Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

The Hardy inequality for the averaging operator on the half-line

Statement

Assume Countable Choice. Let 1<p<∞ and let f:(0,∞)→[0,∞] be measurable, with Hf(t):=t−1∫0tf(s) ds. Then (∫0∞(Hf(t))p dt)1/p≤pp−1(∫0∞f(s)p ds)1/p, equivalently ∫0∞t−p(∫0tf(s) ds)pdt≤(pp−1)p∫0∞f(s)p ds, where both sides are extended nonnegative integrals and +∞ is allowed on either side. The constant p/(p−1) is sharp: for every c<p/(p−1) there is a measurable f with ∥Hf∥Lp>c∥f∥Lp. If f is supported in (0,T) for some 0<T<∞, then the same inequality holds on (0,T), ∫0Tt−p(∫0tf(s) ds)pdt≤(pp−1)p∫0Tf(s)p ds, with the same constant.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice; an exponent 1<p<∞, its conjugate p′:=p/(p−1)∈(1,∞), and a measurable f:(0,∞)→[0,∞].

[F1]

Holder's inequality: for conjugate exponents p,p′ and measurable real-valued φ,ψ with φ∈Lp and ψ∈Lp′, ∫∣φψ∣≤∥φ∥p∥ψ∥p′, and the right-hand side is finite, so φψ is integrable. (Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases)

[F2]

Assume Countable Choice. For a nonnegative measurable function on a product of sigma-finite measure spaces the iterated and double integrals agree: ∫h d(μ×ν‾)=∫X∫Yhx dν dμ=∫Y∫Xhy dμ dν, with section integrals as in the cited statement. (Tonelli and Fubini for the completed product, with only almost-everywhere section measurability, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω))

[F3]

Minkowski's integral inequality: for sigma-finite (X,μ), (Y,ν), 1≤r<∞ and measurable F:X×Y→C with ∫Y∥F(⋅,y)∥Lr(X)dν(y)<∞, the function x↦∫Y∣F(x,y)∣dν(y) lies in Lr(X) and its Lr norm is at most ∫Y∥F(⋅,y)∥Lr(X)dν(y). (Minkowski's integral inequality)

[F4]

Monotone convergence for the integral: if 0≤h1≤h2≤⋯ are measurable and hn↑h pointwise, then ∫hn↑∫h. (Monotone convergence for the integral)

[F5]

The integral used below is the nonnegative extended integral of a measurable function, which is defined for values in [0,∞] and may be +∞; it is monotone and additive on nonnegative measurable functions. (The nonnegative Lebesgue integral)

Proof

technique · truncate the datum, prove the bound for bounded compactly supported $f$ through an explicit $L^{p'}$ dual test function and Minkowski's integral inequality, pass to the limit by monotone convergence, and exhibit a family witnessing sharpness
1.1F4F5algebragiven

Reduction to bounded compactly supported f. For n≥1 put fn:=min⁡(f,n)⋅1(0,n), a measurable function with 0≤fn≤n supported in (0,n), so that fn↑f pointwise. Write F(t):=∫0tf and Fn(t):=∫0tfn; by [F4] applied to the nondecreasing measurable sequence fn1(0,t) one has Fn(t)↑F(t) for every t>0, hence (Fn(t)/t)p↑(F(t)/t)p and ∫0∞fnp↑∫0∞fp. Therefore it suffices to prove the inequality for every fn: applying [F4] to both sides then gives ∫0∞t−pF(t)pdt≤(pp−1)p∫0∞fp, the case ∫fp=+∞ included.

