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>Mma

and, for every bounded finite-expansion operator T,

Tr~(Mm+1,T)Tr~(Mm,T)KTlogMm.

Then every bounded finite-rank operator T satisfies

IT(Mm)1CTlogMm,C:=K1a1.

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.

1.1

Every bounded finite-rank T is an operator-norm limit of finite-rank [given, L1] 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 Tx=jbj(x)fj has TT<ε. Each Tek has finite expansion.

L1finite-dimensional coordinatesdense span
2.1

If T is finite expansion and ekM, property A gives

givenL1step 1.1

akkTekekT(M).

Averaging over M yields Tr~(M,T)T(M). [L1, property A]

3.1

If T is also finite rank, its range is spanned by finitely many of the [given, L1, step 2.1] 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.

L1finite rankdisjointness
4.1

Apply step 2.1 to IT on Mm and telescope step 3.1:

givenstep 2.1step 3.1

IT(Mm)1Tr~(Mm,T)1KTk=m1logMk.

The growth hypothesis gives logMk>akmlogMm, so the geometric sum is at most ((1a1)logMm)1. This proves the estimate for finite-rank finite-expansion T. [steps 2.1, 3.1, trace hypothesis, geometric series]

5.1

For arbitrary bounded finite-rank T, 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.

steps 1.14.1
6.1

If B had λ-BAP, choose m with [given, L2, step 5.1] Cλ/logMm<1/2. The unit ball of finite-dimensional [Mm] is compact, so [L2] would give a finite-rank T with Tλ and IT(Mm)<1/2, contradicting step 5.1.

L2step 5.1finite-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