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.
A unit-mass smooth bump generates an approximate identity
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice.
Let satisfy , and let . Then is an approximate identity.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice, a unit-mass smooth bump, and its rescalings.
An approximate identity and a mollifier family are defined in An approximate identity on and The mollifier family generated by a unit-mass smooth bump.
Linear change of variables preserves Lebesgue measure in the expected way, and the integral is linear on (A linear map of sends Lebesgue measurable sets to Lebesgue measurable sets, with when is invertible and Lebesgue null when it is not, The Lebesgue integral is linear on ).
Proof
By [L2], the change of variables gives [L1, L2, given, algebra] and likewise So the mass is and the norms are uniformly bounded.
Let satisfy . [step 1.1, choose, algebra] Then . Hence for every and every , So the tails concentrate at the origin.
Steps 1.1 and 2.1 verify the three defining clauses in [L1], so [L1, step 1.1, step 2.1] is an approximate identity.
Depends on
- An $L^1$ approximate identity on $\mathbb{R}^n$
- The mollifier family generated by a unit-mass smooth bump
- A linear map $T$ of $\mathbb{R}^n$ sends Lebesgue measurable sets to Lebesgue measurable sets, with $\lambda_n(T[E])=|\det T|\,\lambda_n(E)$ when $T$ is invertible and $T[E]$ Lebesgue null when it is not
- The Lebesgue integral is linear on $L^1(\mu)$
Used by
- Compactly supported smooth functions are dense in W^k,p(Rⁿ) Corollary
- Hilbert transform does not map L-infinity to L-infinity Counterexample
- Hilbert transform is not strong type (1,1) Counterexample
- Hilbert transform of an interval indicator Example
- Mollifying 1_[0,1] at two scales Example
- The weak Dirichlet Poisson problem on an interval Example
- A function with nonnegative test pairings is nonnegative a.e. Lemma
- Cotlar's inequality for maximal truncations Lemma
- Simultaneous L1 and L2 smooth approximation Lemma
- Smooth compactly supported functions of an open set are dense in L² Lemma
- Ambient smooth restrictions are dense on bounded Cᵏ domains Theorem
- C_c^∞(ℝⁿ) is dense in Lᵖ(ℝⁿ) for 1 ≤ p < ∞ Theorem
- Existence of bounded Kruzhkov entropy solutions Theorem
- Local smooth approximation in integer-order Sobolev spaces Theorem
- Locally integrable functions embed in distributions Theorem
- Oleinik's one-sided estimate characterizes bounded entropy solutions Theorem
- Plancherel support for SL2(R) Theorem
- The distributional Riesz functional of a subharmonic function is a positive Radon measure Theorem
- The Hamilton--Jacobi correspondence in one dimension Theorem
- The Mihlin–Hörmander Fourier multiplier theorem Theorem
- Zero weak gradient gives componentwise constants Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
39 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
- Richard L. Wheeden and Antoni Zygmund, Measure and Integral: An Introduction to Real Analysis (standard reference, not scraped)
- Terence Tao, An Introduction to Measure Theory (standard reference, not scraped)