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.
BV Sobolev–Poincaré inequality for Neumann TV
Statement
Assume Countable Choice. For every nonempty bounded connected Lipschitz domain , there is a finite constant such that every satisfies
Statement references
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Countable Choice, a nonempty bounded connected Lipschitz domain , and the Neumann total-variation convention.
Countable Choice is used to choose a sequence contradicting the proposed Poincaré bound. (The Axiom of Countable Choice ())
Compactness and lower semicontinuity for bounded-domain BV: a BV sequence bounded in and TV has an -convergent subsequence, and TV is lower semicontinuous.
A zero distributional gradient is constant on a connected domain: a locally integrable function with zero distributional gradient on a connected open set is a.e. constant.
BV extension and translation bounds: zero extension satisfies .
Full-space, Dirichlet, and Neumann TV conventions: adding a constant leaves Neumann TV unchanged.
Proof
First there is such that every zero-mean satisfies . If no such constant existed, [A1] would select with , , and . Their BV norms are bounded, so [F1] gives a subsequence converging in to . The limit has mean zero and , while lower semicontinuity gives . Hence every distributional derivative of is zero; [F2] makes constant a.e., and its mean forces , contradicting .
For any set . Then has mean zero, by [F5], and step 1.1 gives . By [F3], and Applying [F4] and using proves the Statement with . The same argument also shows every BV function on this bounded domain belongs to .
Depends on
- The Axiom of Countable Choice ($\mathrm{AC}_\omega$)
- Full-space, Dirichlet, and Neumann TV conventions
- Spatial BV and distributional total variation
- Compactness and lower semicontinuity for bounded-domain BV
- BV extension and translation bounds
- BV Sobolev inequality in full space
- A zero distributional gradient is constant on a connected domain
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
38 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
- José A. Iglesias, Gwenael Mercier, and Otmar Scherzer, A note on convergence of solutions of total variation regularized linear inverse problems, §4.3 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Gláucio Terra, Introduction to Geometric Measure Theory — Lecture Notes, version 1.6, §7.5 (standard reference, not scraped)