Alphabeta Math
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.

✓ 5 results · all verified · 5 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs; all 5 also cleared it.

The Duality of Lp and Lq - Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

This examples page keeps the concrete leaves of the duality theorem together: explicit norming functions, the counting-measure ℓ2 instance, the quotient warning that point evaluation does not descend to Lp, and the measure-space counterexample that shows why the p=1 duality theorem needs its stated hypotheses.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-01Open item page →

A power function on (0,1] realizes the duality norm on the unit interval

Example

Let 1<p<∞ with conjugate exponent q, and choose a with 0<a<1/q. On (0,1] with Lebesgue measure, define g(x):=x−a,f(x):=(1−aq)1/px−a(q−1). Then g∈Lq(0,1), the class [f] has ∥[f]∥p=1, and ∫01f(x)g(x) dx=∥g∥q=∥Λg∥=(1−aq)−1/q. So this explicit power pair realizes the norm of the duality functional.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An exponent 1<p<∞, its conjugate exponent q, and a real parameter a with 0<a<1/q.

[L1]

The pairing functional Λg has norm ∥g∥q (The functional Λg has norm ∥g∥q; for q=∞ assume μ is semifinite).

Verification

technique · Take $g(x)=x^{-a}$ with $0<a<1/q$, normalize the extremizer $|g|^{q-1}$ explicitly, and compute both norms by one-variable power integrals
1.1givenalgebra

Since aq<1, one has 1−aq>0 and therefore ∫01x−aq dx=[x1−aq1−aq]01=(1−aq)−1. Hence g∈Lq(0,1) and ∥g∥qq=∫01x−aq dx=(1−aq)−1,∥g∥q=(1−aq)−1/q.

2.1step 1.1givenalgebra

The chosen function f satisfies ∣f(x)∣p=(1−aq)x−aq. Step 1.1 therefore gives ∥[f]∥pp=(1−aq)∫01x−aq dx=1, so ∥[f]∥p=1.

3.1L1step 1.1givenalgebra∎

Also f(x)g(x)=(1−aq)1/px−aq, so another use of step 1.1 gives ∫01f(x)g(x) dx=(1−aq)1/p∫01x−aq dx=(1−aq)1/p−1=(1−aq)−1/q. By step 1.1 and [L1], this equals ∥g∥q=∥Λg∥.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-01Open item page →

The functional f↦∫01/2f on Lp[0,1] has norm 2−1/q

Example

Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

Let 1≤p<∞ and let q be conjugate to p. On [0,1] with Lebesgue measure, define Λ([f]):=∫01/2f(x) dx. Then Λ is a bounded linear functional on Lp[0,1] and ∥Λ∥=2−1/q, with the endpoint convention 2−1/∞=1 when p=1.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Countable Choice and an exponent 1≤p<∞ with conjugate exponent q.

[L2]

If g∈Lq(μ), then the pairing functional Λg has norm ∥g∥q in the ranges treated on the A page (The functional Λg has norm ∥g∥q; for q=∞ assume μ is semifinite).

Verification

technique · Represent the functional by the indicator of $[0,1/2]$, compute that indicator's $L^q$ norm from its measure, and invoke the norm formula for $\Lambda_g$
1.1givenconstruct

Let g:=1[0,1/2]. [given, construct] Then Λ([f])=∫01f(x)g(x) dx=Λg([f]), so Λ is exactly the pairing functional associated to g.

1.2L1given

By [L1], if q<∞ then ∥g∥qq=∫01∣g∣q dx=∫01/21 dx=12, so ∥g∥q=2−1/q.

1.3L1given

If q=∞, then ∣g∣≤1 everywhere and g=1 on a set of positive measure, so ∥g∥∞=1=2−1/∞.

2.1L2step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3∎

Applying [L2] to step 1.1 and steps 1.2-1.3 gives ∥Λ∥=∥Λg∥=∥g∥q=2−1/q.

ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-01Open item page →

Every bounded linear functional on ℓ2 is summation against a unique ℓ2 sequence

Example

Every bounded linear functional Λ:ℓ2→R has a unique sequence b=(bn)∈ℓ2 such that Λ(a)=∑n=0∞anbn(a∈ℓ2), and ∥Λ∥=∥b∥ℓ2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A bounded linear functional Λ on ℓ2.

[L1]

The counting-measure corollary says that every bounded linear functional on ℓp is represented by a unique ℓq sequence, with equality of norms (Counting measure specializes the representation theorem to ℓp and ℓq).

[L2]

On counting measure over N, the integral pairing is exactly the series pairing for sequences (ℓp is the Lp space of counting measure).

Verification

technique · Specialize the counting-measure duality corollary to $p=q=2$ and rewrite the integral pairing as an ordinary series
1.1L1given

Apply [L1] with p=q=2. Then there is a unique sequence b∈ℓ2 such that Λ(a)=∑n=0∞anbn for every a∈ℓ2, and ∥Λ∥=∥b∥ℓ2.

2.1L2step 1.1∎

The summation formula is exactly the counting-measure integral pairing from [L2], so this is the concrete ℓ2 instance of the A-page theorem.

