Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

The largest coordinates attain the best s-term ℓ1 error

Statement

Let n,s∈N with n≥1 and 1≤s≤n, and let x∈Rn use the one-based coordinate labels [n]={1,…,n}, with label j corresponding to library coordinate j−1. Order the coordinates by decreasing ∣xj∣, breaking ties by increasing j, and let S be the first s indices. For every U⊆[n], let xU agree with x on U and vanish on Uc. Then for every T⊆[n] with ∣T∣≤s, ∥xT∥1≤∥xS∥1and∥xSc∥1≤∥xTc∥1. Consequently σs(x)1=∥xSc∥1, so the best s-term tail error is attained by retaining the first s coordinates in the specified order.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Integers n≥1, 1≤s≤n, a vector x∈Rn, its deterministic decreasing-magnitude order j1,…,jn, the set S={j1,…,js}, and an arbitrary T⊆[n] with ∣T∣≤s.

[F1]

Best s-term ℓ1 approximation error: σs(x)1=min⁡{∥xUc∥1:U⊆[n], ∣U∣≤s}.

[F2]

The p-norms ∥x∥p for rational p≥1, and ∥x∥∞: ∥v∥1=∑j=1n∣vj∣ for v∈Rn, using the stated coordinate relabeling. In particular, for the zero-extended restriction xU, the summand is ∣xj∣ on U and zero elsewhere.

[F3]

Laws of finite sums and finite products, clauses 1, 3 and 4: finite sums are additive for two sequences on the same index range, split at a contiguous index cut, and preserve termwise inequalities; sums of nonnegative terms are nonnegative.

Proof

1.1givenF2F3algebra

If T=∅, its retained mass is zero and is no larger than the nonnegative sum on S. Otherwise write the ranks of the elements of T in increasing order as r1<⋯<rk, where k=∣T∣≤s. Then rℓ≥ℓ, so the specified ordering gives ∣xjrℓ∣≤∣xjℓ∣ for each ℓ. The coordinate sum in [F2] may be reordered by successive adjacent swaps, each preserving the sum by associativity and commutativity of real addition; zero terms may be omitted. Thus ∥xT∥1=∑ℓ=1k∣xjrℓ∣≤∑ℓ=1k∣xjℓ∣≤∑ℓ=1s∣xjℓ∣=∥xS∥1, using termwise monotonicity and then the contiguous split at k with a nonnegative remainder.

2.1F1F2F3step 1.1algebra∎

For every U⊆[n] and j∈[n], the zero-extended restrictions satisfy ∣xj∣=∣(xU)j∣+∣(xUc)j∣. Summing over the original full coordinate range and applying [F2] and the same-range additivity in [F3] gives ∥x∥1=∥xU∥1+∥xUc∥1. Taking U=T and U=S and subtracting the retained masses, step 1.1 implies ∥xSc∥1≤∥xTc∥1. Applying this inequality to every admissible T, while S itself is admissible, shows that the finite minimum in [F1] equals ∥xSc∥1.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

37 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