Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-09
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.

Equality in the unit-complex finite-sum bound

Statement

For an integer n>0 and z1,…,zn∈C with ∣zi∣=1, one has ∣∑i=1nzi∣≤n. Equality holds if and only if all the zi are equal. This includes n=1.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: n>0 and ∣zi∣=1 for 1≤i≤n; natural scalars in inequalities are their real images.

[F1]

The modulus of a+bi is the nonnegative square root of a2+b2 (Real and imaginary parts, complex conjugation, and modulus).

[F2]

Real finite sums may be computed in any enumeration (The sum ∑i∈Sai over a finite index set, and its product form).

[F3]

Finite real sums distribute over addition and scaling, and a sum of nonnegative terms vanishes only when every term vanishes (Laws of finite sums and finite products).

[F4]

Complex finite sums are defined in the additive monoid, with empty sum zero (A finite sum in a commutative monoid indexed by an arbitrary finite set).

[F5]

Finite monoid sums can be reindexed, split over disjoint subsets, and summed in either order on a Cartesian product (Finite commutative-monoid sums are invariant under bijective reindexing, split over disjoint unions, and satisfy the finite Fubini rule).

[F6]

Conjugation preserves addition and multiplication; zz‾=∣z∣2, ∣z∣=0 exactly when z=0, and ∣zw∣=∣z∣∣w∣ (Conjugation is an involutive real-field automorphism, zz‾=∣z∣2, and modulus is definite, multiplicative, and subadditive).

[F7]

Base and successor steps establish a property for all finite lengths (The principle of mathematical induction).

[F8]

For nonnegative reals, a≤b if and only if a2≤b2 (Squaring is monotone on the nonnegatives).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F4F6F7algebra

Put S=∑i=1nzi, using F4. For any complex finite lists, distributivity over a finite sum follows by induction: it holds for the empty sum; appending a changes cA to c(A+a)=cA+ca. Likewise conjugation through a finite sum holds at zero and is preserved by A+a‾=A‾+a‾. F7 therefore gives these identities for every finite length.

2.1step 1.1F5F6given

Consequently ∣S∣2=SS‾=∑i,jzizj‾. Split the pairs into i=j, i<j and j<i, and reindex the third part by swapping its coordinates, as permitted by F5. The diagonal sum is n since zizi‾=1, giving ∣S∣2=n+∑i<j(zizj‾+zjzi‾).

3.1step 2.1F6F7F3F4algebra

For each pair i<j, expand ∣zi−zj∣2=(zi−zj)(zi‾−zj‾)=2−zizj‾−zjzi‾. There are n(n−1)/2 such pairs: the count is zero at n=1, and adjoining index n+1 adds the n pairs (i,n+1), so the formula is preserved by n(n−1)/2+n=n(n+1)/2. Induction gives this count for all positive n. Adding the displayed expansions to step 2.1 cancels each off-diagonal term and yields ∑i<j∣zi−zj∣2=n(n−1)−(∣S∣2−n)=n2−∣S∣2.

4.1step 3.1F1F2F3F6F8

Each squared modulus is a nonnegative real by F1 and F6. Use F2 to enumerate the pair set and F3 to conclude n2−∣S∣2≥0. Since ∣S∣≥0 and n>0, F8 now gives ∣S∣≤n.

4.2step 3.1F3F6F4

If ∣S∣=n, the identity in step 3.1 makes the sum of squared differences zero. F3 forces ∣zi−zj∣2=0 for every pair, and F6 gives zi=zj. For n>1, take the pairs (1,j) to conclude every zj=z1. For n=1 that conclusion already holds and the pair sum is empty.

5.1F6F1givenstep 4.2∎

Conversely, if every zi=z1, repeated addition gives S=nz1. Thus ∣S∣=∣n∣∣z1∣=n by F6 and the real modulus in F1. At n=1 this reads ∣z1∣=1. This proves both directions of the equality characterization.

Sources

Etingof et al., Lemma 5.4.5 proof, p. 101, uses strictness for unequal unit roots. The pairwise squared-distance calculation supplies that equality argument locally for all unit complex numbers, without complex arguments or trigonometry.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

41 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