Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

Time derivatives of fixed and differentiable comparison projections

Statement

Assume Countable Choice. Let X be a separable real Hilbert space and Y a real Hilbert space, and let u∈H1(0,T;X) (meaning u,u′∈L2(0,T;X) with distribution derivative). It has a unique continuous representative on [0,T]. Let P∈L(X,Y) be a fixed bounded linear map. Then Pu∈H1(0,T;Y) and (Pu)′=Pu′.

If instead P:[0,T]→L(X,Y) is continuously differentiable in operator norm, then P(t)u(t)∈H1(0,T;Y) and ddt(P(t)u(t))=P′(t)u(t)+P(t)u′(t)a.e. In particular, a differentiable time-dependent Ritz comparison contributes the term P′(t)u(t) to its residual derivative.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: T>0, a separable real Hilbert space X, a real Hilbert space Y, the weak time-derivative convention, u∈H1(0,T;X), and a fixed bounded map or an operator-norm C1 family.

[F1]

The Statement defines H1(0,T;X) by Bochner L2 membership of the function and distribution derivative, checked after every continuous scalar functional; the L2 classes use the strongly measurable convention (Evolution triples and the parabolic energy space).

[F2]

Strongly measurable functions with integrable norm are Bochner integrable, and bounded linear maps commute with Bochner integration (Bochner integrability criterion, Bounded linear maps commute with Bochner integration).

[F3]

Smooth mollifiers converge to Bochner L2 functions in local L2 (Smooth mollifiers approximate Bochner L² functions).

[F4]

Scalar Fubini changes the order of integration for absolutely integrable functions on the finite product interval (Fubini's theorem for L^1 functions on a sigma-finite product).

[F5]

L2(0,T) is contained in L1(0,T) by Holder's inequality (Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases).

[A1]

Countable Choice is an explicit hypothesis of the Bochner approximation supplier (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

Proof

1.1A1F1F3given

Let g1,g2∈L2(0,T;X) both satisfy the distributional derivative identity for u. Put h=g1−g2 and extend it by zero to R. For every fixed x∗∈X∗ and every interior t farther than ϵ from the endpoints, the scalar pairing of ηϵ∗h(t) with x∗ is zero: it is the zero distribution paired with s↦ηϵ(t−s). Since continuous linear functionals separate points, ηϵ∗h(t)=0. By [F3] these convolutions converge to h in L2 on compact subintervals; exhausting (0,T) proves h=0 a.e., so the weak derivative is unique.

2.1F1F2F3F4F5step 1.1constructalgebra

The Bochner integral G(t)=∫0tu′(s)ds exists by [F2] and [F5]. For each x∗∈X∗, scalar Fubini [F4] and integration by parts show that G has weak derivative u′. Hence w=u−G has zero distribution derivative. If ψ∈Cc∞(0,T) has integral zero, its primitive is compactly supported, so ∫wψ=0 in X. Choose η∈Cc∞(0,T) with integral one and put c=∫wη. Subtracting (∫ψ)η shows that w−c has zero distribution. As in step 1.1 its interior convolutions vanish, and [F3] makes them converge to w−c locally in L2. Thus w=c a.e. and u(t)=c+G(t) is a continuous representative. Any two continuous representatives equal a.e. agree everywhere, because their continuous difference vanishes on the dense set where they agree; hence this representative is unique.

2.2F1F2step 1.1given

For fixed P, test the weak derivative identity for u against y∗∘P∈X∗ for arbitrary y∗∈Y∗. Boundedness of P gives ∫0Ty∗(Pu(t))ϕ′(t)dt=−∫0Ty∗(Pu′(t))ϕ(t)dt. The right side is represented by the L2(Y) function Pu′, and uniqueness from step 1.1 gives (Pu)′=Pu′.

3.1F1F4F5step 2.1givenalgebra

For the operator-norm C1 family, fix y∗∈Y∗ and put ℓ(t)=y∗∘P(t)∈X∗, so ℓ′(t)=y∗∘P′(t). Use the representative u(t)=c+∫0tu′(s)ds from step 2.1. For ϕ∈Cc∞(0,T), scalar Fubini and integration by parts give ∫0Tℓ(t)u(t)ϕ′(t)dt=−∫0T(ℓ′(t)u(t)+ℓ(t)u′(t))ϕ(t)dt. Indeed, substitute c+∫0tu′(s)ds on the left, interchange the integrals over 0≤s≤t≤T, and use ∫sTℓ(t)ϕ′(t)dt=−ℓ(s)ϕ(s)−∫sTℓ′(t)ϕ(t)dt; a second Fubini interchange combines the ℓ′ terms into ℓ′(t)u(t). Absolute integrability follows from boundedness of ℓ,ℓ′,ϕ,ϕ′ and [F5]. Since this identity holds for all y∗ and P′u,Pu′∈L2(0,T;Y), the vector-valued weak derivative is P′u+Pu′.

4.1step 3.1givenalgebra∎

The displayed derivative belongs to L2(0,T;Y) because P and P′ are bounded on [0,T] and u,u′∈L2(0,T;X). Hence P(t)u(t)∈H1(0,T;Y) with the asserted formula.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

38 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