Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-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.

Midpoint quadrature defect for one-dimensional P1 stiffness

Statement

Assume Countable Choice. Let 0=x0<⋯<xN=1 be a finite partition with cells K=[xj−1,xj], cell lengths hK, and maximum h. Let A∈C2([0,1]), and let vh,wh be continuous piecewise-linear functions. Write vK′,wK′ for their constant cell slopes and take their a.e. derivatives as L2 representatives. Define the exact and midpoint stiffness forms by

a(vh,wh):=∫(0,1)A(x)vh′(x)wh′(x) dλ1(x),ah(vh,wh):=∑KhKA(mK)vK′wK′,

where mK is the cell midpoint and the cell derivatives are constant. Then

∣a(vh,wh)−ah(vh,wh)∣≤h224∥A′′∥L∞(0,1)∥vh′∥L2(0,1)∥wh′∥L2(0,1).

Moreover, ∥vh′∥L2(0,1)2=∑KhK∣vK′∣2, and likewise for wh′.

The midpoint rule is exact for this stiffness integrand when A is affine; for a general C2 coefficient the displayed defect is retained. The bound is exact-arithmetic quadrature error, separate from roundoff.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice, the finite partition, A∈C2([0,1]), and continuous piecewise-linear vh,wh.

[F1]

Composite midpoint rule on a uniform grid: on one cell K, the midpoint value times hK is the one-panel midpoint quadrature rule.

[F2]

Composite midpoint error bound for a twice continuously differentiable function: for g∈C2(K), the one-panel error is at most hK3∥g′′∥L∞(K)/24.

[F4]

Triangle inequality for finite sums: the absolute value of the sum of cell errors is bounded by their absolute values' sum.

[F6]

Extreme value theorem: a continuous real function on a nonempty compact subset of R attains a greatest and a least value: the continuous function ∣A′′∣ attains a finite maximum on [0,1]. Because every relative interval has positive Lebesgue measure by [F8], this maximum is its essential supremum (The essential supremum of a measurable function with respect to a measure, The space L∞(μ) of essentially bounded measurable functions).

[F7]

The L2 norm is the square root of the integral of the square (The function space Lp(μ) for 0<p<∞, The space Lp(μ) as the quotient by null functions). A finite-valued measurable function has simple integral ∑jcjλ1(Ej) (Nonnegative simple measurable functions, The integral of a nonnegative simple function), and its nonnegative Lebesgue integral agrees with that value (The nonnegative integral agrees with the simple integral on simple functions).

[F8]

Under Countable Choice, every interval in [0,1] has Lebesgue measure equal to its length; in particular each open cell K∘=(xj−1,xj) has measure hK and each mesh node is null (A box in Rn with parameters ai≤bi is Lebesgue measurable of measure ∏i<n(bi−ai), whichever of its faces are included, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

[F9]

Under Countable Choice, a bounded Riemann-integrable function on [0,1] has the same Riemann and Lebesgue integrals (A bounded Riemann integrable function on a closed bounded interval is Lebesgue measurable and has the same integral, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

[F10]

A continuous function on a closed interval is Riemann integrable, and changing its values at finitely many points preserves its integral (A continuous function on [a,b] is Riemann integrable, by Heine-Cantor and Riemann's criterion, Changing an integrable function at finitely many points changes neither its integrability nor its integral).

Proof

1.1givenF7F8construct

For each cell, define gv=vK′ and gw=wK′ on K∘, and set both representatives to 0 at the finitely many mesh nodes. Their squares are nonnegative simple functions. By [F7] and [F8], ∥vh′∥22=∑K∣vK′∣2λ1(K∘)=∑KhK∣vK′∣2, and the same identity holds for wh′ and for the cell-restricted norms.

1.2givenF1F2construct

On a cell K, vK′ and wK′ are constants, so gK(x):=A(x)vK′wK′ is C2; the discrete sample is the one-panel midpoint rule [F1]. Also ∥gK′′∥∞≤∥A′′∥∞∣vK′∣∣wK′∣. Applying [F2] with n=1 bounds the cell error by hK3∥A′′∥∞∣vK′∣∣wK′∣/24.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2algebra

By step 1.1, the cell error in step 1.2 is at most hK2∥A′′∥∞∥vh′∥L2(K)∥wh′∥L2(K)/24.

3.1F3F4F5F6F8F9F10step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

The global integrand Avh′wh′ is bounded. On each cell its representative differs at most at the endpoints from the continuous function gK(x)=A(x)vK′wK′, so [F10] makes each cell restriction Riemann integrable with the same cell integral as gK. Repeated application of [F3] then makes the global integrand Riemann integrable and expresses its integral as the sum of the cell integrals. By [F9], its Lebesgue integral on [0,1] equals this Riemann integral; the endpoints are null by [F8], so this is also a(vh,wh). Thus a(vh,wh)−ah(vh,wh) is the sum of the cell errors. The finite-sum triangle inequality [F4] and step 2.1 bound its absolute value by h2∥A′′∥∞/24 times ∑K∥vh′∥L2(K)∥wh′∥L2(K). Cauchy–Schwarz [F5] and the norm decompositions in step 1.1 give the displayed global estimate.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

100 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