Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-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.

✓ 5 results · all verified · 2 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. The 3 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Gaussian basis integral recurrences and boys error — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

These examples evaluate the same-center s-orbital overlap, kinetic, attraction, and electron-repulsion integrals; exhibit the small-T cancellation in the upward Boys recurrence; and attain the explicit n,r tensor-error bounds with an aligned finite perturbation. A two-function overlap matrix shows how nearly duplicate exponents produce a small eigenvalue. The screening example accumulates every skipped-block bound and stops screening before the total budget is exceeded.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Highly contracted Gaussian coefficients amplify primitive integral error

Example

Let n=2, r=1, D=(1), C=(K,K)T with K>0, and suppose every primitive four-index tensor error is ΔGabcd=ε>0 while ΔH=0. Then the transformed four-index error is 16K4ε, the energy error is 8K4ε, and the gradient error has Frobenius norm 162K3ε. Both bounds in Explicit finite-dimensional contraction error bounds for energy and gradient are attained for this aligned-sign perturbation.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The finite energy functional in Finite tensor contractions and their variational energy and gradient, with the two-dimensional coefficient vector and entrywise perturbation in the Example.

[F1]

Finite tensor contractions and their variational energy and gradient: G1111′=∑a,b,c,d=12Ca1Cb1Cc1Cd1Gabcd and E2=12D112G1111′.

[F2]

Explicit finite-dimensional contraction error bounds for energy and gradient: energy and gradient errors are bounded by the explicit n,r,B,M formulas in its Statement.

Verification

1.1givenF1algebra

There are 24=16 primitive entries, each perturbed by ε, and each product of four coefficients is K4. Thus ΔG1111′=16K4ε and ΔE=12ΔG1111′=8K4ε. The perturbed energy is 12ε(C1+C2)4, so each gradient component is 2ε(C1+C2)3=16K3ε; its two-entry Frobenius norm is 162K3ε.

2.1givenF2step 1.1algebra∎

Here B=∥C∥F=2K and M=∥D∥F=1. Substitution into [F2] gives energy bound 12(1)2(1)2(2)2(2K)4ε=8K4ε and gradient bound 2(2)2(1)2(2K)3(1)2ε=162K3ε, equal to the errors in step 1.1.

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Nearly duplicate Gaussian primitives produce an ill-conditioned overlap matrix

Example

For a,b>0, define normalized s primitives ha(x)=(2a/π)3/4e−a∥x∥2. Their overlap is S(ha,hb)=(2aba+b)3/2. For a=b the two-function overlap matrix has eigenvalues 2 and 0. For distinct exponents a,b it has eigenvalues 1±S(ha,hb), and as b→a its condition number tends to infinity.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Positive exponents a,b, normalized Gaussian functions as defined in the Example, and the overlap integral in Cartesian Gaussian primitives, contractions, and integral conventions.

[F1]

Gaussian product theorem and finite polynomial shifts: e−a∥x∥2e−b∥x∥2=e−(a+b)∥x∥2.

[F2]

Cartesian Gaussian moments and exponent-parameter derivatives: ∫e−p∥x∥2dx=(π/p)3/2.

Verification

1.1givenF1F2algebra

By [F1]–[F2], the unnormalized overlap is (π/(a+b))3/2 and each norm squared is (π/(2a))3/2 or (π/(2b))3/2. Multiplying by the normalization constants gives S(ha,hb)=(2ab/(a+b))3/2.

2.1givenalgebra∎

The Gram matrix is (1SS1), whose characteristic polynomial is (1−λ)2−S2, so its eigenvalues are 1±S. At a=b, S=1 and the lower eigenvalue is zero. For a≠b, 2ab<a+b, hence 0<S<1; continuity of the displayed formula gives S→1 as b→a, and therefore (1+S)/(1−S)→∞.

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passOpen item page →

Exact same-center s-orbital overlap, kinetic, attraction, and Coulomb integrals

Example

Let ga(x)=e−a∥x∥2 and gb(x)=e−b∥x∥2 for a,b>0, both centered at the origin. Put p=a+b. Then S(ga,gb)=π3/2p3/2,T(ga,gb)=3abπ3/2p5/2,V0(ga,gb)=2πp. For c,d>0, put q=c+d. The same-center two-electron integral is G(ga,gb;gc,gd)=2π5/2pqp+q.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Positive exponents a,b,c,d; the integral conventions in Cartesian Gaussian primitives, contractions, and integral conventions; and all centers equal to zero.

[F1]

Cartesian Gaussian moments and exponent-parameter derivatives: ∫R3e−p∥x∥2dx=(π/p)3/2 and ∫R3∥x∥2e−p∥x∥2dx=32p(π/p)3/2.

[F2]

Cartesian Gaussian raising, lowering, and kinetic-energy recurrences: −12Δgb=(3b−2b2∥x∥2)gb for an s primitive.

[F4]

Hermite recurrence formulas for Gaussian nuclear-attraction and two-electron Coulomb integrals: the s-pair Coulomb formulas reduce to 2π/p F0(p∥P−C∥2) and 2π5/2/(pqp+q)F0(η∥P−Q∥2); an s-pair has only its E000=1 coefficient.

[F5]

Gaussian product theorem and finite polynomial shifts: multiplying two primitives gives the product exponent p=a+b and product center P=(aA+bB)/p, with its stated Gaussian prefactor.

Verification

1.1givenF1F2F5algebra

For A=B=0, [F5] gives gagb=e−p∥x∥2, so [F1] evaluates the overlap as (π/p)3/2. For kinetic energy, substitute [F2] and use both moments in [F1]: 3b(π/p)3/2−2b232p(π/p)3/2=3abπ3/2p5/2.

