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.
A bounded regular decomposition with both summands satisfying full Dirichlet conditions
Statement
Assume AC. Let be a nonempty bounded Lipschitz open set. There are bounded real linear maps and such that No contractibility, connected boundary, or mesh hypothesis is required. The scalar estimate uses the full H(curl) norm; no estimate by curl alone is asserted.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC, the nonempty bounded Lipschitz open set , and in the closure-defined zero-tangential space.
Whole-space support and the zero-boundary Sobolev closure gives the whole-space H(curl) zero extension and characterizes supported whole-space restrictions as .
A whole-space Fourier splitting for compactly supported H(curl) fields supplies the bounded linear whole-space split , with and .
Scalar H1 and H2 extension across a bounded Lipschitz boundary supplies a bounded scalar extension on every bounded Lipschitz open set, including one with several components.
Test function cutoffs and euclidean localization with supplies the fixed smooth cutoff in step 2.1, equal to one on a neighborhood of . Weak Leibniz rule with a smooth factor at gives the whole-space product identities and estimates for . Its explicit CC assumption follows from the stated AC.
Proof
Fix a ball with , let be the zero extension of by [F1], and use [F2] with support . Then , , and . The exterior open set has Lipschitz boundary: near use the same graph with the opposite side, and near use the smooth sphere; these boundary sets are a positive distance apart. It may have several components, which [F3] permits. On , , so . Hence , with . This follows directly from the definition of second weak derivatives: .
Extend by [F3] to . Choose one fixed equal to one near , and define whole-space fields and . Both are in with norms bounded by . On , and almost everywhere, so there; outside their cutoff makes them zero. Thus they vanish almost everywhere outside . By [F1], and . On , and its gradient is zero, giving . Fixed zero extension, Fourier multipliers, , and cutoff make the maps , linear; their estimates have just been proved. Only the geometry of , not a mesh or a topological assumption, enters the constants.
Depends on
- Scalar H1 and H2 extension across a bounded Lipschitz boundary
- Whole-space support and the zero-boundary Sobolev closure
- A whole-space Fourier splitting for compactly supported H(curl) fields
- Zero tangential trace H(curl) space
- The Axiom of Choice
- Test function cutoffs and euclidean localization
- Weak Leibniz rule with a smooth factor
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
48 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
- Ralf Hiptmair and Clemens Pechstein, Regular Decompositions of Vector Fields—Continuous, Discrete, and Structure-Preserving (standard reference, not scraped)