Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generated
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 sampling reconstruction bridges compact-uniform raw quadrature limits

Statement

Let X,U be real Banach spaces, and let continuous maps H,Hn:X→U satisfy sup⁡a∈K∥Hn(a)−H(a)∥U→0 for every norm-compact K⊂X. Suppose continuous finite-dimensional sampling and reconstruction maps Sn:X→En and Jn:En→X are supplied and satisfy sup⁡a∈K∥JnSn(a)−a∥X→0 on every such K. Then Gn(a)=Hn(Jn(Sn(a))) factors through finite-dimensional data, with Fn=En, finite map the identity and output reconstruction Rn=Hn∘Jn:En→U, and Gn→H uniformly on every norm-compact input set in the actual U norm. When X,U are function spaces on bounded domains with the pointwise output convention required by the discretization-invariant-family definition, this is a finite-sampling family in that definition.

For the supremum-norm continuous-input case these reconstruction hypotheses always hold with exactly the prescribed tags of arbitrary finite partitions of a nonempty bounded open D⊂Rd whose maximal cell diameters hn tend to zero. Namely let X=C(Dˉ;Rq), let Sn(a)=(a(ξn,j))j, and, when hn>0, for x∈Dˉ put wn,j(x)=max⁡{0,2hn−∣x−ξn,j∣},Jn(z)(x)=∑jwn,j(x)zj∑jwn,j(x). If hn=0, the domain is the zero-dimensional singleton; define Jn(z) to be the constant function with value z1. This reconstructs every input exactly. In both branches ∥JnSn∥X→X≤1, and the reconstruction error is bounded by the input modulus of continuity at 2hn, uniformly on every compact input family. In a stronger Banach input norm the first clause applies whenever the stated reconstructions converge in that norm; convergence in the supremum norm alone is not substituted for that condition.

A further case needs no input reconstruction. Suppose a raw finite architecture first uses its input only through the sampled pointwise lift in the integral-only field v1,n(x)=∑jωn,jκn(x,ξn,j)P(a(ξn,j))+bn(x), and every later stage acts on this field and the fixed parameters without further access to the original input. Assume these stages are defined and continuous on the compatible Banach spaces in question. Then each raw map itself factors through the finite input sample vector. Its compact-uniform raw convergence therefore already gives a finite-sampling family in the actual output norm, regardless of whether a sample reconstruction into the input norm has been supplied. This includes the integral-only universality subclass, when its kernels and intermediate spaces satisfy the declared compatible norm hypotheses.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Banach spaces, continuous raw maps, finite-dimensional maps, and compact-uniform limits in the Statement. In the concrete branch the nonempty bounded open set and tagged partitions are given, with nonnegative maximal diameters tending to zero.

[F1]

Uniformly convergent continuous images of a compact set have compact union, including the limit image (Uniformly convergent images of a compact set have compact union).

[F4]

A map between function spaces satisfying the domain and pointwise-output conventions, and factoring through the supplied finite sampling, finite map and output reconstruction, has the type required by Discretization-invariant operator family. Ambient open covers of compact metric subsets admit finite subcovers (A subset of a metric space is open in the subspace metric exactly when it is the trace of an open set of the ambient space, and it is compact as a metric space in its own right exactly when every family of open subsets of the ambient space covering it, indexed or not, has finitely many members covering it).

Proof

1.1givenF1construct

Fix compact K⊂X. If K is empty the conclusion is vacuous. Otherwise put An=JnSn and L=K∪⋃n≥1An(K). The maps An are continuous and converge uniformly on K to the identity. Thus [F1] makes L compact in the actual X norm. By hypothesis sup⁡b∈L∥Hn(b)−H(b)∥U→0.

