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 exhaustive box quadratic solve returns the unique minimizer in finite time
Statement
For a nonempty box and positive-definite , the exact algorithm of Finite exhaustive active-set solve for a box-constrained positive quadratic returns the unique minimizer of after at most status checks.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A finite-dimensional nonempty box, a symmetric positive-definite Hessian, and exact arithmetic for the stated algorithm.
The algorithm enumerates all status vectors and retains precisely candidates with coordinates fixed at their assigned lower or upper bounds, free coordinates strictly between their bounds, and the lower/free/upper gradient signs stated in its definition (Finite exhaustive active-set solve for a box-constrained positive quadratic).
The Euclidean extreme-value theorem gives a minimizer of a continuous function on a compact box (Semicontinuous extreme value theorem on compact Euclidean sets).
The box is nonempty and all arithmetic and comparisons in the algorithm are exact.
Proof
The box is compact and is continuous, so [F2] supplies a minimizer . If and , the feasible right derivative is ; if , the feasible left derivative gives ; and if , both signs of perturbation are feasible, so . For a fixed coordinate with , assign lower status if and upper status if (either if ).
Assign each nonfixed coordinate of its lower, upper, or free status according as it is at the lower bound, at the upper bound, or strictly between them; assign fixed coordinates as in step 1.1. Every nonempty principal block is positive definite: for , extend by zeros to to get . Hence is nonsingular; if , its system is vacuous. The free subsystem has the unique solution by its zero free gradient. Thus the algorithm recovers , whose free coordinates are strictly interior by their assignment and whose gradient signs hold by step 1.1. It is retained by [F1], so the algorithm terminates within checks.
Let be a retained candidate and . For any feasible , the checked coordinate signs give on lower-active coordinates, the same inequality on upper-active coordinates, and zero on free coordinates; hence . The exact expansion is nonnegative, and is strictly positive when because is positive definite. Thus every retained candidate is the unique minimizer, so the first one returned by the algorithm is.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
12 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
- Eduardo Casas and Fredi Tröltzsch, Error estimates for linear-quadratic elliptic control problems (standard reference, not scraped)
- Hannes Meinlschmidt, Optimization with Partial Differential Equations, FAU lecture notes (standard reference, not scraped)