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 have a dense linearly independent generator with property A. Suppose there are pairwise disjoint nonempty finite subsets of the generator and constants , such that
and, for every bounded finite-expansion operator ,
Then every bounded finite-rank operator satisfies
Consequently has no -BAP for any finite .
Facts & Assumptions
Finite-expansion matrices, normalized localized trace, property A, and have the fixed-generator meanings of Enflo finite-expansion and localized-trace system.
-BAP gives norm- finite-rank approximations uniformly on each compact set (Approximation property and bounded approximation property).
Proof
Given: The objects and hypotheses in the Statement.
Every bounded finite-rank is an operator-norm limit of finite-rank [given, L1] finite-expansion operators. Indeed, choose a finite basis of and bounded coefficient functionals with . Approximate each by a finite linear combination of the dense generators so that has . Each has finite expansion.
If is finite expansion and , property A gives
Averaging over yields . [L1, property A]
If is also finite rank, its range is spanned by finitely many of the [given, L1, step 2.1] vectors , hence is contained in the span of a finite subset of the generator. Because the are disjoint, its diagonal coefficients on vanish for all sufficiently large . Thus .
Apply step 2.1 to on and telescope step 3.1:
The growth hypothesis gives , so the geometric sum is at most . This proves the estimate for finite-rank finite-expansion . [steps 2.1, 3.1, trace hypothesis, geometric series]
For arbitrary bounded finite-rank , take the approximants from step 1.1 [given, step 1.1, step 4.1] 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.
If had -BAP, choose with [given, L2, step 5.1] . The unit ball of finite-dimensional is compact, so [L2] would give a finite-rank with and , contradicting step 5.1.
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
- Per Enflo, A counterexample to the approximation problem in Banach spaces (standard reference, not scraped)