Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
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 selected exact-J two-stage Rosenbrock method is scalar L-stable

Statement

For scalar stability, consider the exact-arithmetic complexification of the exact-Jacobian stage equations of Two-stage second-order Rosenbrock W-method with shared factorization. For λ,y,k1,q2,k2∈C, h>0, z=hλ, and α=1−1/2, use

(1−αz)k1=λy,F1=λ(y+hk1/2),(1−αz)q2=F1−k1,k2=q2+k1,y+=y+hk2.

Equivalently, identify C with R2 and multiplication by λ with Cλ=(Re⁡λ−Im⁡λIm⁡λRe⁡λ) in the real stage equations, with exact-J data J~=Cλ and T~=0. This is a scalar stability analysis of exact stage equations; it is not an execution of the finite-precision real algorithm. Use the scalar rational-function criteria in Scalar stability function, A-stability, and L-stability for Runge–Kutta methods for its amplification function. Its scalar stability function is R(z)=1+(1−2α)z(1−αz)2. This function has no pole on Re⁡z≤0, has modulus at most one there, and tends to zero as ∣z∣→∞ in that half-plane. Hence this exact-J scalar method is L-stable. This theorem makes no A/L-stability claim for an arbitrary approximate Jacobian.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The exact-J method, the scalar test equation, and z=hλ.

[F1]

Two-stage second-order Rosenbrock W-method with shared factorization: its real stage coefficients and equations have the form displayed in the Statement; this theorem analyzes their exact complexification, not a finite-precision real execution.

[F2]

Scalar stability function, A-stability, and L-stability for Runge–Kutta methods: L-stability requires no left-half-plane pole, modulus at most one there, and vanishing limit at infinity in that half-plane.

[F3]

Real and imaginary parts, complex conjugation, and modulus: every complex scalar is uniquely x+iy and ∣x+iy∣=x2+y2.

[F4]

Conjugation is an involutive real-field automorphism, zz‾=∣z∣2, and modulus is definite, multiplicative, and subadditive: the complex modulus is nonnegative, multiplicative, and satisfies ∣z+w∣≤∣z∣+∣w∣.

Proof

Given: The data in the Statement.

1.1givenF1algebra

Take a nonzero starting value y. The exact complex equations in the Statement give hk1/y=z/(1−αz) and, by k2=q2+k1, the equivalent equation (1−αz)k2=F1−αzk1. Substituting F1=λ(y+hk1/2) and eliminating k1 yields 1+hk2/y=1+[z+(1/2−2α)z2]/(1−αz)2. Since α=1−1/2 satisfies α2+1/2−2α=0, this reduces to the stated R(z).

2.1givenF3F4step 1.1algebra

Let z=x+iy with x≤0. The equation 1−αz=0 would force z=1/α>0, so the denominator has no zero in the closed left half-plane. Put c=1−2α=2α. Expanding gives ∣1−αz∣4−∣1+cz∣2=(−4α−2c)x+(2α2−c2)∣z∣2+4α2x2−4α3x∣z∣2+α4∣z∣4=−2x+4α2x2−4α3x∣z∣2+α4∣z∣4≥0. Every term is nonnegative because x≤0 and α>0, so ∣R(z)∣≤1.

3.1step 2.1F2F3F4algebra∎

By the triangle inequality in [F4], α∣z∣=∣αz∣=∣1−(1−αz)∣≤1+∣1−αz∣, so ∣1−αz∣≥α∣z∣−1. Also ∣1+cz∣≤1+∣c∣∣z∣. Therefore ∣R(z)∣≤(1+∣c∣∣z∣)/(α∣z∣−1)2 whenever ∣z∣>1/α, and this bound tends to zero as ∣z∣→∞. Together with step 2.1, [F2] gives L-stability.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

16 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