Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (z-ai/glm-5.2)audited 2026-07-27
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.

Dirichlet's test: if the partial sums of ∑ak are bounded and (bk) is nonincreasing with bk→0, then ∑akbk converges

Statement

Let (ak) and (bk) be sequences of reals, and let An=∑k<nak be the partial sums of ∑ak (Series, partial sums, convergence and the sum, divergence, and the tail series). Suppose that

  1. the range { An:n∈N } is bounded (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set), that is there is a real M≥0 with ∣An∣≤M for every n; and
  2. (bk) is nonincreasing (Nondecreasing, increasing, nonincreasing, decreasing, monotone, and eventually monotone sequences) and converges to 0 (Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals).

Then ∑akbk converges.

Under hypothesis 2 the terms bk are automatically nonnegative, and the proof says so before using it: a nonincreasing sequence is bounded below by each of its own later terms, and passing to the limit gives bk≥0 (Limits preserve non-strict inequalities).

Nothing is assumed about ∑ak itself. Its partial sums need only stay bounded; they need not converge. That is what makes this test the source of the alternating series test (The alternating series test: if (bk) is nonincreasing with bk→0 then ∑k(−1)kbk converges, the sum lies between any two consecutive partial sums, and the error after n terms is at most bn) and of examples whose sign pattern is not alternating at all.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Sequences (ak) and (bk) of reals with An=∑k<nak bounded in absolute value, and (bk) nonincreasing with bk→0.

[L1]

Abel summation by parts: for every n≥1, ∑k<nakbk=Anbn−1−∑k<n−1Ak+1(bk+1−bk) (Abel summation by parts: with An=∑k<nak one has ∑k<nakbk=Anbn−1−∑k<n−1Ak+1 (bk+1−bk) for every n≥1).

[L2]
[L3]

Limits preserve non-strict inequalities holding eventually (Limits preserve non-strict inequalities, Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals).

[L4]

Telescoping: with dk:=bk−bk+1, the partial sums of ∑dk are b0−bn, and ∑dk converges if and only if (bk) converges, with sum b0−lim⁡kbk (∑(bk−bk+1) converges iff (bk) converges, with sum b0−lim⁡bk).

[L5]

Direct comparison: if 0≤xk≤yk from some index on and ∑yk converges, then ∑xk converges (If 0≤ak≤bk eventually, convergence of ∑bk gives convergence of ∑ak, and divergence of ∑ak gives divergence of ∑bk).

[L6]

If ∑∣xk∣ converges then ∑xk converges (If ∑∣ak∣ converges then ∑ak converges).

[L7]

Linearity: if ∑xk converges then so does ∑c xk for every real c (Convergent series add and scale termwise).

[L8]

A null sequence times a bounded sequence is null (A null sequence times a bounded sequence is null).

[L9]

Algebra of limits for differences of convergent sequences (Algebra of limits: sums, scalar multiples, products and quotients).

[L10]

A sequence converges to x if and only if some tail of it converges to x (Convergence depends only on the tail).

[L11]

Absolute value: ∣xy∣=∣x∣∣y∣, ∣x∣≥0, and ∣−x∣=∣x∣ (Basic properties of the absolute value).

[L12]

A bounded set of reals admits a bound in absolute value (Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Fix a real M≥0 with ∣An∣≤M for every n∈N.

givenL12choose
1.2

For each fixed k the inequality bm≤bk holds for all m≥k, and (bm)m converges to 0 while the constant sequence with value bk converges to bk; hence 0≤bk.

givenL2L3
1.3

Put dk:=bk−bk+1 and ck:=Ak+1(bk+1−bk) for k∈N, and let sn:=∑k<nakbk, tn:=∑k<nck and un:=An+1bn.

given
1.4

Each dk≥0, since (bk) is nonincreasing; and ∑dk converges, with sum b0−0=b0, because (bk) converges to 0.

givenL2L4
2.1

For every k, ∣ck∣=∣Ak+1∣ ∣bk+1−bk∣=∣Ak+1∣ dk≤Mdk, using bk+1−bk=−dk and dk≥0.

step 1.1step 1.3step 1.4L11
2.2

The sequence (An+1)n is bounded by M and (bn) converges to 0, so un=An+1bn converges to 0.

step 1.1step 1.3givenL8
2.3

The series ∑Mdk converges, by step 1.4 and linearity.

step 1.4L7
2.4

For every n∈N, applying [L1] at the index n+1≥1 gives sn+1=An+1bn−∑k<nAk+1(bk+1−bk)=un−tn.

step 1.3L1
3.1

Since 0≤∣ck∣≤Mdk for every k, the series ∑∣ck∣ converges by comparison, and therefore ∑ck converges; write T for its sum, so that tn→T.

step 2.1step 2.3L5L6
4.1

By step 2.2, step 3.1 and the algebra of limits, sn+1→0−T=−T as n→∞.

step 2.2step 3.1step 2.4L9
5.1

The sequence (sn+1)n∈N is the first tail of (sn), so (sn) itself converges to −T; that is, ∑akbk converges, with sum −T.

step 4.1L10∎

Remarks

  • Where each hypothesis is used, and none is decorative. Boundedness of (An) is used twice: once to bound ∣ck∣ in step 2.1, and once to kill the boundary term in step 2.2. Monotonicity of (bk) is what makes ∣bk+1−bk∣ equal to bk−bk+1, so that the bound in step 2.1 telescopes; without it the differences need not sum to anything. And bk→0 is used both in the telescoping sum of step 1.4 and in the boundary term of step 2.2.

  • Why nonincreasing and not monotone, although either would do. Hypothesis 2 could equally be stated with "monotone", and the theorem would still be true: a nondecreasing (bk) converging to 0 is nonpositive, so (−bk) is nonincreasing and converges to 0, and applying the theorem to it gives convergence of ∑ak(−bk) and hence of ∑akbk (Convergent series add and scale termwise). What "monotone" may not be weakened to is "monotone and bounded": a monotone (bk) with a nonzero limit is not covered, and for such a factor the conclusion fails in general. The nonincreasing form is chosen here because it is the form the proof uses, and because it makes bk≥0 immediate. Abel's test: if ∑ak converges and (bk) is monotone and bounded then ∑akbk converges is the result that handles monotone bounded factors, and it has a different hypothesis on ∑ak.

  • The sum is not computed. The proof produces the limit as −T, where T is the sum of a series that the argument only proves convergent. This is a convergence test and nothing more.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

50 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