1.2F5algebragiven

The bounded compactly supported case: the dual test function and finiteness. Assume now 0≤f≤M and f=0 outside (0,T0). Then F(t)≤min⁡(Mt,∫0∞f) for all t, so Hf=F/t is finite on (0,∞) with 0≤Hf≤M; put φ(t):=(F(t)/t)p−1, a bounded nonnegative measurable function. Its Lp′ norm satisfies ∥φ∥p′p′=∫0∞(F(t)/t)pdt=:I, and I<+∞ because I≤Mp+(1/(p−1))(∫0∞f)p: on (0,1) the bound Hf≤M gives ∫01(Hf)p≤Mp, and on (1,∞) the bound Hf≤t−1∫0∞f gives ∫1∞(Hf)p≤(∫f)p∫1∞t−pdt=(∫f)p/(p−1). Thus φ∈Lp′(0,∞) and Hf∈Lp(0,∞).

1.3F5algebragiven

Sharpness. For R>1 set fR(t):=t−1/p1(1,R)(t), so ∥fR∥pp=log⁡R. For 1<t<R one has HfR(t)=p′t−1/p(1−t−1/p′). Given A>1 and R>A, this gives ∥HfR∥pp≥(p′)p(1−A−1/p′)plog⁡(R/A). Dividing by log⁡R and letting R→∞, then A→∞, shows that no constant smaller than p′ can bound ∥Hf∥p/∥f∥p. Each HfR has finite Lp norm: it vanishes below 1, and above R it equals t−1∫1RfR.

2.1F2step 1.2algebra

The duality identity. With Φ(s):=∫s∞φ(t)t−1dt, Tonelli's theorem [F2] applied to the nonnegative measurable function (s,t)↦f(s)φ(t)t−11{s<t} on (0,∞)×(0,∞) gives I=∫0∞φ(t)(F(t)/t) dt=∫0∞φ(t)t−1∫0tf(s) ds dt=∫0∞f(s)Φ(s) ds.

2.2F3step 1.2algebra

The Lp′ bound on Φ. For s>0 substitute t=su, u∈(1,∞), to get Φ(s)=∫1∞φ(su)u−1du. Apply Minkowski's integral inequality [F3] to F(x,u):=φ(xu)u−1 on (0,∞)×(1,∞): the hypothesis holds because ∫1∞∥φ(⋅ u)u−1∥Lp′du=∥φ∥p′∫1∞u−1−1/p′du=p′∥φ∥p′<+∞. The conclusion gives ∥Φ∥p′≤p′∥φ∥p′.

3.1F1step 1.2step 2.1step 2.2algebra

The bound for bounded compactly supported f. By steps 2.1 and 2.2 and Holder's inequality [F1], I=∫0∞fΦ≤∥f∥p∥Φ∥p′≤p′∥f∥p I1/p′. If I=0 there is nothing to prove; otherwise 0<I<+∞ by step 1.2, so dividing by I1/p′ gives I1/p≤p′∥f∥p, which is the claimed inequality for f.

4.1F5step 1.1step 3.1algebra

The interval case. Let f be supported in (0,T) and extend it by zero to (0,∞); the extension has the same Lp integral and its averaging function equals t−1∫0tf for t≤T, so ∫0Tt−p(∫0tf)pdt≤∫0∞t−p(∫0tf)pdt≤(p′)p∫0∞fp=(p′)p∫0Tfp, the middle inequality being the general inequality obtained by combining the reduction of step 1.1 with the bounded-case bound of step 3.1.

5.1step 1.1step 3.1step 1.3step 4.1given∎

Conclusion. Step 1.1 reduces the general measurable case to the bounded compactly supported case, which is step 3.1; step 1.3 shows the constant cannot be improved, and step 4.1 discharges the interval form. This proves both displayed inequalities, the sharpness assertion, and the statement for data supported in (0,T).

Source notes

Mironescu, printed p. 78, steps (11.27)-(11.28), applies Hardy's inequality in the radius variable to the same double integral; Kampanou, Chapters 3 and 5, and Teschl, Appendix A, record the boundedness of t−1∫0tf on Lp(0,∞) with norm p/(p−1), which is the content proved here. The proof above is the standard weighted-dual argument; it uses only Countable Choice through the Fubini-Tonelli interface [F2].

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

37 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