Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07
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.

Kronecker summation lemma

Statement

Let (xn)n≥1 be real and let 0<bn be deterministic, nondecreasing, and tend to infinity. If ∑n≥1xn/bn converges in R, then 1bn∑k=1nxk⟶0. Repeated values of bn are allowed.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

Abel summation by parts: with An=∑k<nak one has ∑k<nakbk=Anbn−1−∑k<n−1Ak+1 (bk+1−bk) for every n≥1: Let (ak) and (bk) be sequences of reals and let An  :=  ∑k<nak(n∈N) be the partial sums of ∑ak (def-series, def-finite-sum), so that A0=0 and ak=Ak+1−Ak for every k. Then for every natural number n≥1 ∑k<nakbk  =  An bn−1  −  ∑k<n−1Ak+1 (bk+1−bk). Both sides are finite sums in the sense of def-finite-sum; at n=1 the right-hand sum is empty and the identity reads a0b0=A1b0. The hypothesis n≥1 is what makes the statement legitimate, not merely convenient: the index n−1 occurs on the right, and n−1 is a natural number exactly when n≥1. At n=0 there is nothing to state, both the left-hand side and A0 being 0.

Proof

Given: The objects and hypotheses of the statement.

1.1F1givenalgebra

Put t0=b0=0 and tn=∑k=1nxk/bk→t. Abel summation, shifted from its zero-based indices, gives bn−1∑k=1nxk=tn−∑k=1n(bk−bk−1)tk−1/bn. One can verify the same identity by substituting xk=bk(tk−tk−1) and telescoping; for n=1 it reads x1/b1=t1.

2.1step 1.1givenalgebra

The weights wn,k=(bk−bk−1)/bn are nonnegative and sum to one. For ε>0, take M such that ∣tj−t∣<ε for j≥M. With K=max⁡0≤j<M∣tj−t∣, the weighted average differs from t by at most KbM/bn+ε for n>M. The first term tends to zero; no division by K is required, even if it vanishes. Repeated normalizers merely give zero weights.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

As ε is arbitrary the weighted average tends to t. Subtracting it from tn→t in the finite identity proves the assertion, including the zero sequence.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

10 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