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.

✓ 6 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 4 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Nonlinear equations and Newton methods

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

For an open U⊆Rn with n≥1 and a square residual F:U→Rn, Newton's correction solves DF(x)s=−F(x) and updates x by s. The finite procedures distinguish a residual-tolerance status from an exact root and return separate statuses for a singular Jacobian, an invalid stencil or trial, an exhausted line search, and an exhausted update budget. Fixed-point iteration is defined on a metric space as a separate general iteration format.

With coordinates indexed by 0≤i<n, the forward-difference Jacobian has the bound ∥JhF(x)−JF(x)∥op≤(M/2)∥h∥2 when every component Fj is C2, every increment hi is nonzero, every full coordinate segment x+thiei for 0≤t≤1 lies in U, and the second partials ∣∂iiFj∣ on those segments have the stated finite bounds Mij≥0; here Mi=(∑j<nMij2)1/2 and M=max⁡i<nMi. Ordinary updated-Jacobian Newton has local quadratic convergence for F∈C2 at a simple root x∗, meaning F(x∗)=0 and J(x∗) is invertible, provided some closed ball B‾2(x∗,R)⊆U satisfies ∥J(x)−J(y)∥op≤L∥x−y∥2 for some L≥0 and all x,y in that ball. Invertibility at the root gives a smaller ball with a uniform inverse-Jacobian bound, and the Lipschitz bound controls the Taylor remainder. This result applies only to the exact full Newton correction. The separate An accepted damped Newton step strictly decreases the residual merit proves strict decrease of the residual merit for an accepted step with nonzero residual; finite backtrack exhaustion remains a failure status.

When F=∇f, the canonical objective method is Damped Newton method on its C2 positive-definite-Hessian branch, including its positive decrement tolerance and pre-update stopping order. Its objective theorem does not cover arbitrary vector residuals or an indefinite Hessian. Likewise, Newton maps are uniform contractions near a point with invertible derivative concerns a map with a fixed inverse matrix; here it is used only for its local inverse bound, not as a proof of the updated-Jacobian Newton rate. No global-start, finite-precision, or discretization-accuracy claim is made.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableprecheck pendingjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Fixed-point iteration with a residual stop and finite budget

Definition

Let (X,d) be a metric space (Metric space: d(x,y)=0 iff x=y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric), let G:X→X be a specified map, and choose an initial point x0∈X, a residual tolerance ε≥0, and an iteration budget N∈N0. A fixed point of G is a point x with G(x)=x. The procedure returns a point and a status as follows. For k=0,1,…,N, compute the fixed-point residual rk:=d(G(xk),xk). If rk≤ε, return (xk,residual-tolerance-met,rk,k). Otherwise, if k=N, return (xk,iteration-budget-exhausted,rk,k). Otherwise set xk+1:=G(xk) and continue.

A positive residual tolerance reports an approximate fixed point only; this definition asserts no convergence or error bound.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Finite-budget fixed-point iteration returns a status in bounded outer work

Statement

For admissible inputs of Fixed-point iteration with a residual stop and finite budget with budget N∈N0, every entered iterate belongs to X. The procedure uses at most N updates and N+1 fixed-point residual evaluations and returns one of its stated statuses. Termination is in the model where each map evaluation, metric evaluation and comparison returns in finite time. These counts specify outer procedure operations and give no bound on the internal cost of evaluating the supplied map or metric.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The algorithm's metric space, self-map, initial point, tolerance and finite budget, and returning evaluation primitives.

[F1]

Fixed-point iteration with a residual stop and finite budget evaluates its residual once at each entered index, tests tolerance before budget, returns at index N if tolerance fails, and updates only when k<N.

Proof

technique · induction
1.1givenF1base

At the initial entered index 0, the point x0 belongs to X, no update has occurred, and the single pass evaluates one residual.

1.2IH

For an entered index k≤N, assume the preceding entered indices are exactly 0,…,k−1, every entered point through xk lies in X, and at most k updates have occurred before pass k.

2.1givenF1step 1.2algebra

If pass k continues, [F1] requires k<N and sets xk+1=G(xk)∈X by the self-map condition. The next index is k+1 and exactly one additional update has occurred. Thus the assertion of step 1.2 holds at the next entered index. A return creates no further index or update.

3.1givenF1step 1.1step 1.2step 2.1discharge-induction∎

The base and induction step prove membership of every entered iterate and that the entered indices form an initial segment of 0,…,N. At index N, either the residual test returns or the budget test returns before another update. Hence there are at most N+1 residual evaluations and N updates. Every pass contains finitely many returning primitives, so the procedure terminates with a stated status, including when N=0.

