Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26
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 curl flux integrand of a C2 patch is a two-dimensional curl of the pulled-back field

Statement

Let OR2 be open, let φ:OR3 be C2, let UR3 be open with φ[O]U and let F:UR3 be C1. Put P=Fφ,φu and Q=Fφ,φv on O. Then P and Q are C1 on O and, at every point of O, the difference of the two pulled-back partial derivatives equals the curl flux integrand:

uQvP=(curlF)φ, φu×φv.

No regularity of the patch is used: the identity holds also at parameter points where φu×φv=0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The open sets OR2 and UR3, the C2 map φ:OR3 with φ[O]U, and the C1 field F:UR3.

[F1]

In the present local setting, define the pulled-back functions directly by P=Fφ,φu and Q=Fφ,φv on O. For a regular patch over a finite elementary Green region these agree with the notation of The induced boundary chain and circulation of a C2 patch over a finite elementary Green region.

[F2]

For x,yRm, x,y=i<mxiyi (The Euclidean inner product x,y=k<nxkyk on Rn).

[F3]

For u,vR3, u×v=(uyvzuzvy,uzvxuxvz,uxvyuyvx) (The cross product in R3), and the curl of a C1 field is curlF=(yFzzFy, zFxxFz, xFyyFx) (Divergence and curl of a C1 vector field).

[F4]

A map is of class Ck when each component is (Ck Euclidean maps and diffeomorphisms), and a scalar is Ck when every iterated derivative of length at most k exists and is continuous (Ck maps and multi-index derivative notation in Euclidean space).

[F5]

If every partial derivative jfi(a) exists, the Jacobian matrix is Jf(a)=(jfi(a))i<n,j<m (The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case).

[L1]

For a C1 field F on an open UR3, a point pU and u,vR3, DF(p)u,vDF(p)v,u=curlF(p),u×v (The curl measures the antisymmetric part of the total derivative).

[L2]

If f is C2 on an open subset of Rm, then ijf=jif for every pair of coordinate indices (Clairaut--Schwarz theorem for continuous second partial derivatives).

[L3]

If f is totally differentiable at a and g at f(a), then D(gf)(a)=Dg(f(a))Df(a) (The chain rule for total derivatives: D(gf)(a)=Dg(f(a))Df(a)).

[L4]

If f is totally differentiable at a then Dwf(a)=Df(a)w for every w, and the matrix of Df(a) is Jf(a) (A total derivative computes every directional derivative, and its matrix is the Jacobian).

[L5]

If every partial derivative of f exists on a neighbourhood of a and is continuous at a, then f is totally differentiable at a with Df(a) the linear map of matrix Jf(a) (If all partial derivatives exist on a neighbourhood and are continuous at a point, then the map is totally differentiable there with Jacobian derivative).

[L6]

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Since φ is C2 on O, [F4] makes each uφi and vφi a C1 function on O; and since F is C1 on U with φ[O]U, [L3], [L4] and [L5] make each Fiφ differentiable in each parameter with u(Fiφ)=j(jFi)(φ)uφj,v(Fiφ)=j(jFi)(φ)vφj, both continuous on O, so Fφ is C1 there. By [F1], [F2] and [L6], P=iFi(φ)uφi and Q=iFi(φ)vφi are then C1 on O.

givenF1F2F4L3L4L5L6
2.1

Differentiating Q with respect to u by [L6] and substituting step 1.1, uQ=i(j(jFi)(φ)uφj)vφi+iFi(φ)uvφi, and by [F2], [F5] and [L4] the first double sum is DF(φ)φu,φv while the second is F(φ),uvφ.

step 1.1F2F5L4L6
2.2

The same computation for P with respect to v gives vP=i(j(jFi)(φ)vφj)uφi+iFi(φ)vuφi=DF(φ)φv,φu+F(φ),vuφ.

step 1.1F2F5L4L6
3.1

Each component φi is C2 on O by [F4], so [L2] gives uvφi=vuφi for every i; hence the two terms F(φ),uvφ and F(φ),vuφ of steps 2.1 and 2.2 are equal. This is the only place where φ being C2 rather than C1 is used.

step 2.1step 2.2F4L2
4.1

Subtracting step 2.2 from step 2.1 and cancelling by step 3.1 leaves uQvP=DF(φ)φu,φvDF(φ)φv,φu, which by [L1] applied at the point φ with the vectors φu and φv is curlF(φ),φu×φv, the coordinates being those of [F3]. No step used φu×φv0.

step 2.1step 2.2step 3.1F3L1

Remarks

  • The right-hand side is a flux integrand, but the identity is not about flux. It is a pointwise equality of two continuous functions on O. Reading its right side as the flux integrand of curlF through the patch requires the patch to be regular; the identity itself does not, which is why it also holds along the parameter boundary, where a regular patch is allowed to degenerate.

  • What each hypothesis is for. F being C1 makes curlF exist and makes the chain rule of step 1.1 available; φ being C2 makes φu and φv differentiable, so that steps 2.1 and 2.2 can be written at all, and makes the two mixed second derivatives equal in step 3.1.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

56 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