Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-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.

One-step error recurrence for the assigned nonlinear regularized Gauss–Newton step

Statement

Assume Countable Choice. Let X,Y be real or complex Hilbert spaces over the same scalar field and let U⊆X be open. Let F:U→Y be continuously Fréchet differentiable over that field, with bounded complex-linear derivatives in the complex case. Let x†∈U satisfy F(x†)=y, and suppose xk,x† lie in a convex subset of U on which F′ is L-Lipschitz. Let yδ satisfy ∥yδ−y∥≤δ, put ek=xk−x† and Ak=F′(xk), and use the step of Unanchored Levenberg–Marquardt step with explicit early stopping with αk>0. Define Rk:=y−F(xk)+Akek. Then ek+1=αk(Ak∗Ak+αkI)−1ek+(Ak∗Ak+αkI)−1Ak∗(yδ−y+Rk), and ∥ek+1∥≤∥ek∥+δ+(L/2)∥ek∥22αk. If in addition the tangential-cone condition ∥F(x)−F(z)−F′(z)(x−z)∥≤η∥F(x)−F(z)∥ holds for all x,z in that subset, then also ∥Rk∥≤η(∥F(xk)−yδ∥+δ), which may replace (L/2)∥ek∥2 in the recurrence bound. This lemma alone does not assert contraction or discrepancy-stopped convergence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Hilbert-space data and iterates above, αk>0, the Lipschitz derivative bound, and, for the final bound, the stated tangential cone condition.

[A1]

The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω): Countable Choice is assumed by the Hilbert adjoint and shifted-normal-operator suppliers.

[F1]

Unanchored Levenberg–Marquardt step with explicit early stopping: ek+1=ek+sk and (Ak∗Ak+αkI)sk=Ak∗(yδ−F(xk)).

[F2]

The shifted Hilbert-space normal operator is invertible with inverse norm at most 1/λ: Bk=Ak∗Ak+αkI is invertible with ∥Bk−1∥≤1/αk.

[F3]

Hilbert-space Tikhonov amplifies data by at most 1/(2λ): ∥Bk−1Ak∗v∥≤∥v∥/(2αk) for bounded Ak.

[F4]

A Lipschitz Fréchet derivative gives a quadratic linearization remainder: ∥F(x)−F(z)−F′(z)(x−z)∥≤(L/2)∥x−z∥2 on the convex subset.

Proof

Given: The assumptions and facts above. Put Bk=Ak∗Ak+αkI.

1.1A1F1F2algebra

From [F1], ek+1=ek+Bk−1Ak∗(yδ−F(xk)). Multiplying by Bk and using Bkek=Ak∗Akek+αkek gives Bkek+1=αkek+Ak∗(Akek+yδ−F(xk)). Since Akek+y−F(xk)=Rk, the term in parentheses is yδ−y+Rk. Applying [F2] to invert Bk proves the stated identity.

2.1A1F2F3F4step 1.1algebra

By [F2], ∥αkBk−1ek∥≤∥ek∥. By [F3], ∥Bk−1Ak∗(yδ−y+Rk)∥≤(δ+∥Rk∥)/(2αk). The triangle inequality and [F4] give the quadratic-error recurrence.

3.1A1givenstep 2.1algebra∎

For the tangential-cone bound, substitute x=x† and z=xk. Its left side is ∥y−F(xk)+Ak(xk−x†)∥=∥Rk∥, so ∥Rk∥≤η∥y−F(xk)∥≤η(∥y−yδ∥+∥yδ−F(xk)∥)≤η(δ+∥yδ−F(xk)∥). Inserting this estimate into the bound from [step 2.1] proves the optional residual form.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

28 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