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.
Compactness of on bounded open sets
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let , let be a bounded open set and let . Then is compactly embedded in : the inclusion is bounded, and every sequence bounded in has a subsequence converging in . No regularity of is needed.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: the Axiom of Choice, , a bounded open , , and a sequence with .
Zero extension. For each the zero extension of lies in with the zero extension of and ; the extension vanishes outside . (Zero extension of W_0^{1,p} has no boundary derivative, Zero-boundary Sobolev space as a norm closure, Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms)
Translation estimate. , under the Axiom of Choice. (The translation estimate for functions on )
Automatic tails. A family in whose members all vanish almost everywhere outside the fixed bounded set satisfies the tightness condition of the Fr'echet--Kolmogorov criterion. (Uniformly supported families have vanishing tails, Bounded subset, diameter, distance from a point to a set, and distance between two sets in a metric space)
The Fr'echet--Kolmogorov criterion. A bounded family in with vanishing tails and uniform translation control is totally bounded, its closure is compact, and every sequence in it has an -convergent subsequence. (The Fr'echet--Kolmogorov compactness criterion in , The Axiom of Countable Choice (), The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an -indexed chain)
Restriction is contractive. , and the norm of the restriction never exceeds the norm of an extension. (Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms, The space as the quotient by null functions)
Proof
By [F1] the extensions satisfy , and the finite-dimensional equivalence of norms gives since each component is bounded in by ; moreover each vanishes outside the fixed bounded set .
The family meets the hypotheses of [F4]: it is bounded by step 1.1; its tails vanish by [F3]; and by [F2] , a bound uniform in that tends to with .
By [F4] there is a subsequence converging in , say to ; restricting to gives by [F5], so converges in . Boundedness of the inclusion is the inequality of [F5]; the extraction uses the Countable and Dependent Choice of [F4], and the Axiom of Choice is inherited through the translation estimate [F2].
Depends on
- The translation estimate for $W^{1,p}$ functions on $\mathbb R^n$
- Uniformly supported families have vanishing tails
- The Fr\'echet--Kolmogorov compactness criterion in $L^p(\mathbb R^n)$
- Zero extension of W_0^{1,p} has no boundary derivative
- Zero-boundary Sobolev space as a norm closure
- Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms
- The space $L^p(\mu)$ as the quotient by null functions
- Bounded subset, diameter, distance from a point to a set, and distance between two sets in a metric space
- The Axiom of Countable Choice ($\mathrm{AC}_\omega$)
- The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an $\mathbb{N}$-indexed chain
- The Axiom of Choice
Used by
- A bounded map into H¹₀ yields a compact L² operator Corollary
- Subcritical compactness for W^1,p₀ on arbitrary bounded open sets Corollary
- The adjoint solution operator solves the adjoint form problem Lemma
- The shifted solution operator is compact on L² Lemma
- Weak H¹ convergence plus Rellich preserves the L² unit normalisation Lemma
Dependency tree · two levels
60 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
- John K. Hunter, Notes on Partial Differential Equations (UC Davis, revised 18 June 2014, complete 242-page two-quarter notes) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Richard S. Laugesen, Linear Analysis and Partial Differential Equations (University of Illinois, complete graduate notes) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Gerald Teschl, Partial Differential Equations: From Classical to Modern (archived 2025 author manuscript) (standard reference, not scraped)