Alphabeta Math
PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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.

Sufficient explicit Runge–Kutta order conditions through order four

Statement

Let (A,b,c) be an s-stage explicit tableau in the sense of Explicit Runge–Kutta tableaus, stage maps, and failure status, with ci=∑j<iaij. For a vector v∈Rs, write vi[r]=vir. Define (Ac)i=∑j<iaijcj, (Ac[2])i=∑j<iaijcj2, and (A2c)i=∑j<iaij(Ac)j.

Let f:U→Rd be autonomous and of class C4 on an open convex set U⊆Rd. Assume an exact solution y and all stages from exact starting values lie in a common compact convex K⊂U, and that the derivatives of f through order four are bounded on K. For a component fi, let J=Df(y), H=D2f(y), and G=D3f(y) denote its coordinate derivative arrays: (Jv)i=∑j∂jfi(y)vj, Hi(u,v)=∑j,k∂j∂kfi(y)ujvk, and Gi(u,v,w)=∑j,k,ℓ∂j∂k∂ℓfi(y)ujvkwℓ. These arrays act componentwise on vectors; J2v and J3v mean repeated matrix application, and JH(u,v) means J(H(u,v)). The following coefficient equations are sufficient for the indicated uniform local orders on K:

  • order at least one: ∑ibi=1;
  • order at least two: also ∑ibici=1/2;
  • order at least three: also ∑ibici2=1/3 and ∑ibi(Ac)i=1/6;
  • order at least four: also ∑ibici3=1/4, ∑ibi(Ac[2])i=1/12, ∑ibici(Ac)i=1/8, and ∑ibi(A2c)i=1/24.

Here local order p means a uniform exact-start defect of norm O(hp+1) as in One-step ODE methods, local defect, uniform order, and step stability. The conditions are sufficient coefficient matches; this item asserts no necessity claim.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An explicit tableau, a C4 autonomous vector field, an exact solution and admitted stages in the stated compact convex tube, and the bounded-derivative hypotheses.

[F1]

Explicit Runge–Kutta tableaus, stage maps, and failure status: Yi=y+h∑j<iaijKj, Ki=f(Yi) in the autonomous case, and y+=y+h∑ibiKi.

[F2]

One-step ODE methods, local defect, uniform order, and step stability: the local defect is the method output from an exact starting state minus the exact next state; uniform order p is a uniform norm bound O(hp+1).

[F3]

Ck maps and multi-index derivative notation in Euclidean space, If all partial derivatives exist on a neighbourhood and are continuous at a point, then the map is totally differentiable there with Jacobian derivative, and Continuous mixed partials of order k are invariant under permutations: continuous ordered coordinate derivatives through order four exist; the first derivative is represented by the Jacobian matrix of coordinate partials; and the second- and third-order coordinate arrays are symmetric.

[F4]

Multivariable Taylor formula with a Lagrange remainder along a line segment: on a convex domain, a Ck+1 scalar function equals its degree-k Taylor polynomial plus a bounded order-(k+1) remainder along each admitted segment. Apply this coordinatewise to f and to y.

[F6]

The Euclidean inner product ⟨x,y⟩=∑k<nxkyk on Rn: ∥v∥22=∑k=1dvk2; uniform coordinate remainder bounds therefore give a uniform Euclidean-norm remainder bound.

Proof

1.1givenF3F5F7algebra

Write f0=f(y), J=Df(y), H=D2f(y), and G=D3f(y) at the exact starting state. The hypothesis f∈C4(U) is in the coordinate sense of [F3]. To justify the Banach chain rules used below, regard each finite array of order-r coordinate partials as a map into a finite-dimensional coordinate space. For r=0,1,2,3, its first coordinate partials exist and are continuous by f∈C4(U), so the continuous-partials theorem in [F3], applied successively, gives continuous Fréchet derivatives through order four, with entries the corresponding coordinate partials. Thus [F5] applies to f and the exact solution. The exact solution is differentiable, hence continuous from the Fréchet remainder in its derivative definition; since y′=f∘y and f is continuous, y′ is continuous and y is C1. If y is Cr for 1≤r≤4, the iterated chain and product rules in [F5] and continuity of the derivative arrays show f∘y is Cr, so y′=f∘y makes y Cr+1. Thus y is C5 on the admitted interval. A further differentiation expresses y(5) using f and its derivatives through order four, which are bounded on K; hence the order-four Taylor remainder of y is uniform. Differentiating gives y′′=Jf0, y′′′=H(f0,f0)+J2f0, and y(4)=G(f0,f0,f0)+3H(f0,Jf0)+JH(f0,f0)+J3f0; the factor 3 uses the symmetry in [F3].

2.1givenF1F3F4step 1.1inductionalgebra

Prove the stage expansions simultaneously by induction on i. The empty first row gives Y1=y and K1=f0, the displayed formulas below with their zero row coefficients. Suppose the formulas hold for j<i. Substituting them into Yi=y+h∑j<iaijKj gives Yi−y=hcif0+h2(Ac)iJf0+h3((A2c)iJ2f0+12(Ac[2])iH(f0,f0))+O(h4). Taylor-expand f(Yi) at y through cubic order by [F4]: f(y+δ)=f0+Jδ+12H(δ,δ)+16G(δ,δ,δ)+O(∥δ∥24). Substituting the preceding stage-state expansion and collecting powers of h gives, uniformly in i, Ki=f0+hciJf0+h2((Ac)iJ2f0+12ci2H(f0,f0))+h3((A2c)iJ3f0+12(Ac[2])iJH(f0,f0)+ci(Ac)iH(f0,Jf0)+16ci3G(f0,f0,f0))+O(h4). The cross term uses [F3] to exchange the two arguments of H. Compactness, bounded derivatives, and finiteness of s make every remainder uniform.

3.1F1step 2.1algebra

Substituting step 2.1 into y+=y+h∑ibiKi gives coefficients of the four orders: hf0 has coefficient ∑ibi; h2Jf0 has coefficient ∑ibici; h3J2f0 and h3H(f0,f0) have coefficients ∑ibi(Ac)i and 12∑ibici2; and the four h4 terms J3f0, JH(f0,f0), H(f0,Jf0), and G(f0,f0,f0) have coefficients ∑ibi(A2c)i, 12∑ibi(Ac[2])i, ∑ibici(Ac)i, and 16∑ibici3.

4.1givenF4step 1.1step 3.1algebra

Taylor's formula [F4] and the derivatives in step 1.1 give the exact solution coefficients 1, 1/2, 1/6 for each order-three term, and 1/24, 1/24, 3/24, 1/24 for the four order-four terms in the same order as step 3.1.

5.1givenF2F4F6step 2.1step 3.1step 4.1algebra∎

The displayed coefficient equations make the method and exact expansions agree through hp for each requested p≤4. The stage remainder in step 2.1 is O(h4) and is multiplied by h, while the exact Taylor remainder is uniform on the compact tube, so matching through hp leaves a uniform defect O(hp+1). By [F2] this is uniform local order at least p.

Remarks

For a nonautonomous field f(t,y), adjoin the time equation t′=1 and apply the same autonomous argument to (t,y)′=(1,f(t,y)). Since ci=∑j<iaij, the time component of stage i is exactly t+cih; thus this extension uses the actual tableau abscissae.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

83 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