1.2givenF2constructalgebra

In the concrete branch 0≤hn<∞. If hn=0, every cell is its singleton tag, so their finite union D is finite. A nonempty open subset of Rd with d≥1 contains a ball and hence infinitely many points; therefore this case forces d=0 and D=Dˉ is the singleton of R0. All tags are that point, and Jn(z)(x)=z1 is a bounded linear reconstruction of norm at most one, with JnSn(a)=a and reconstruction error 0=ωa(0). Now suppose hn>0. Every point of D is within hn of some tag in its cell. The distance to the finite tag set is continuous, so the same inequality holds on Dˉ. Consequently ∑jwn,j(x)>0 there. The normalized weights are continuous, nonnegative and sum to one. Thus Jn is a bounded linear map from the finite sample space with its maximum norm into C(Dˉ;Rq), of norm at most one. The sampling map is bounded with norm at most one. A positive weight implies ∣x−ξn,j∣<2hn, so ∥JnSn(a)−a∥∞≤ωa(2hn), where ωa(r)=sup⁡∣x−y∣≤r∣a(x)−a(y)∣.

2.1givenF4step 1.1constructalgebra

Continuity of H controls uniform perturbations of the compact set K. Explicitly, for ε>0 collect every ball B(x,r) with x∈K and r>0 such that ∥H(z)−H(x)∥U<ε/2 for ∥z−x∥X<3r. These balls cover K; choose a finite subcover and take δ to be its smallest radius. If a∈K and ∥b−a∥X<δ, both points lie within 3r of one selected center, so ∥H(b)−H(a)∥U<ε. Hence sup⁡K∥H(An(a))−H(a)∥U→0. Combining this with step 1.1 gives sup⁡K∥Gn−H∥U→0. The maps Sn, identity on En, and Rn=HnJn provide the asserted finite-dimensional factorization, and [F4] applies when its function-space conventions hold; no access to the original input is used by Rn.

3.1F2F3step 2.1step 1.2algebra

For a compact K⊂C(Dˉ;Rq) and η>0, [F3] gives a finite η-net a1,…,as. By [F2] their moduli tend to zero. For a∈K within η of ai, ωa(r)≤2η+ωai(r). Therefore sup⁡a∈Kωa(r)→0. Step 1.2 supplies the reconstruction hypotheses of steps 1.1–2.1 and proves the whole concrete branch. The general argument measured every reconstruction error in X and every output error in U, so it also proves the first clause without any unproved norm upgrade.

4.1givenF4constructalgebra∎

For the last assertion set En=Fn=(Rq0)Nn and let Sn(a) be its prescribed sample vector. For z∈En, construct v1,n(z)(x)=∑jωn,jκn(x,ξn,j)P(zj)+bn(x) and apply the subsequent raw stages to this field; call the resulting output Rn(z). The first field belongs to its designated auxiliary space because it is a finite sum of its kernel sections and bias with finite scalar/vector coefficients. Every subsequent field belongs to its designated space by the stated compatibility assumptions. The finite sum and continuity of the lift make the first field continuous in z, and continuity of the subsequent maps makes Rn:En→U continuous. Induction through those stages proves Hn(a)=Rn(Sn(a)) exactly. The identity finite map between En and Fn gives [F4], and the assumed compact-uniform raw limit proves its convergence in the actual U norm. No off-grid original input is requested at any stage of this construction.

Source notes

This statement is a local alteration and application of the compact-union mechanism in Kovachki et al., Appendix B, Lemma21, and its use for compact-uniform composition in the proof of Lemma22. The complete relevant source statements and printed proofs on PDF/printed pages74–77 of the cached JMLR full text were inspected in this provenance clarification. The source does not state the present finite-sampling bridge, the explicit normalized tag weights, or the integral-first factorization as these separate assertions; those adaptations are fully proved above. The source's printed closedness argument in Lemma21 assumes unjustified convergence of the selected integer indices. The locally proved open-cover compact-union supplier supplies the correct stated conclusion without relying on that step. The finite sampling/reconstruction interpretation is the explicit local definition of discretization invariance. No new retrieval, source-fetch stamp, whole-paper reread, or source attribution for the newly authored formulas is claimed.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

50 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