Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)
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.

Hg toolkit polygonal interpolation of quasi geodesics

Statement

Let q:[a,b]X be a (λ,ε)-quasi-geodesic in a geodesic metric space, with ab. If d(q(a),q(b))2ε, there is a continuous (λ,4ε)-quasi-geodesic p:[a,b]X with the same endpoints which is 2λ-Lipschitz and satisfies d(q(t),p(t))4ε,dH(q([a,b]),p([a,b]))2ε. If instead the endpoint distance is less than 2ε, then every image point is within 3λ2ε+ε of q(a). No continuity of q, properness of X, or AC is assumed.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: q,[a,b],λ,ε as in the statement.

[F1]

Quasi-geodesic inequalities and the two-inclusion meaning of Hausdorff control are as in Hg toolkit local geodesics and hausdorff control.

Proof

1.1

If ε=0, set p=q: the upper inequality makes it λ-Lipschitz and continuous, and all approximation errors vanish. If ε>0 and the endpoint distance is less than 2ε, the lower inequality gives ba<3λε, and the upper inequality gives d(q(t),q(a))λ(ba)+ε<3λ2ε+ε. This includes a one-point domain. Henceforth assume positive ε and separated endpoints. Write h=ε/λ. The upper endpoint inequality implies bah>0.

F1givenalgebra
2.1

If hba2h, use a single marked interval [a,b]. If ba>2h, put N=(ba)/h20, mark a,a+h,,a+Nh, and then (a+Nh+b)/2,b. The last two gaps lie in [h,3h/2); earlier gaps equal h. In particular all gaps are between h and 2h. Choose one geodesic for each consecutive pair of marked images, and interpolate it at constant speed to define p. At a zero image distance use the constant map. Endpoints of adjacent pieces agree. On a marked interval of length H, its speed is at most (λH+ε)/H2λ. Splitting a parameter interval at its finitely many marks proves the global 2λ-Lipschitz bound and hence continuity.

step 1.1F1algebra
3.1

For any parameter t, the closer endpoint v of its marked interval satisfies tvh (including the single-interval case). Since p(v)=q(v), the quasi-geodesic upper bound gives d(q(t),p(v))λh+ε=2ε, while Lipschitz control gives d(p(t),q(v))2λh=2ε. These prove the two Hausdorff inclusions individually. Adding the same two bounds gives d(q(t),p(t))4ε.

step 2.1F1algebra
3.2

Within one marked interval of length H, constant speed gives d(p(s),p(t))(λ+ε/H)stλst+ε. In distinct intervals, join p(s) to its right marked endpoint, then to the left marked endpoint for t, then to p(t). The middle pair are original q values. Adding their three upper estimates gives d(p(s),p(t))λ(ts)+3ελ(ts)+4ε for s<t.

step 2.1F1algebra
3.3

For the lower bound, the single-interval case satisfies ts2h, so (ts)/λ4ε0. In the longer construction, parameters in the same or adjacent marked intervals satisfy ts3h, again making that lower bound nonpositive. For separated intervals write s[u,u+h] and t[v,w], u+h<v, wv3h/2. The first interval has length exactly h: the two exceptional intervals are the final adjacent ones, so neither can be the first of a separated pair. Put A=(su)/h[0,1] and B=(tv)/h[0,3/2].

step 2.1F1algebra
4.1

In the separated case select marked endpoints U,V as follows. If A3/5 take U=u, otherwise take U=u+h; if B3/5 take V=v, otherwise take V=w. The four cases give respectively the following upper bounds for E=(sU+tV)/h and for J=max{0,(ts)(VU)}/h: (E,J)(6/5,3/5), (1,1), (3/2,0), (13/10,2/5), in the order (A3/5,B3/5), (A>3/5,B3/5), (A3/5,B>3/5), (A>3/5,B>3/5). For example the last case has u+hs2h/5 and wt9h/10, while (ts)(wuh)u+hs2h/5. In every case 1+2E+J4. Since U<V, the original lower inequality and the 2λ Lipschitz bound give d(p(s),p(t))(VU)/λε2λhE(ts)/λε(1+2E+J/λ2)(ts)/λ4ε.

step 2.1step 3.3F1algebra
5.1

Combining the lower cases, upper estimate and approximation estimates proves all assertions. Equality s=t is immediate and reversed parameter order follows by symmetry. The construction uses finitely many chosen geodesics, and requires no continuity of the original map.

step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1step 3.2step 3.3step 4.1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

3 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