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-01Open item page →

Point evaluation at 0 is not well defined on Lp[0,1]

Statement refuted

Point evaluation at 0 defines a map on Lp([0,1]).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)). Let [0,1] carry Lebesgue measure, and let 1≤p≤∞.

[L1]

Elements of Lp are equivalence classes modulo almost-everywhere equality, so a pointwise operation on representatives descends only if it is independent of the chosen representative (The space Lp(μ) as the quotient by null functions).

Counterexample

technique · Compare the zero function with the indicator of the singleton $\{0\}$: they define the same $L^p$ class but have different values at $0$
1.1givenconstruct

Let u:=0 and v:=1{0} on [0,1]. [given, construct] Then u(0)=0,v(0)=1, so point evaluation at 0 distinguishes these two representatives.

2.1L1L2step 1.1

By [L2], the set {0} is null, so u=v almost everywhere. [L1, L2, step 1.1] Therefore [L1] says that u and v define the same element of Lp([0,1]).

3.1L1step 1.1step 2.1∎

A well-defined map on Lp([0,1]) cannot assign two different values to [L1, step 1.1, step 2.1] the same class. Steps 1.1 and 2.1 show that evaluation at 0 would have to do exactly that, so it does not descend to Lp([0,1]).

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-01Open item page →

The zero-countable / infinity-cocountable measure space breaks the p=1 endpoint of duality

Statement refuted

For p=1, every bounded linear functional on L1(μ) is represented by a unique element of L∞(μ) on every measure space.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)). Let X be an uncountable set, let A:={E⊆X:E is at most countable or X∖E is at most countable}, and define μ(E):={0,E is at most countable,+∞,X∖E is at most countable.

[L1]

Under countable choice, a countable union of at most countable sets is at most countable, and every subset of an at most countable set is at most countable (Countable unions of at most countable sets, assuming ACω, Every subset of an at most countable set is at most countable).

[L2]

A sigma-algebra is an algebra of subsets closed under countable unions, and a measure has value 0 on ∅ and is countably additive on pairwise disjoint measurable sequences (Sigma-algebras, Measures on sigma-algebras).

[L3]

The space L1(μ) is built from integrable representatives, L∞(μ) is the space of essentially bounded measurable functions, and Lp passes to almost-everywhere equivalence classes (The class L1(μ) of integrable functions, The space L∞(μ) of essentially bounded measurable functions, The space Lp(μ) as the quotient by null functions).

[L4]

Chebyshev-Markov gives μ({∣f∣≥t})≤t−1∫∣f∣ dμ(t>0) (Chebyshev-Markov inequality for the integral).

Counterexample

technique · Build the countable-cocountable measure directly, then use Chebyshev-Markov to force every $L^1$ representative to vanish off an at most countable set while $L^\infty$ still contains distinct bounded representatives
1.1L1L2givenconstruct

The family A contains ∅ and is closed under complements by definition. Let (En) lie in A. If every En is at most countable, then ⋃n=1∞En is at most countable by [L1]. If some Ej is cocountable, then X∖⋃n=1∞En⊆X∖Ej, so [L1] makes the complement at most countable. Thus A is a sigma-algebra on X.

2.1L1L2step 1.1givenconstruct

The function μ satisfies μ(∅)=0. Let (En) be pairwise disjoint in A. If two members Ei,Ej were cocountable, then X=(X∖Ei)∪(X∖Ej) would be at most countable by [L1], contradicting that X is uncountable. So at most one En is cocountable. If every En is at most countable, then ⋃n=1∞En is at most countable by [L1], and both sides of countable additivity are 0. If some Ej is cocountable, then X∖⋃n=1∞En⊆X∖Ej is at most countable by [L1], so the union is cocountable and both sides of countable additivity are +∞. Hence μ is a measure on (X,A).

3.1step 2.1givenalgebra

By definition of μ, a measurable set has finite μ-measure exactly when it is at most countable, and then its μ-measure is 0. In particular, X is measurable and μ(X)=+∞ because X∖X=∅ is at most countable.

4.1L1L3L4step 3.1givenchooseconstruct

Let [f]∈L1(μ) and choose an integrable representative u. For each n≥1, set En:={∣u∣≥1/n}. By [L4], μ(En)≤n∫∣u∣ dμ<∞. Step 3.1 therefore gives μ(En)=0, so each En is at most countable. By [L1], {u≠0}=⋃n=1∞En is at most countable and hence null. Thus every element of L1(μ) is the zero class.

4.2L3step 3.1algebra

The constant functions 0 and 1 are both in L∞(μ), but they do not define the same L∞ class because {1≠0}=X, and step 3.1 gives that X is not null. Thus L∞(μ) contains at least two distinct classes.

5.1step 4.1step 4.2algebra∎

Since L1(μ) has only the zero class by step 4.1, its only bounded linear functional is the zero functional. Both 0 and 1 represent that zero functional, because ∫f⋅0 dμ=0=∫f⋅1 dμ for the unique class f=0 in L1(μ). By step 4.2, those two L∞ classes are distinct, so uniqueness fails. Therefore the p=1 representation theorem is false on this measure space.

Sources