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableprecheck pendingOpen item page →

Newton correction for a square vector residual

Definition

Let n≥1, let A:Rn→Rn be a linear map, and let r∈Rn be a residual vector. If A is not invertible in the sense of Invertible Euclidean linear maps, return (singular-jacobian,∅). If A is invertible, return (correction,s), where s is the unique vector solving As=−r.

Use the following exact-arithmetic procedure, with exact real zero tests. Represent A by its matrix in the standard basis, with indices 0≤i,j<n.

  1. To compute the determinant of any matrix M=(mij) below, initialize d=0. Enumerate the permutations σ of {0,…,n−1} in lexicographic order. For each, count its inversions ν(σ)=#{(i,j):i<j, σ(i)>σ(j)}, multiply p=∏i=0n−1mσ(i),i in increasing index order, and add (−1)ν(σ)p to d. The resulting d is the determinant in For n≥1, the determinant over a commutative ring by the Leibniz formula, and ∣det⁡A∣ for a real matrix.
  2. Compute d=det⁡(A) by step 1. If d=0, return (singular-jacobian,∅), using A finite square real matrix is invertible if and only if its determinant is nonzero for the invertibility test.
  3. Otherwise, for j=0,…,n−1, copy A to Aj, replace column j by −r, compute dj=det⁡(Aj) by step 1, and set sj=dj/d. Return (correction,s), the solution specified by Cramer's rule over a commutative ring: every solution satisfies det⁡(A)xj=det⁡(Aj(b)), and a unit determinant gives the unique quotient formula over R.

The output is a linear correction, not a claim that r came from a nonlinear function or that applying the correction decreases a residual.

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableprecheck pendingjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Forward-difference Jacobian on an open domain

Definition

Let n≥1, let U⊆Rn be open, and let F:U→Rn be C1 in the sense of Continuously differentiable maps, local inverses, and local diffeomorphisms. Its Jacobian JF(x) is the matrix of first partial derivatives from The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case, and the matrix of DF(x) in the standard basis is JF(x) by A total derivative computes every directional derivative, and its matrix is the Jacobian. For x∈U, supply increments h=(h0,…,hn−1)∈Rn. For each standard basis vector ei with 0≤i<n, the admissible stencil conditions are hi≠0 and x+hiei∈U.

If any admissibility condition fails, return invalid-stencil. Otherwise form the matrix JhF(x) column by column: JhF(x)ei:=F(x+hiei)−F(x)hi,0≤i<n. Return success and this matrix. Each evaluation point is in U. This procedure defines a forward-difference approximation; it asserts no accuracy or convergence guarantee.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Vector Newton remainder under a Lipschitz Jacobian

Statement

Let n≥1, let U⊆Rn be open, let F:U→Rn be C1, and write J(x)=DF(x) as a matrix in the standard basis. The matrix of DF(x) agrees with the Jacobian matrix by A total derivative computes every directional derivative, and its matrix is the Jacobian. For a matrix A let ∥A∥op:=sup⁡∥v∥2=1∥Av∥2. Let K⊆U be convex, let x∗,x∈K, and suppose for some L≥0 that ∥J(y)−J(z)∥op≤L∥y−z∥2(y,z∈K). Then ∥F(x)−F(x∗)−J(x)(x−x∗)∥2≤L2∥x−x∗∥22.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The open set U, the C1 map F, the convex set K, the points x∗,x∈K, the Jacobian J, and the Lipschitz bound with constant L.

[F1]

Continuously differentiable maps, local inverses, and local diffeomorphisms: a C1 map is totally differentiable at every point, and its derivative-matrix entries are continuous.

[F2]

The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case: the Jacobian matrix has entries ∂jFi in the standard basis; A total derivative computes every directional derivative, and its matrix is the Jacobian identifies this matrix with the matrix of DF.

[F3]

The chain rule for total derivatives: D(g∘f)(a)=Dg(f(a))∘Df(a): the derivative of a composition is the composition of the derivatives.

[F4]

The derivative and the Riemann integral of a vector-valued function: an intrinsic derivative and a componentwise integral: vector derivatives and integrals are componentwise; a vector-valued function is integrable when its components are integrable, and its integral is their vector of integrals.

[F5]

A continuous function on [a,b] is Riemann integrable, by Heine-Cantor and Riemann's criterion: every continuous real-valued function on a compact interval is Riemann integrable.

