Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-13
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.

Induced transformations preserve restricted finite measure

Statement

For a finite measure-preserving system and a measurable E with μ(E)>0, its induced transformation TE on E∞ preserves both μ∣E∞ and μE. Neither invertibility nor ergodicity is required.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

Return fibers and induced inverse images are measurable. First-return time and induced map are measurable.

[F2]

The recurrent core is conull in E, and T_E is its self-map. First-return times and induced transformations.

[F3]

Pullback by T preserves the original measure. Compositions, iterates and completions preserve invariance.

[F4]

Additivity splits measurable sets into disjoint pieces. Measures on sigma-algebras.

[F5]

Increasing unions of partial first-return sets have the supremum of their measures. Continuity from below for measures.

Proof

Given: For a finite measure-preserving system and a measurable E with μ(E)>0, its induced transformation TE on E∞ preserves both μ∣E∞ and μE. Neither invertibility nor ergodicity is required.

1.1F1F2F3F4

Fix a trace set B⊆E∞; it is ambient measurable. Write Hn=E∩T−nB∩⋂j=1n−1T−jEc and RN=T−NB∩⋂j=0N−1T−jEc. Pulling B back once and splitting at E gives μ(B)=μ(H1)+μ(R1). Pulling RN back and splitting at E gives μ(RN)=μ(HN+1)+μ(RN+1). Thus for each N≥1, μ(B)=∑n=1Nμ(Hn)+μ(RN).

2.1step 1.1F1F2F4F5

The H_n are disjoint first-return pieces. Each differs from Hn∩E∞ by a subset of the measurable null set E∖E∞; these differences are themselves measurable. Consequently the finite-sum identity implies μ(⋃n=1N(Hn∩E∞))≤μ(B). Passing to the increasing union gives μ(TE−1B)≤μ(B).

3.1step 2.1F2F4algebra∎

Apply the same inequality to C=E∞∖B. Since TE maps its entire domain to itself, TE−1C=E∞∖TE−1B. All measures here are finite, so μ(E∞)−μ(TE−1B)≤μ(E∞)−μ(B) gives the reverse inequality. Equality follows for every B; division by 0<μ(E)<∞ proves invariance of μE.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

22 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