Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
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.

Enflo's quantitative localized-trace obstruction

Statement

Let B have a dense linearly independent generator with property A. Suppose there are pairwise disjoint nonempty finite subsets Mm of the generator and constants a>1, K>0 such that

∣Mm+1∣>∣Mm∣a

and, for every bounded finite-expansion operator T,

∣Tr⁡~(Mm+1,T)−Tr⁡~(Mm,T)∣≤K∥T∥log⁡∣Mm∣.

Then every bounded finite-rank operator T satisfies

∥I−T∥(Mm)≥1−C∥T∥log⁡∣Mm∣,C:=K1−a−1.

Consequently B has no λ-BAP for any finite λ.

Facts & Assumptions

[L1]

Finite-expansion matrices, normalized localized trace, property A, and ∥⋅∥(M) have the fixed-generator meanings of Enflo finite-expansion and localized-trace system.

[L2]

λ-BAP gives norm-λ finite-rank approximations uniformly on each compact set (Approximation property and bounded approximation property).

Proof

technique · direct

Given: The objects and hypotheses in the Statement.

1.1givenL1

Every bounded finite-rank T is an operator-norm limit of finite-rank finite-expansion operators. Indeed, choose a finite basis f1,…,fr of T(B) and bounded coefficient functionals bj with Tx=∑jbj(x)fj. Approximate each fj by a finite linear combination fj′ of the dense generators so that T′x=∑jbj(x)fj′ has ∥T−T′∥<ε. Each T′ek has finite expansion. [L1, finite-dimensional coordinates, dense span] (finite-dimensional coordinates; dense span).

2.1givenL1step 1.1

If T is finite expansion and ek∈M, property A gives ∣akk∣≤∥Tek∥∥ek∥≤∥T∥(M). Averaging over M yields ∣Tr⁡~(M,T)∣≤∥T∥(M). [L1, property A] (property A).

3.1givenL1step 2.1

If T is also finite rank, its range is spanned by finitely many of the vectors Tej, hence is contained in the span of a finite subset of the generator. Because the Mk are disjoint, its diagonal coefficients on Mk vanish for all sufficiently large k. Thus Tr⁡~(Mk,T)→0. [L1, finite rank, disjointness] (finite rank; disjointness).

4.1givenstep 2.1step 3.1

Apply step 2.1 to I−T on Mm and telescope step 3.1: ∥I−T∥(Mm)≥∣1−Tr⁡~(Mm,T)∣≥1−K∥T∥∑k=m∞1log⁡∣Mk∣. The growth hypothesis gives log⁡∣Mk∣>ak−mlog⁡∣Mm∣, so the geometric sum is at most ((1−a−1)log⁡∣Mm∣)−1. This proves the estimate for finite-rank finite-expansion T. [steps 2.1, 3.1, trace hypothesis, geometric series] (trace hypothesis; geometric series).

5.1givenstep 1.1step 4.1

For arbitrary bounded finite-rank T, take the approximants from step 1.1 and pass to the limit in the operator norm, the restriction norm, and the right-hand side. This proves the displayed estimate in full generality. [steps 1.1, 4.1].

6.1givenL2step 5.1∎

If B had λ-BAP, choose m with Cλ/log⁡∣Mm∣<1/2. The unit ball of finite-dimensional [Mm] is compact, so [L2] would give a finite-rank T with ∥T∥≤λ and ∥I−T∥(Mm)<1/2, contradicting step 5.1. [L2, step 5.1, finite-dimensional compactness] (finite-dimensional compactness).

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

5 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