[F6]

If f:[a,b]→Rm is differentiable with integrable f′ then ∫abf′=f(b)−f(a); and a bounded derivative makes f Lipschitz: if a vector-valued function is differentiable on the closed interval and its vector derivative is integrable, then the integral of the derivative is the endpoint increment.

[F8]
[F9]

If f≤g on [a,b] and both are integrable then ∫abf≤∫abg; and m(b−a)≤∫abf≤M(b−a): pointwise order between integrable real functions on [a,b] implies the same order between their integrals.

[F10]

Newton–Leibniz needs only continuity on [a,b], differentiability on (a,b), and a Riemann-integrable extension of the interior derivative: if H′=h on a closed interval and h is integrable, then ∫h=H(1)−H(0) on [0,1]; in particular ∫01c dt=c for a constant c and ∫01(1−t) dt=1/2.

Proof

Given: The data in the Statement.

1.1givenF1F2F3F4F5construct

Put e:=x−x∗ and g(t):=F(x∗+te) for 0≤t≤1. Convexity keeps the segment in K⊆U; openness of U gives an open parameter interval containing [0,1] on which g is defined. The chain rule gives g′(t)=J(x∗+te)e, continuous because J is Lipschitz on K, so its coordinates are integrable by [F4] and [F5].

2.1step 1.1F4F6F7F10

Applying [F6] to g yields F(x)−F(x∗)=∫01J(x∗+te)e dt. Also ∫01J(x)e dt=J(x)e, by [F4], [F7], and [F10] applied coordinatewise to the constant vector.

3.1step 2.1F4F5F8F9F10algebra∎

By linearity, J(x)e−[F(x)−F(x∗)]=∫01[J(x)−J(x∗+te)]e dt. The vector integrand has continuous coordinates, so it is integrable by [F4] and [F5]. The norm inequality [F8], the operator-norm definition, and the Lipschitz hypothesis give ∥J(x)e−[F(x)−F(x∗)]∥2≤∫01L(1−t)∥e∥22 dt=L2∥e∥22. The scalar comparison function t↦L(1−t)∥e∥22 is continuous and hence integrable by [F5], so [F9] applies to the pointwise bound; also ∥x−(x∗+te)∥2=(1−t)∥e∥2.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Forward-difference Jacobian error bound

Statement

Let n≥1, let U⊆Rn be open, and let each component Fj:U→R, j<n, be C2 (twice continuously differentiable). Fix x∈U and increments h=(h0,…,hn−1)∈Rn with hi≠0 for every i<n. For each i<n, suppose an open interval Ii⊆R contains [0,1] and x+thiei∈U for every t∈Ii. Suppose finite constants Mij≥0 satisfy ∣∂iiFj(x+thiei)∣≤Mij(0≤t≤1, j<n). Put Mi:=(∑j<nMij2)1/2 and M:=max⁡i<nMi. Let JhF(x) be the forward-difference matrix of Forward-difference Jacobian on an open domain, let JF(x) be the Jacobian matrix of The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case. With the Euclidean operator norm on matrices, ∥JhF(x)−JF(x)∥op≤M2∥h∥2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The open domain, C2 components, point x, coordinate increments, intervals Ii, and second-partial bounds Mij from the Statement.

[F1]

Forward-difference Jacobian on an open domain: for i<n, column i of JhF(x) is [F(x+hiei)−F(x)]/hi, when hi≠0 and the sample is in U.

[F2]

The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case: for i,j<n, the Jacobian entries are ∂iFj(x).

[F3]

A total derivative computes every directional derivative, and its matrix is the Jacobian: the matrix of DF in the standard basis is the Jacobian matrix.

[F4]

The chain rule for total derivatives: D(g∘f)(a)=Dg(f(a))∘Df(a): the derivative of a composition with an affine line is the total derivative applied to the line direction.

[F5]

Multivariable Taylor formula with a Lagrange remainder along a line segment: for a scalar C2 function on an open interval, its order-one Taylor expansion on [0,1] has a second-order Lagrange remainder at some point in (0,1).

[F7]

If all partial derivatives exist on a neighbourhood and are continuous at a point, then the map is totally differentiable there with Jacobian derivative: continuous first partial derivatives give a total derivative with the coordinate Jacobian matrix. Applied to each Fj and each first partial of Fj, the componentwise C2 hypotheses give the total differentiability needed below; continuity of the derivative entries makes F a C1 map admissible for [F1].

Proof

Given: The data in the Statement.

