Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck pending
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.

Worked E0 check: constant-coefficient transport on the three-torus, explicit solution and conserved energy

Example

On T2π3 take m=1, A0=1, A1=2, A2=A3=0, B=0, so the system (⋆) of Periodic first-order symmetric hyperbolic systems: coefficients, admissible values, data classes and solutions reads ∂tu+2∂1u=0, with u0∈Hs real-valued and integer s≥5. This example exhibits the explicit solution on the periodic domain, u(t,x)=u0(x1−2t,x2,x3), verifies that it is the E0 solution, and checks the weighted energy identity e′(t)=0 for the energy e(t)=∫u(t)2 dμ directly.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the torus data and the system ∂tu+2∂1u=0 with real Hs datum u0, integer s≥5.

[L1]

The periodic torus, its characters and the spaces Hs are those of The 2 pi-periodic three-torus, its normalized measure, test functions and the Sobolev spaces H^s; for a periodic Hs function the translate x↦u0(x1−2t,x2,x3) is again in Hs with the same norm, by the derivative rule and the periodicity of the Fourier representation (Periodic Fourier differentiation identity and equivalence of the derivative and Fourier-weight Sobolev norms, Periodic Sobolev embedding: H^s on the three-torus controls C^m when s minus m exceeds three halves supplies the C1 representative since s−1>3/2).

[L2]

E0 existence and uniqueness for this system: the data u0 with values in any compact interval and finite Hs norm admit a classical Sobolev solution, unique by Uniqueness of classical solutions and continuous dependence in H^{s-1} for periodic symmetric hyperbolic systems, with ∂tu∈L∞Hs−1; the solution is found by the Galerkin/limit construction (Local existence of Sobolev and classical solutions of a periodic symmetric hyperbolic system, uniform on bounded H^s data). [L2]

[L3]

The metric measure μ is translation invariant on the torus and ∫∂1v dμ=0 for every smooth periodic v (the fundamental theorem of calculus on one period, as in Periodic Fourier differentiation identity and equivalence of the derivative and Fourier-weight Sobolev norms step 1.1). [L3]

[L4]

The finite Fourier projection PN and its range XN are Fourier modes on the periodic three-torus and the Galerkin projection P_N; PN commutes with spatial derivatives and maps Hs into XN (The Galerkin projection is self-adjoint, commutes with derivatives, is a contraction in every H^r, converges to the identity and has the sharp Fourier-tail bound). For A0=1, the weighted Galerkin energy of Equivalence of the weighted Galerkin energy with the H^s norm and its Gronwall inequality is eN(t)=∑∣α∣≤s∥DαuN(t)∥22.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1L1algebra

(The explicit function solves the system.) Define u(t,x):=u0(x1−2t,x2,x3). Then ∂tu(t,x)=−2(∂1u0)(x1−2t,x2,x3) and ∂1u(t,x)=(∂1u0)(x1−2t,x2,x3), so ∂tu+2∂1u=0 pointwise; u(0,⋅)=u0, and u is classical because integer s≥5 and inherits the Hs-bound of u0 at every time, with higher smoothness whenever u0 is smooth.

2.1step 1.1L3algebra

(Energy identity.) e(t)=∫u(t)2dμ=∫u02dμ=e(0) by translation invariance [L3]; equivalently, differentiating under the integral and using the equation and [L3], e′(t)=2∫u∂tu dμ=−4∫u∂1u dμ=−2∫∂1(u2) dμ=0.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1L2L3L4discharge-construct∎

(Identification with the E0 solution.) By [L2] there is a unique solution through u0; the explicit function of step 1.1 is one, so the E0 solution is u(t,x)=u0(x1−2t,x2,x3) and its energy is conserved. For the actual Galerkin energy, set uN(t)=PNu(t), equivalently uN(t,x)=(PNu0)(x1−2t,x2,x3). By [L4] this smooth finite Fourier polynomial solves ∂tuN+2∂1uN=0 with datum PNu0, hence its projected equation. Each Fourier coefficient obeys ∂tu^N(k)=−2ik1u^N(k), so this is exactly the Galerkin trajectory. Every DαuN is the translate of DαPNu0; translation invariance gives eN(t)=∑∣α∣≤s∥DαPNu0∥22=eN(0) and eN′(t)=0. Thus the actual energy inequality is verified with C=0, at every cutoff N, as well as the zero-order identity of step 2.1.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources