Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-22
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.

Chain sum product and composition rules for Banach derivatives

Statement

Let UX be open in a real Banach space X, and let Y, Z, W be real Banach spaces. Then:

  1. Sum rule. If f1,f2:UY are Fréchet differentiable at xU and a,bR, then af1+bf2 is Fréchet differentiable at x with D(af1+bf2)(x)=aDf1(x)+bDf2(x).
  2. Bounded-bilinear product rule. If f:UY and g:UZ are Fréchet differentiable at x, and B:Y×ZW is bounded bilinear, then UuB(f(u),g(u)) is Fréchet differentiable at x and

D(B(f,g))(x)h=B(Df(x)h, g(x))+B(f(x), Dg(x)h)(hX).

  1. Chain rule. If f:UY is Fréchet differentiable at x, if W0Y is an open set with f[U]W0, and if g:W0Z is Fréchet differentiable at f(x), then gf is Fréchet differentiable at x and D(gf)(x)=Dg(f(x))Df(x).

No continuity of any derivative map is assumed; these are pointwise statements about one x at a time.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An open UX in a real Banach space X, real Banach spaces Y,Z,W, and xU. The three claims have separate map data:

  • For claim 1, f1,f2:UY are differentiable at x and a,bR.
  • For claim 2, f:UY and g:UZ are differentiable at x, and B:Y×ZW is bounded bilinear with a constant C0 as in [L3].
  • For claim 3, f:UY is differentiable at x, W0Y is open with f[U]W0, and g:W0Z is differentiable at f(x).

The symbols f,g are local to their respective claims. Throughout the proof, source increments h satisfy x+hU; in claim 3 this guarantees y+k(h)=f(x+h)W0.

[L1]

Fréchet differentiability at x with derivative T means that for every real ε>0 there is a real δ>0 such that f(x+h)f(x)Thεh for every h with h<δ and x+hU (Fréchet derivative between Banach spaces).

[L2]

The norm satisfies the triangle inequality u+vu+v, absolute homogeneity λu=λu, and separation u=0u=0 (A norm on a real vector space, the induced metric, and the dictionary with the metric axioms).

[L3]

A bounded bilinear map B has a real constant C0 with B(u,v)Cuv for all u,v, and is jointly continuous (A bounded bilinear map between normed spaces, For a bilinear map, boundedness is equivalent to joint continuity).

[L4]

Linear combinations of bounded linear operators with a common source and target are bounded linear. A composite of bounded linear operators is bounded linear, and STST; the operator norm satisfies TuTu (Composition satisfies |ST|\le|S|,|T|, The operator norm as the least bound and as the unit-sphere or unit-ball supremum, The spaces (\mathcal B(X,Y)) and (\mathcal B(X)) of bounded linear operators).

[L5]

If two bounded linear operators satisfy the Fréchet remainder condition for the same map at the same point, they are equal (The Fréchet derivative is unique).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

For claim 1, write T:=aDf1(x)+bDf2(x), a bounded linear operator by [L4], and r(h):=af1(x+h)+bf2(x+h)af1(x)bf2(x)Th, which equals ar1(h)+br2(h) with rj(h):=fj(x+h)fj(x)Dfj(x)h. Then r(h)/har1(h)/h+br2(h)/h for h0, and both terms tend to 0 by [L1]; hence af1+bf2 is differentiable at x with derivative T, which is claim 1.

L1L2L4algebra
1.2

For claim 2 define L(h):=B(Df(x)h,g(x))+B(f(x),Dg(x)h) for hX. Since Df(x), Dg(x) are linear and B is bilinear, L is linear, and L(h)C(Df(x)g(x)+f(x)Dg(x))h by [L3] and [L4], so L is a bounded linear operator XW.

L3L4algebra
1.3

For claim 3 let T:=Df(x) and S:=Dg(f(x)), write y:=f(x), R(k):=g(y+k)g(y)Sk for kY with y+kW0, and r(h):=f(x+h)f(x)Th. Put k(h):=f(x+h)f(x)=Th+r(h); then g(f(x+h))g(f(x))STh=Sr(h)+R(k(h)) identically in h. Given a real η>0, apply [L1] for g at y with ε:=η/(2(T+1)) to get δ1>0 with R(k)η2(T+1)k for k<δ1, and apply [L1] for f at x with ε:=1 and with ε:=η/(2(1+S)) to get a single δ2>0 such that for h<δ2 both k(h)(T+1)h and r(h)η2(1+S)h hold (take the smaller of the two thresholds). Then for h<min{δ2,δ1/(T+1)} one has R(k(h))η2h and Sr(h)Sr(h)η2h, so g(f(x+h))g(f(x))SThηh. Hence the bounded linear operator ST of [L4] satisfies the remainder condition for gf at x, and by [L5] it is the derivative, which is claim 3.

L1L4L5algebra
2.1

For claim 2 put Δf(h):=f(x+h)f(x), Δg(h):=g(x+h)g(x), so that Δf(h)=Df(x)h+rf(h) and Δg(h)=Dg(x)h+rg(h) with remainders rf,rg as in [L1]. By bilinearity, expanding B(f(x)+Δf,g(x)+Δg) gives B(f(x+h),g(x+h))B(f(x),g(x))L(h)=B(rf(h),g(x))+B(f(x),rg(h))+B(Δf(h),Δg(h)), because B(Δf,g(x))=B(Df(x)h,g(x))+B(rf,g(x)) and likewise in the second variable, while the cross term is B(Δf,Δg).

step 1.2L3algebra
3.1

For h small, [L1] with ε=1 gives Δf(h)(Df(x)+1)h and Δg(h)(Dg(x)+1)h. Combining this with [step 2.1] and [L3], B(f(x+h),g(x+h))B(f(x),g(x))L(h)Crf(h)g(x)+Cf(x)rg(h)+C(Df(x)+1)(Dg(x)+1)h2. Dividing by h for h0 and letting h0, every term tends to 0 by [L1], so the left-hand side is o(h) and the bounded linear operator L of [step 1.2] satisfies the remainder condition for B(f,g) at x; by [L5] it is the derivative, which is claim 2.

step 1.2L1L3L5algebra
4.1

Claim 1 is [step 1.1], claim 2 is [step 3.1], and claim 3 is [step 1.3]; this is exactly the conjunction stated.

step 1.1step 1.3step 3.1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

29 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