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.
Counting measure is a measure
Statement
For every set , the counting set function of Counting measure on an arbitrary set is a measure on .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A set and a pairwise disjoint sequence of subsets of .
Counting measure assigns a finite set its finite cardinality and an infinite set the value (Counting measure on an arbitrary set).
A measure must vanish at the empty set and be countably additive on pairwise disjoint measurable sequences (Measures on sigma-algebras).
A nonnegative extended series is the supremum of its finite partial sums (Series in the nonnegative extended real line).
A set is finite when it is equinumerous with a natural number, and otherwise it may be countably infinite or uncountable (Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable).
Proof
One has . For every , disjointness gives whenever all those sets are finite.
If some is infinite, then is infinite and both and are .
Suppose every is finite. If is finite, only finitely many pairwise disjoint can be nonempty, and step 1.1 gives .
Suppose every is finite but is infinite. For every , the set contains more than distinct points; the finitely many indices of the containing those points have a strict upper bound (take one more than their maximum), so step 1.1 gives . Hence the partial sums are unbounded and their supremum is .
Steps 1.2, 2.1 and 2.2 cover all possibilities for the union, so countable additivity holds; with from step 1.1, [L2] proves that is a measure.
Depends on
Used by
- Counting-measure tails decrease to the empty set while every term has infinite measure Counterexample
- Assuming countable choice, counting measure is sigma-finite exactly on countable sets Example
- FALSE: continuity from above needs no finiteness hypothesis False statement
- Assuming countable choice, every measure is the sum of its semifinite part and a zero-infinity-valued measure Theorem
Cited to discharge well-definedness by Counting measure on an arbitrary set.
Dependency tree · two levels
13 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
- S. Axler, Measure, Integration & Real Analysis, Example 2.55 (standard reference, not scraped)