2.1givenF3F4algebra∎

In [F4], set C=P=0; then the Boys argument is zero and [F3] gives V0=2π/p. For the two-electron integral, both pair centers are zero and their only Hermite coefficient is 1, so [F4] with F0(0)=1 gives 2π5/2/(pqp+q).

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passOpen item page →

Small-argument cancellation in the upward Boys recurrence

Example

For 0<T≤14, the upward formula for the first two Boys orders is F1(T)=F0(T)−e−T2T. Both subtracted quantities are close to one, while their difference is of order T. If the input intervals for them have radii r0,re, the exact upward affine image has radius (r0+re)/(2T). If its endpoints are converted outward once with finite errors δ−,δ+, the stored radius is (r0+re)/(2T)+(δ−+δ+)/2. Rounding at intermediate nodes requires propagating their contributions as well. Thus fixed input radii can be strongly amplified as T↓0. The direct Taylor branch has the certified remainder T2/10 for F0 after its linear term, so it avoids this division by a small T.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: 0<T≤1/4, the Boys integral and recurrence, and finite certified intervals for F0(T) and e−T.

[F1]

Boys integral, power series, recurrence, and incomplete-gamma representation: F1=(F0−e−T)/(2T) and F0(T)=1−T/3+⋯.

[F2]

The real exponential function and the number e by a power series: e−T=∑k=0∞(−T)k/k!.

[F3]

A monotone-range Taylor remainder for small Boys arguments: after 1−T/3, the F0 remainder has absolute value at most T2/10 for T≤1.

[F4]

Upward and downward Boys recurrence error amplification bounds: the exact upward image has radius (r0+re)/(2T); one finite outward conversion of each full-image endpoint adds the mean endpoint error. Intermediate-node errors must instead be propagated through all subsequent affine coefficients.

[F5]

Soundness of every successful finite-budget Boys enclosure and Finite-budget certified evaluation of Boys function tables: the evaluator offers a small-T Taylor enclosure and makes no success claim when a finite recurrence candidate misses tolerance.

Verification

1.1givenF1F2F3algebra

The exact identity in [F1] divides a difference of two terms. By [F1] and [F3], F0(T)=1−T/3+RF with ∣RF∣≤T2/10. By [F2], e−T=1−T+Re with ∣Re∣≤T2 for T≤1: for k≥2, k!≥2k−1, so ∑k≥21/k!≤∑k≥221−k=1. Therefore ∣(F0(T)−e−T)−2T3∣≤1110T2, so for T≤1/4 the positive difference is at least T/4. The two terms being subtracted each tend to one as T↓0.

2.1givenF3F4F5algebra∎

Applying [F4] with m=0 gives a factor 1/(2T) on both seed radii, which diverges as T↓0 for fixed nonzero radii. The stated stored-radius formula follows only for a full affine image with one finite conversion per endpoint; a primitive subtraction error must also be divided by 2T before adding the final division error. In contrast, [F3] gives a direct Taylor enclosure with error T2/10. The algorithm [F5] can therefore select the direct small-argument branch and return only a certified interval; the example makes no claim that every requested tolerance succeeds under every finite cap.

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passOpen item page →

Coulomb screening must accumulate every discarded-block bound

Example

Suppose a finite screening queue has three candidate input-basis Coulomb quartets (which may be singleton-contraction primitive quartets), each with a verified weighted energy bound wj=0.4τ, and the total discarded-energy budget is τ>0. Choose the permitted screening execution that skips a candidate whenever its cumulative bound fits the budget. With exact accumulation, the first two blocks are skipped and contribute a cumulative bound 0.8τ. The third would raise the cumulative bound to 1.2τ, so it must be evaluated or left unscreened. The reported discarded bound is 0.8τ; none of the skipped integrals is claimed to be zero. This is also an execution of the outward-rounded rule when these sums are represented exactly, for example τ=5 and wj=2 in a format containing 2,4,5,6. Otherwise outward accumulation may conservatively prevent a skip or report a larger bound.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A total screening tolerance τ>0, three finite candidate records with verified weighted Cauchy–Schwarz bounds 0.4τ, exact accumulation of these bounds, and the permitted policy that skips each candidate when the budget guard allows it. For an execution of Finite primitive and contracted Gaussian integral evaluation with certified screening, assume the displayed sums are represented exactly in its format.

[F1]

Positive Coulomb bilinear form, Cauchy–Schwarz, and screening bound: each weighted discarded contribution is bounded by its certified diagonal Cauchy–Schwarz product, and total error is bounded by the sum of those terms.

[F2]

Soundness and accumulated error bounds for the finite Gaussian integral evaluator: every successful reported discarded-energy bound dominates the absolute contribution of all skipped terms.

[F3]

Finite primitive and contracted Gaussian integral evaluation with certified screening: a candidate is skipped only when adding its certified weighted bound keeps the running total at most the requested tolerance.

Verification

1.1givenF1F3algebra

The first bound is 0.4τ≤τ, and the cumulative sum after two is 0.8τ≤τ, so [F3] permits both skips. The selected policy therefore skips both and, with the assumed exact accumulation, records 0.8τ.

2.1givenF1F2F3step 1.1algebra∎

Adding the third gives 0.8τ+0.4τ=65τ>τ. By [F3], the screening guard therefore rejects skipping that third block and requires its evaluation or retention. By [F1]–[F2], the reported 0.8τ bounds only the first two omitted contributions and does not assert exact sparsity.

Sources