Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

Backward Euler stability, first-order error for exact initial data, and reconstruction bounds

Statement

Let Vh be a finite-dimensional conforming subspace of a real evolution triple. Let a(t;⋅,⋅):Vh×Vh→R be real bilinear and measurable in t for each fixed pair. Assume there is one null set E⊂(0,T) outside which, with common constants 0≤M<∞ and α>0, ∣a(t;vh,wh)∣≤M∥vh∥V∥wh∥V,a(t;vh,vh)≥α∥vh∥V2(vh,wh∈Vh). Let f∈L2(0,T;Vh∗). Let uh∈H1(0,T;Vh) be the semidiscrete solution from Finite-dimensional parabolic Galerkin ODEs with measurable coefficients. On a finite partition 0=t0<⋯<tN=T, put τj=tj−tj−1 and τmax⁡=max⁡jτj. For the interval-averaged backward Euler values Uj from Backward Euler FEM with interval-averaged forms and load, define ej=Uj−uh(tj) and let U^ be the affine reconstruction, with U‾(t)=Uj on (tj−1,tj). Every step has a unique solution. With CU=∥U0∥H2+α−1∥f∥L2(0,T;Vh∗)2, the separate maximum and cumulative bounds are max⁡0≤m≤N∥Um∥H2≤CU,∑j=1N∥Uj−Uj−1∥H2+α∑j=1Nτj∥Uj∥V2≤CU. The reconstruction satisfies ∥U^′∥L2(0,T;Vh∗)2≤2∥f∥L2(Vh∗)2+2M2∥U‾∥L2(V)2, ∥U^−U‾∥L2(0,T;Vh∗)2≤ci2τmax⁡3∑j=1N∥Uj−Uj−1∥H2, where ci=∥V↪H∥. For the nodal error, define Ce=∥e0∥H2+M2ατmax⁡2∥uh′∥L2(0,T;Vh)2. Then the error obeys the separate bounds max⁡0≤m≤N∥em∥H2≤Ce,α∑j=1Nτj∥ej∥V2≤Ce. Thus exact initial projection U0=uh(0) gives first-order maximum nodal error. The reconstruction estimates provide bounds for later compactness arguments; they do not themselves assert compactness.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite-dimensional conforming subspace Vh, the measurable bounded/coercive form, f, the semidiscrete trajectory uh, a finite time partition, and U0∈Vh.

[F1]

Instantiate backward Euler with the algorithm's form ah:=a and load g=f. It uses the corresponding interval-average forms and load, and its step equation is the displayed variational equation (Backward Euler FEM with interval-averaged forms and load).

[F2]

The exact finite-dimensional semidiscrete trajectory exists in H1(0,T;Vh) and satisfies the variational equation (Finite-dimensional parabolic Galerkin ODEs with measurable coefficients).

[F3]

2(x−y,x)H=∥x∥H2−∥y∥H2+∥x−y∥H2 (The Hilbert-space discrete energy identity).

[F4]

The form is bounded by M and coercive by α (Bounded, coercive and symmetric sesquilinear forms).

Proof

1.1F1F4givenconstruct

Fix a finite basis of Vh and write the jth variational step as a square linear system for the coefficients of Uj. If its homogeneous system has solution x∈Vh, testing by x gives τj−1∥x∥H2+aˉj(x,x)=0. Coercivity [F4] implies x=0. Thus the square matrix has zero kernel and is invertible, proving a unique solution at each step without a choice axiom.

1.2F1F2F4givenalgebra

With the instantiation in [F1], aˉj(vh,wh)=τj−1∫Ija(t;vh,wh) dt for all vh,wh∈Vh; changing the form on its common null set does not change this average. Integrate the semidiscrete equation [F2] over Ij and subtract it from the backward Euler step. With ej=Uj−uh(tj), this gives τj−1(ej−ej−1,vh)H+aˉj(ej,vh)=rj(vh), where rj(vh)=τj−1∫Ija(t;uh(t)−uh(tj),vh) dt. The fundamental theorem of calculus in finite-dimensional Vh yields ∥rj∥Vh∗≤M∫Ij∥uh′(s)∥Vhds. Cauchy–Schwarz gives ∑jτj∥rj∥Vh∗2≤M2τmax⁡2∥uh′∥L2(Vh)2.

2.1F1F3F4step 1.1algebra

Test the step equation with Uj, multiply by 2τj, use [F3], and bound 2fˉj(Uj) by α∥Uj∥V2+α−1∥fˉj∥Vh∗2. Summing and applying Jensen's inequality gives, for every m, ∥Um∥H2+∑j=1m∥Uj−Uj−1∥H2+α∑j=1mτj∥Uj∥V2≤CU. Taking the maximum of the endpoint term over m proves the maximum bound; setting m=N proves the cumulative bound.

3.1F1F4step 2.1algebra

On (tj−1,tj), U^′=(Uj−Uj−1)/τj and the step equation gives U^′=fˉj−AˉjUj in Vh∗, where Aˉj is the averaged form operator. Its norm is at most M∥Uj∥V, proving the derivative bound by squaring and integrating. Also U^(t)−Uj=(1−s)(Uj−1−Uj) with s=(t−tj−1)/τj; integrating (1−s)2 gives τj/3. Since H→Vh∗ has norm at most ci, this proves the reconstruction difference bound.

4.1F3F4step 1.2algebra∎

Test the error equation from step 1.2 with ej, multiply by 2τj, use [F3], and absorb 2τj∥rj∥∥ej∥Vh by ατj∥ej∥V2+α−1τj∥rj∥Vh∗2. Summing to any m and using the residual estimate in step 1.2 gives, for every m, ∥em∥H2+α∑j=1mτj∥ej∥V2≤∥e0∥H2+α−1∑j=1mτj∥rj∥Vh∗2≤Ce. Taking the maximum of the endpoint term and setting m=N for the cumulative term prove the two asserted bounds.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Cited to discharge well-definedness by Backward Euler FEM with interval-averaged forms and load.

Dependency tree · two levels

13 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