1.1givenF3F4F5F7choose

By [F7], the C2 components and their first partials have the total derivatives needed for the chain rule, and F is admissible for [F1]. For each input coordinate i<n and output component j<n, put gij(t):=Fj(x+thiei) on Ii. The chain rule [F4] and Jacobian identification [F3] give gij′(t)=hi∂iFj(x+thiei) and gij′′(t)=hi2∂iiFj(x+thiei). Taylor's theorem [F5] between 0 and 1 supplies θij∈(0,1) with Fj(x+hiei)−Fj(x)=hi∂iFj(x)+hi22∂iiFj(x+θijhiei). The points θij may differ between components.

2.1step 1.1F1F2givenalgebra

Divide by the nonzero hi. In column i, output coordinate j has error at most Mij∣hi∣/2; hence the Euclidean column error is at most Mi∣hi∣/2, even though the remainder points θij may differ.

3.1step 2.1F6algebra∎

For a unit vector v, the triangle inequality and [F6] give ∥(JhF(x)−JF(x))v∥2≤∑i<n∣vi∣∥(JhF(x)−JF(x))ei∥2≤12(∑i<nvi2)1/2(∑i<nMi2hi2)1/2≤M2∥h∥2. Taking the supremum over unit v proves the operator-norm bound.

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableprecheck pendingOpen item page →

Finite-budget Newton for a square vector residual

Definition

Let U⊆Rn be open, n≥1, and let F:U→Rn be C1 (Continuously differentiable maps, local inverses, and local diffeomorphisms) with Jacobian JF as in The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case. The matrix of DF(x) in the standard basis is JF(x) by A total derivative computes every directional derivative, and its matrix is the Jacobian. Inputs: x0∈U, residual tolerance ε≥0, and update budget N∈N0. Output: the last valid iterate and one of root, singular-jacobian, invalid-trial, or iteration-budget-exhausted.

For k=0,1,…,N, in this order:

  1. Compute F(xk). If ∥F(xk)∥2≤ε, return (xk,root). Here root means the residual tolerance was met; it does not certify an exact zero when ε>0.
  2. If k=N, return (xk,iteration-budget-exhausted).
  3. Call Newton correction for a square vector residual with A=JF(xk) and r=F(xk). If it returns singular-jacobian, return (xk,singular-jacobian).
  4. Let sk be its correction. If xk+sk∉U, return (xk,invalid-trial). Otherwise set xk+1=xk+sk.

It makes no arbitrary-start, global-convergence, or discretization-error claim.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Finite-budget Newton preserves its domain and returns a status in bounded outer work

Statement

For admissible inputs of Finite-budget Newton for a square vector residual with budget N∈N0, every entered iterate lies in U. The procedure makes at most N correction calls, at most N accepted updates, and at most N+1 explicit outer residual evaluations. It returns a stated residual, singular-Jacobian, invalid-trial or budget status. Termination is in the exact-arithmetic model where residual and Jacobian evaluations, domain decisions and correction calls return in finite time. No convergence, tolerance-attainment or backend complexity claim follows.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The algorithm's admissible inputs and returning primitives.

[F1]

Finite-budget Newton for a square vector residual evaluates F(xk) once at an entered index, checks residual and budget before correction, and accepts an update only after checking membership in U.

Proof

technique · induction
1.1givenF1base

At the initial entered index 0, the point x0 lies in U, no correction or update has occurred, and the pass explicitly evaluates one residual.

1.2IH

For an entered index k≤N, assume the preceding entered indices are exactly 0,…,k−1, every entered point through xk lies in U, and at most k correction calls and accepted updates have occurred before pass k.

2.1givenF1step 1.2algebra

A continuing pass requires k<N. It makes one correction call; a singular correction or invalid trial returns without entering another index. Otherwise the domain test gives xk+1∈U, and the next index is k+1 with one additional correction call and accepted update. Thus the assertion of step 1.2 holds at the next entered index.

3.1givenF1step 1.1step 1.2step 2.1discharge-induction∎

The base and induction step prove membership of all entered iterates and that their indices form an initial segment of 0,…,N. At k=N the residual or budget branch returns before a correction. Hence there are at most N+1 explicit residual evaluations, N correction calls and N accepted updates. Singular or invalid-trial returns only shorten the execution. The finitely many returning primitives therefore terminate with a stated status, including when N=0.

