Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (openai/gpt-5.4)verified 2026-07-26 (claude-opus-5)
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.

Monotonicity of the supremum under inclusion

Statement

Let SS and TT be subsets of R\mathbb{R} with ST\emptyset \ne S \subseteq T, and suppose TT is bounded above. Then SS is nonempty and bounded above, both supS\sup S and supT\sup T exist, and

supSsupT.\sup S \le \sup T.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Sets S,TRS, T \subseteq \mathbb{R} with SS \ne \emptyset, STS \subseteq T, and TT bounded above.

[L1]

Supremum and the least-upper-bound property: u=supXu = \sup X means uu is an upper bound of XX and uuu \le u' for every upper bound uu' of XX; every nonempty XRX \subseteq \mathbb{R} that is bounded above has such a uu (Complete ordered field (least-upper-bound property)).

[L2]

A least upper bound is unique, so supX\sup X denotes a single real number (Suprema and infima are unique).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Since TT is bounded above, fix an upper bound uu of TT, so tut \le u for every tTt \in T.

givenchoose
1.2

By hypothesis SS is nonempty and STS \subseteq T, so TT is nonempty as well.

given
2.1

Every sSs \in S lies in TT and therefore satisfies sus \le u; hence uu is an upper bound of SS and SS is bounded above.

step 1.1step 1.2L1
3.1

Both SS and TT are nonempty and bounded above, so by the least-upper-bound property supS\sup S and supT\sup T exist, each uniquely.

step 1.2step 2.1L1L2
4.1

As supT\sup T is an upper bound of TT, every tTt \in T satisfies tsupTt \le \sup T; since STS \subseteq T, every sSs \in S satisfies ssupTs \le \sup T, so supT\sup T is an upper bound of SS.

step 3.1step 1.2L1
5.1

The number supS\sup S is the least of the upper bounds of SS, and supT\sup T is one of them, hence supSsupT\sup S \le \sup T.

step 4.1step 3.1L1

Remarks

  • The hypothesis that the larger set is bounded above cannot be weakened to the smaller one being bounded above: supT\sup T has to exist for the inequality to mean anything.
  • The dual statement, infTinfS\inf T \le \inf S for ST\emptyset \ne S \subseteq T with TT bounded below, follows by applying this lemma to ST\emptyset \ne -S \subseteq -T, which gives sup(S)sup(T)\sup(-S) \le \sup(-T), and then negating and using infX=sup(X)\inf X = -\sup(-X) (Reflection through zero exchanges upper and lower bounds, Every nonempty set bounded below has an infimum).

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 6 results over 6 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources