Alphabeta Math
PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedverified 2026-09-26 (gpt-6-sol)
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 functional Λg has norm ∥g∥q; for q=∞ assume μ is semifinite

Statement

Let (X,A,μ) be a measure space, let 1≤p<∞, and let q be conjugate to p. For g∈Lq(μ), let Λg([f])=∫fg dμ. Then ∥Λg∥≤∥g∥q. If 1<p<∞, then equality holds: ∥Λg∥=∥g∥q. If p=1 and hence q=∞, the same equality holds provided μ is semifinite.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A measure space (X,A,μ), an exponent 1≤p<∞, its conjugate exponent q, and an element g∈Lq(μ).

[L1]

The pairing functional Λg is bounded and satisfies ∥Λg∥≤∥g∥q (Every g∈Lq(μ) defines a bounded linear functional on Lp(μ)).

[L2]

If 1<p<∞ and q is conjugate to p, then p(q−1)=q (Conjugate exponents, including the endpoint conventions).

[L3]

The essential supremum is the least essential bound: if M=∥g∥∞ and u is any measurable representative of g, then ∣u∣≤M almost everywhere. If M>0 and 0<ε<M, then the set {∣u∣>M−ε} has positive measure; otherwise M−ε would be a smaller essential bound (The essential supremum is attained as the least essential bound).

[L4]

In a semifinite measure space, every measurable set of positive measure contains a measurable subset of positive finite measure (Finite, sigma-finite, and semifinite measures).

Proof

technique · Use Holder for the upper bound. For $1<p<\infty$ test against the normalized extremizer with conjugate phase; for $p=1$ use a finite-measure subset of an almost-maximal level set, which is exactly where semifiniteness enters
1.1L1given

The upper bound ∥Λg∥≤∥g∥q is exactly [L1].

2.1step 1.1given

If g=0 in Lq(μ), then Λg=0 by definition, so ∥Λg∥=0=∥g∥q. Hence only the case g≠0 remains.

2.2L2step 1.1givenchooseconstruct

Assume 1<p<∞. Choose a representative u of g and define s(x):={u(x)‾/∣u(x)∣,u(x)≠0,0,u(x)=0,f(x):=∣u(x)∣q−1s(x)∥g∥qq−1. Then ∣f∣p=∣u∣q/∥g∥qq by [L2], so ∥[f]∥pp=1∥g∥qq∫∣u∣q dμ=1. Also fu=∣u∣q/∥g∥qq−1, so Λg([f])=1∥g∥qq−1∫∣u∣q dμ=∥g∥q. Therefore ∥Λg∥≥∥g∥q. Together with step 1.1, this gives ∥Λg∥=∥g∥q.

3.1L3L4step 1.1step 2.1givenchooseconstruct

Assume p=1, so q=∞, and assume μ is semifinite. Put M:=∥g∥∞. Step 2.1 leaves only g≠0, so M>0. Choose a representative u of g, and define s(x):={u(x)‾/∣u(x)∣,u(x)≠0,0,u(x)=0. For 0<ε<M, [L3] gives a measurable set Eε:={∣u∣>M−ε} of positive measure. By [L4], choose Fε⊆Eε with 0<μ(Fε)<∞, and set fε:=s1Fεμ(Fε). Then ∥[fε]∥1=1 and Λg([fε])=1μ(Fε)∫Fε∣u∣ dμ≥M−ε. Hence ∥Λg∥≥M−ε for every 0<ε<M, so ∥Λg∥≥M=∥g∥∞. Step 1.1 gives the reverse inequality, and therefore ∥Λg∥=∥g∥∞.

4.1step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2step 3.1∎

Step 2.2 proves the strict-exponent case, and step 3.1 proves the q=∞ endpoint under semifiniteness. Together with steps 1.1 and 2.1, this proves the proposition.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

16 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