Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedPipeline-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.

Projected oscillator transition response

Example

Let H=ℓ2(N0) with standard orthonormal basis (en)n≥0. Fix ω>0 in s−1 and ℏ>0 in J s. Define the diagonal Hamiltonian Hen=ℏω(n+12)en,D(H)={c∈ℓ2:∑n≥0(n+12)2∣cn∣2<∞}. For real b0≠0 in the chosen observable unit, define the bounded transition observable B=b0(∣e0⟩⟨e1∣+∣e1⟩⟨e0∣) and set A=B. Let β>0 in J−1, q=e−βℏω, and Δ=ℏω. On a finite interval [0,T] with T>0 in s, drive with a constant real field h(t)=h0 and dimensionless ϵ∈R, where h0B has unit J. This is a bounded projection between the first two oscillator levels, not the unbounded oscillator position.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The diagonal operator and domain, ω>0, ℏ>0, β>0, b0≠0, and the finite control interval and field above.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: the trace-Gibbs supplier uses full Choice for its unbounded spectral calculus.

[F1]

Self-adjoint trace-Gibbs normalization and form-energy optimization: if H is self-adjoint and e−sH is trace class on an open positive interval, then its Gibbs matrix is a faithful normal density.

[F2]

Bounded-commutator graph-domain Schrödinger response: for bounded self-adjoint B preserving D(H) with bounded extension of [H,B], the interaction propagator preserves the graph domain, solves the strong Schrödinger equation, and the bounded-observable response formula holds.

Verification

technique · diagonal spectral calculation followed by the graph-domain response theorem

Given: [A1], [F1], [F2], and the oscillator/control data in the Example.

1.1givenconstructalgebra

Finite-support sequences are dense in ℓ2, so D(H) is dense. The diagonal real operator is symmetric. If y∈D(H∗), testing the adjoint relation against each en forces (H∗y)n=ℏω(n+12)yn; this vector belongs to ℓ2 exactly when ∑n(n+12)2∣yn∣2<∞. Thus D(H∗)=D(H) and H∗=H.

2.1givenA1F1step 1.1algebra

The Gibbs eigenvalues are (1−q)qn, since ∑n≥0e−βℏω(n+1/2)=e−βℏω/2/(1−q); hence Zβ=e−βℏω/2/(1−q) is finite for every β>0 and [F1] applies. The Gibbs matrix is positive trace one and commutes with U(t) because both are functions of H. The operator B has norm ∣b0∣; its image lies in span⁡{e0,e1}⊂D(H), so it maps D(H) into itself. Its commutator C=[H,B] is the finite-rank bounded operator Ce0=Δb0e1, Ce1=−Δb0e0, Cen=0 for n≥2.

3.1givenF2step 2.1algebra

Since B only connects e0 and e1, the unperturbed expectation Tr⁡(σβαt(B)) is zero. Direct multiplication of the two nonzero matrix blocks gives Tr⁡(σβ[αt(B),B])=−2ib02(1−q)2sin⁡(ωt), so RBB(t)=2b02(1−q)2sin⁡(ωt)/ℏ. The constant-field convolution in [F2] is therefore ϵh0∫0tRBB(u) du=2ϵh0b02(1−q)2Δ(1−cos⁡(ωt)). Here CT=2∣h0∣∣b0∣T/ℏ; the response theorem also bounds the omitted term by ∣b0∣(∣ϵ∣CT)2e∣ϵ∣CT/2.

4.1givenstep 2.1step 3.1algebra∎

The two-dimensional space V=span⁡{e0,e1} and its orthogonal complement are invariant under the constant controlled Hamiltonian. Put d=Δ/2>0, g=ϵh0b0, and R=(d2+g2)1/2>0. On V, let X=(0110) and Z=diag⁡(1,−1). Then H−ϵh0B=ΔI−dZ−gX and (dZ+gX)2=R2I. Its exact propagator on this block is therefore e−itΔ/ℏ[cos⁡(Rt/ℏ)I+isin⁡(Rt/ℏ)(dZ+gX)/R]. The initial diagonal block has entries p0=1−q and p1=(1−q)q, with p0−p1=(1−q)2; the complementary levels contribute zero to the expectation of B. Multiplying these two-by-two matrices gives the exact expectation Tr⁡(ρϵ(t)B)=b0gd(1−q)2R2(1−cos⁡(2Rt/ℏ)). For ϵ=0 this is zero, and its first derivative at ϵ=0 is the coefficient computed in step 3.1. The formula holds on every stated finite control interval. For the consistent extension using the same constant control for all t≥0, it is nonconstant and periodic whenever ϵh0b0≠0, so the exact expectation has no infinite-time limit; this conclusion follows from the exact block formula, not from extrapolating the finite-time remainder. This concerns the bounded projected transition observable, not oscillator position or an empirical measurement.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources