Alphabeta Math
PropositionStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passjudge pass (openai/gpt-5.4)audited 2026-07-25
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.

Multiplying inequalities of positives

Statement

Let FF be an ordered field. If 0<a<b0 < a < b and 0<c<d0 < c < d then ac<bdac < bd. If 0ab0 \le a \le b and 0cd0 \le c \le d then acbdac \le bd.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Elements a,b,c,da, b, c, d of an ordered field FF.

[L1]

For a positive multiplier c>0c > 0: x<y    xc<ycx < y \iff xc < yc; multiplying a strict inequality by a positive element preserves it (Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication).

[L2]

For c0c \ge 0: xyxcycx \le y \Rightarrow xc \le yc; the case c>0c > 0 is [L1] and the case c=0c = 0 gives 000 \le 0 (Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication).

[L3]

The order is transitive: if x<yx < y and y<zy < z then x<zx < z, and likewise for \le, since the positive cone is closed under addition (Ordered field).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Assume 0<a<b0 < a < b and 0<c<d0 < c < d; since c>0c > 0, scaling a<ba < b by cc gives ac<bcac < bc.

L1
1.2

Since b>0b > 0 (from 0<a<b0 < a < b), scaling c<dc < d by bb gives bc<bdbc < bd.

L1
1.3

Assume instead 0ab0 \le a \le b and 0cd0 \le c \le d; since c0c \ge 0, from aba \le b we get acbcac \le bc.

L2
1.4

Since b0b \ge 0 (from 0ab0 \le a \le b), from cdc \le d we get bcbdbc \le bd.

L2
2.1

By transitivity, ac<bc<bdac < bc < bd, hence ac<bdac < bd, proving the strict claim.

L3step 1.1step 1.2
2.2

By transitivity of \le, acbcbdac \le bc \le bd, hence acbdac \le bd, proving the nonstrict claim.

L3step 1.3step 1.4
3.1

Both the strict and the nonstrict inequalities hold.

step 2.1step 2.2

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · next 3 levels

Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 5 results over 4 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.

Sources