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.

Classical coherence matrices and measurement scope — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

ExampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Mixed classical polarization ensembles

Physical scope

A finite, ideal classical ensemble of two transverse electric phasors at a fixed paraxial detector point. The example distinguishes a vanishing ensemble polarization vector from nonzero field amplitude in every realization. It is a constructed model example, not a reported preparation, measurement, or observation and not a quantum density-operator interpretation.

Example

At one fixed detector point, let a nonzero complex electric amplitude a, with units V m−1, occur with equal probability in the two realizations Z=(a,0)T and Z=(0,a)T. Then Γ=(∣a∣2/2)I2, S0=∣a∣2>0, and S1=S2=S3=0, so the ensemble is unpolarized by the two-component definition even though each realization is a definite nonzero classical field amplitude.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The two-point probability space with probability 1/2 at each point, and a∈C∖{0} in V m−1.

[F1]

Classical two-component coherency matrix: Γ=E[ZZ†] and the Stokes coordinates are the trace, diagonal difference, twice the real off-diagonal part, and minus twice its imaginary part.

[F2]

Stokes cone and deterministic Jones transformations: a positive-intensity state with S1=S2=S3=0 has degree of polarization zero; the theorem's algebra is conditional on this classical second-moment model.

[F3]

Linearity, monotonicity, and the modulus bound for expectation: finite expectations distribute over the two outcomes with their stated probabilities.

[A1]

The ensemble consists exactly of the two stated realizations with probability 1/2 each; no physical preparation or observation is claimed.

Verification

1.1givenF1F3A1algebra

The two realization matrices are Z1Z1†=(∣a∣2000) and Z2Z2†=(000∣a∣2). Averaging them with the probabilities in [A1] gives Γ=(∣a∣2/2)I2.

2.1givenstep 1.1F1F2algebra∎

Substituting this matrix into [F1] gives S0=∣a∣2>0 and S1=S2=S3=0, hence P=0; each of the two sample values remains a specified nonzero classical amplitude because a≠0.

Remarks

The example is a finite mathematical ensemble, not a simulated or measured dataset. It does not assert that the realizations occur with equal empirical frequency in any laboratory.

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Normalized polarization is undefined at darkness

Physical scope

A zero-amplitude classical ensemble in the two-component coherency-matrix model. It demonstrates a boundary of a normalization definition; it is not a reported dark-detector observation, a noise model, or an empirical claim.

Statement refuted

For every square-integrable two-component classical ensemble, the quotient P=S12+S22+S32/S0 defines a real degree of polarization.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The one-point probability space Ξ={σ0} with P({σ0})=1, and the square-integrable two-component complex amplitude Z(σ0)=0.

[F1]

Classical two-component coherency matrix: Γ=E[ZZ†], S0=Γ11+Γ22, and the normalized degree is defined only when S0>0.

[A1]

Z(σ0)=0 on the declared one-point probability space.

Counterexample

1.1givenF1A1algebra

From [A1], ZZ†=0 at the sole sample point, so [F1] gives Γ=0 and S0=S1=S2=S3=0.

2.1step 1.1F1algebra∎

The proposed quotient therefore has denominator S0=0 and is undefined; the universal statement is false, even though the unnormalized cone inequality holds as 0≥0.

Remarks

This is a domain-of-definition counterexample. It makes no claim about a real detector's dark counts, background, resolution, or uncertainty.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

None yet.

Sources