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableprecheck pendingOpen item page →

Finite-budget residual-merit damped Newton

Definition

Let U⊆Rn be open, n≥1, and let F:U→Rn be C1 (Continuously differentiable maps, local inverses, and local diffeomorphisms) with Jacobian JF as in The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case. The matrix of DF(x) in the standard basis is JF(x) by A total derivative computes every directional derivative, and its matrix is the Jacobian. Define the residual merit Φ(x):=12∥F(x)∥22. Inputs: x0∈U, residual tolerance ε≥0, update budget N∈N0, sufficient-decrease parameter α∈(0,1), reduction factor β∈(0,1), and finite backtrack budget B∈N0. Output: the last valid iterate and one of root, singular-jacobian, invalid-trial, line-search-exhausted, or iteration-budget-exhausted.

At iteration k=0,1,…,N, apply these instructions in order:

  1. Evaluate F(xk). If ∥F(xk)∥2≤ε, return (xk,root). This status records the residual test only.
  2. If k=N, return (xk,iteration-budget-exhausted).
  3. Call Newton correction for a square vector residual with A=JF(xk) and r=F(xk). If it returns singular-jacobian, return (xk,singular-jacobian). Otherwise let sk be its correction.
  4. For j=0,1,…,B, set t=βj and trial y=xk+tsk. If y∉U, reject the trial and continue. If y∈U, evaluate Φ(y) and accept the first trial satisfying Φ(y)≤Φ(xk)−αt∥F(xk)∥22. On acceptance set xk+1=y and continue at iteration k+1.
  5. If no trial was accepted, return (xk,invalid-trial) if every tested point was outside U; otherwise return (xk,line-search-exhausted).

The residual-merit test is defined directly for a vector root problem. A finite backtrack budget can return failure; no global convergence or quadratic-rate claim is made.

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableprecheck pendingOpen item page →

Finite-budget forward-difference Newton for a square vector residual

Definition

Use the same open domain, differentiability assumptions, initial point, residual tolerance and update budget as Finite-budget Newton for a square vector residual. Supply one increment vector h=(h0,…,hn−1) with every hi≠0 for 0≤i<n. Output: the last valid iterate and one of root, invalid-stencil, singular-jacobian, invalid-trial, or iteration-budget-exhausted; every returned status is paired with the current last valid iterate.

For k=0,1,…,N, in this order:

  1. Evaluate F(xk). If ∥F(xk)∥2≤ε, return (xk,root).
  2. If k=N, return (xk,iteration-budget-exhausted).
  3. Call Forward-difference Jacobian on an open domain at (F,xk,h). If it returns invalid-stencil, return (xk,invalid-stencil).
  4. Otherwise call Newton correction for a square vector residual with A=JhF(xk) and r=F(xk). If that correction is unavailable, return (xk,singular-jacobian). Otherwise let sk be the returned correction.
  5. If the trial xk+sk is outside U, return (xk,invalid-trial); otherwise set xk+1=xk+sk and continue.

The root status still means only ∥F(xk)∥2≤ε. This approximate-Jacobian procedure has no quadratic-rate claim here.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedOpen item page →

Updated-Jacobian Newton has local quadratic convergence at a simple root

Statement

Let n≥1, let U⊆Rn be open, and let F:U→Rn be C2, meaning F is C1 and its first derivative is itself continuously differentiable. Write J(x)=DF(x) as a matrix in the standard basis. Let x∗∈U satisfy F(x∗)=0 and suppose J(x∗) is invertible. Suppose there are R>0 and L≥0 such that the closed Euclidean ball B‾2(x∗,R):={x∈Rn:∥x−x∗∥2≤R} lies in U and ∥J(x)−J(y)∥op≤L∥x−y∥2(x,y∈B‾2(x∗,R)), where ∥A∥op:=sup⁡∥v∥2=1∥Av∥2. Then there are r∈(0,R] and K>0 such that every J(x) on B‾2(x∗,r) is invertible with ∥J(x)−1∥op≤K. Put C:=KL/2 and choose ρ∈(0,r] with Cρ≤1/2 (if L=0, any ρ≤r works).

For every x0∈B‾2(x∗,ρ), each update attempted by Finite-budget Newton for a square vector residual is defined, remains in this ball, and satisfies ∥xk+1−x∗∥2≤C∥xk−x∗∥22. If the ordinary exact-Jacobian Newton recurrence is continued indefinitely, these estimates imply xk→x∗ with a quadratic error bound. A finite budget may stop before the residual tolerance is met; root status records only that tolerance, not an exact-zero certificate. This result gives no arbitrary-start or global-convergence guarantee.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: n,U,F,x∗,R,L and the Jacobian conditions in the Statement; a residual tolerance ε≥0, update budget N∈N0, and an initial value x0∈B‾2(x∗,ρ).

