The space L∞(μ) of essentially bounded measurable functions, A measurable function between measurable spaces).

[F2]

Sobolev norms: for w∈H1(Ω) the classes w and Djw are in L2(Ω), ∥w∥L2≤∥w∥H1 and ∥Djw∥L2≤∥w∥H1, and H1(Ω) is the a.e. quotient with quotient L2 norms (Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms, The space Lp(μ) as the quotient by null functions, The Lp norm descends to the quotient and makes Lp a normed space for 1≤p≤∞).

[F3]

Weak derivatives depend only on the Sobolev class, and products of measurable classes are measurable and change, as integrands, only on null sets when representatives change (Weak differentiation ignores null-set changes, Complex Lp classes and Euclidean test-function conventions).

[F4]

Estimates: for real measurable f,g Hölder gives ∫∣fg∣≤∥f∥p∥g∥p′ for conjugate exponents, and the general product inequality gives fg∈Lr with ∥fg∥r≤∥f∥p∥g∥q when 1/r=1/p+1/q; the complex forms are the componentwise ones of Complex Holder, Minkowski, and the quotient norm; for real vectors Cauchy--Schwarz gives ∑j=1n∣xj∣≤n (∑j=1n∣xj∣2)1/2 (Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases, Generalized Holder inequality puts products into Lr, Cauchy-Schwarz ∣⟨x,y⟩∣≤∥x∥2∥y∥2 with its equality case, the triangle inequality for ∥⋅∥2, the parallelogram law and polarisation).

Proof

1.1F1F3

Every integrand is measurable and bounded a.e. by a product of L2 classes: the products aijDjuDiv‾, biDiuv‾ and cuv‾ are measurable by [F1] and [F3], since products of measurable functions are measurable and representatives agree a.e.; the a.e. coefficient bounds turn each of them into an a.e. dominated multiple of a product of two L2 classes, e.g. ∣aijDjuDiv‾∣≤Ma∣Dju∣∣Div∣ off a null set.

1.2F1F2F4

Principal part: for almost every x, Cauchy--Schwarz in Rn applied to the vectors (∣Dju(x)∣)j and (1,…,1), together with ∣aij(x)∣≤Ma, gives ∣aij(x)Dju(x)Div(x)‾∣≤nMa∣Du(x)∣ ∣Dv(x)∣, where ∣Du∣=(∑j∣Dju∣2)1/2. Hence ∫Ω∣aijDjuDiv‾∣ dx≤nMa∥Du∥L2∥Dv∥L2 by H"older with exponent 2, so the principal term converges absolutely.

1.3F1F2F4

Drift part: summing the coefficientwise bounds and applying H"older to each ∣Diu∣∣v∣ gives ∑i=1n∫Ω∣biDiuv‾∣ dx≤Mb∑i=1n∥Diu∥L2∥v∥L2≤nMb∥Du∥L2∥v∥L2, since ∥Diu∥L2≤∥Du∥L2; the drift term is absolutely convergent.

1.4F1F2F4

Reaction part: ∫Ω∣cuv‾∣ dx≤Mc∥u∥L2∥v∥L2 by H"older.

2.1F2step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4algebra

Bound: adding the three estimates and using ∥Dw∥L2≤∥w∥H1 and ∥w∥L2≤∥w∥H1 for w=u and w=v gives ∣a(u,v)∣≤nMa∥u∥H1∥v∥H1+nMb∥u∥H1∥v∥H1+Mc∥u∥H1∥v∥H1=(nMa+nMb+Mc)∥u∥H1∥v∥H1, so a is a bounded form on H1(Ω).

3.1F3step 2.1∎

Class independence and sesquilinearity: replacing u, v or any coefficient by another representative alters each integrand only on a null set, hence leaves every integral unchanged; in particular the two L2 and weak-derivative slots depend only on the classes, and the value is finite by steps 1.2--2.1. Linearity in u and conjugate-linearity in v hold termwise: the principal and drift terms are linear in the u-slot and conjugate-linear in the v-slot, and the reaction term is linear in u and conjugate-linear in v, with the finite sum of absolutely convergent integrals linear separately in each slot. So a is a well-defined bounded sesquilinear form on H1(Ω); on the subspace H01(Ω) the same estimate holds with the restricted norm.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

69 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