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.
Finite continued-fraction enclosure for erfcx
Statement
Fix real and integer . Set , and for define
Then for every , where is the moment ratio from Moment recurrence for the scaled complementary error function. Therefore
Each finite depth gives a valid enclosure; no convergence or shrinking-width claim as grows is made.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , integer , and the intervals defined above.
Proof
The upper bound in [F1] puts in . The map is positive and decreasing for . Hence, if , then ; by [F1] the middle term is . Backward induction gives down to .
The function is positive and decreasing on . Applying it to the interval and using [F2] gives the stated erfcx enclosure. Every step used a finite number of inclusions, so the enclosure is valid at this regardless of whether its width decreases with larger .
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
12 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
- DLMF, §7.9, continued fractions for erfc (standard reference, not scraped)
- N. M. Temme, “Numerical aspects of special functions,” Acta Numerica 17 (2008), §§3 and 5 (standard reference, not scraped)