Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passverified 2026-09-09 (gpt-6-astra)
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.

Hahn decomposition for signed measures, unique up to total-variation-null sets

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let ν be a signed measure on (X,A). Then there exist measurable sets P,N such that P∩N=∅,P∪N=X, P is positive for ν, and N is negative for ν.

Separately, without any choice axiom, if two such decompositions (P,N) and (P′,N′) are given, then P△P′ is null for ν and hence has total variation 0. This conditional comparison does not assume the general existence assertion.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A signed measure ν on (X,A) in the sense of A signed measure is countably additive and takes at most one infinite value, and the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice).

[L1]

A measurable set is positive, negative, or null according to the signs of the signed measures of all its measurable subsets. (Positive, negative, and null sets for a signed measure)

[L2]

Under AC, a measurable set of positive finite signed measure contains a positive subset whose signed measure is at least as large. (A set of positive finite signed measure contains a positive subset of at least the same mass)

[L3]

A set is null for a signed measure exactly when its total variation there is 0. (A set is null for a signed measure exactly when its total variation is zero there)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenL1choose

A signed measure omits at least one infinite sign. Replacing ν by −ν swaps positive and negative sets, so first work in the case ν(E)<+∞ for every measurable E. Put m=sup⁡{ν(A):A∈A, A positive}∈[0,+∞]; the empty set is admissible. If m<+∞, for every n≥1 the family of positive sets with ν(A)>m−1/n is nonempty. If m=+∞, use instead the nonempty family with ν(A)>n. AC selects An from these families simultaneously. Set P=⋃n≥1An. This is the optimizing-sequence use of AC; the positive-subset supplier [L2] has its separate stated AC use.

2.1L1step 1.1algebra

For measurable E⊆P, set Bn=E∩(An∖⋃1≤j<nAj). These are disjoint measurable subsets of positive sets, with union E. Thus countable additivity gives ν(E)=∑nν(Bn)≥0. Hence P is positive and ν(P) is finite in the chosen sign convention. For each n, positivity of P∖An gives ν(P)≥ν(An). The branch m=+∞ would imply ν(P)>n for every n, impossible. Therefore m is finite and m−1/n<ν(An)≤ν(P)≤m, whence ν(P)=m.

3.1L1L2step 2.1algebra

Put N=X∖P. If a measurable E⊆N had ν(E)>0, its value would be finite by the chosen sign convention. By [L2] it would contain a positive subset Q with ν(Q)≥ν(E)>0. Disjoint positive sets have positive union, by splitting each measurable subset between them; hence P∪Q would be positive and ν(P∪Q)=m+ν(Q)>m, a contradiction. Thus every measurable subset of N has nonpositive value, so N is negative.

4.1L1L3step 3.1algebra∎

If the original sign was reversed, interchange the two sets just constructed; they then form a positive/negative partition for the original measure. For any two decompositions of that measure, P∖P′ lies in both a positive set P and a negative set N′, and similarly P′∖P lies in P′∩N. Every measurable subset of either difference therefore has value zero. Splitting a measurable subset of their disjoint union into its two parts proves that P△P′ is null. By [L3] its total variation is zero. This uniqueness argument itself makes no sequence choices.

Depends on

Used by

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