[F1]

Newton maps are uniform contractions near a point with invertible derivative: if F is C1 on an open subset of Rn and DF(x∗) is invertible, there is a closed ball about x∗ on which every DF(x) is invertible and its inverse has a uniform operator-norm bound. Its additional contraction conclusion concerns the fixed-inverse map Ty(x)=x+B(y−F(x)) with B=DF(x∗)−1.

[F2]

Vector Newton remainder under a Lipschitz Jacobian: for x in a convex region containing x∗, ∥F(x)−F(x∗)−J(x)(x−x∗)∥2≤(L/2)∥x−x∗∥22 when J is L-Lipschitz there.

[F3]

Newton correction for a square vector residual: if J(xk) is invertible, the unique correction solves J(xk)sk=−F(xk); otherwise the correction is unavailable.

[F4]

Finite-budget Newton for a square vector residual: the exact-Jacobian procedure tests the residual and update budget before a correction, and checks trial membership in U before updating.

[F5]

Continuously differentiable maps, local inverses, and local diffeomorphisms: C1 means total differentiability at every point and continuity of the derivative-matrix entries.

[F6]

The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case: the Jacobian entries in the standard basis are the first partial derivatives; A total derivative computes every directional derivative, and its matrix is the Jacobian identifies this matrix with the matrix of DF.

Proof

1.1givenF1F5choose

Apply [F1] at x∗. It supplies a radius r0>0 and a finite inverse bound K>0 on B‾2(x∗,r0). Set r:=min⁡{R,r0}, so the ball remains inside U, the Jacobian remains L-Lipschitz, and ∥J(x)−1∥op≤K throughout it. Only this inverse-bound conclusion of [F1] is used; the contraction there is for a fixed inverse matrix, not for the updated-Jacobian recurrence.

2.1step 1.1givenchoosealgebra

Let C:=KL/2. If C>0, choose 0<ρ≤min⁡{r,(2C)−1}; if C=0, choose any 0<ρ≤r. Then Cρ≤1/2.

3.1givenF2F3F5F6step 1.1step 2.1algebra

Suppose an update is attempted at xk∈B‾2(x∗,ρ) and put ek:=xk−x∗. The inverse bound makes the correction in [F3] unique. Since F(x∗)=0, [F2] and J(xk)ek−F(xk)=J(xk)ek−[F(xk)−F(x∗)] give ek+1=J(xk)−1(J(xk)ek−F(xk)) and ∥ek+1∥2≤C∥ek∥22. The full trial is in U because ∥ek+1∥2≤Cρ∥ek∥2≤∥ek∥2/2≤ρ/2.

4.1givenF4F7step 3.1induction∎

Starting from x0 in the stated ball, induction using step 3.1 shows every attempted update is valid, remains in the ball, and obeys the quadratic bound. It also gives ∥xk−x∗∥2≤2−k∥x0−x∗∥2 for every generated iterate; [F7] makes this tend to zero if the recurrence is continued indefinitely. The finite-budget algorithm may stop earlier under its own residual or budget rule.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedOpen item page →

An accepted damped Newton step strictly decreases the residual merit

Statement

Use the inputs and residual merit Φ(x)=12∥F(x)∥22 of Finite-budget residual-merit damped Newton. At any iterate where the procedure accepts a step t>0 with F(x)≠0, the accepted point x+=x+ts satisfies Φ(x+)≤Φ(x)−αt∥F(x)∥22<Φ(x). This statement concerns accepted steps only; it does not assert that a chosen finite backtrack budget will accept a trial.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An admissible execution of Finite-budget residual-merit damped Newton, with its parameter α∈(0,1), a nonzero residual F(x), and an accepted step size t=βj for some tested integer j≥0.

[F1]

Finite-budget residual-merit damped Newton: a tested step is accepted only if Φ(x+ts)≤Φ(x)−αt∥F(x)∥22.

Proof

Given: The hypotheses in the Statement.

1.1givenalgebra

Since 0<β<1 and j≥0, the tested size t=βj is positive. Because the Euclidean norm is defined by the square root of the sum of coordinate squares, F(x)≠0 gives a nonzero coordinate and hence ∥F(x)∥22>0; with α>0, this gives αt∥F(x)∥22>0.

2.1step 1.1F1algebra∎

The acceptance condition in [F1] therefore gives Φ(x+)≤Φ(x)−αt∥F(x)∥22<Φ(x), as claimed.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

None yet.

Sources