Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-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.

Peierls contour probability bound

Statement

Let n∈Z≥0 and Bn=[−n,n]2∩Z2. For s∈{−1,+1}Bn, set s^i=si for i∈Bn and s^i=+1 for i∉Bn, and define HBn+(s)=−J∑{i,j}⊂Z2: ∣i−j∣1=1, {i,j}∩Bn≠∅s^is^j,ZBn+=∑s∈{−1,+1}Bne−βHBn+(s),γBn+(s)=(ZBn+)−1e−βHBn+(s). The energy sum is finite because Bn is finite and interactions are nearest-neighbor. For the nearest-neighbor Ising model with coupling J>0, zero field and β>0, any simple dual cycle γ that occurs in the disagreement graph of a configuration determines the event Aγ that all primal bonds crossed by γ have disagreeing spins. Then γBn+(Aγ)≤e−2βJ∣γ∣. For each such cycle, the parity-inside is defined by Square-lattice even graphs and parity contour separation and lies in the variable box.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite plus-boundary square-lattice Ising system with J>0, h=0, β>0, and a disagreement cycle γ.

[F1]

For n≥1, in a disagreement graph of a plus-boundary configuration, ray parity defines a finite inside whose boundary bonds are exactly the cycle edges (Square-lattice even graphs and parity contour separation).

[F2]

A finite Gibbs probability assigns weights proportional to e−βH with a finite positive normalizer (Finite Gibbs relative entropy and free-energy minimum).

Proof

1.1givenF1construct

For n≥1, let Cγ be the parity-inside primal sites from [F1]; that lemma gives Cγ⊆Bn and identifies its boundary bonds with the edges crossed by γ. For n=0, B0={0}: the plus spin has no disagreement edges, and the minus spin has exactly the four dual edges forming the unit square centered at 0. This is the only possible simple disagreement cycle; its ray-parity inside is {0} and its crossed bonds are exactly the four bonds incident to 0. Thus the same containment and boundary identification hold also for n=0. The map that flips every spin in Cγ and leaves all other spins fixed is an involution on the finite configuration set, preserves the fixed plus exterior, and is injective.

2.1step 1.1algebra

Every bond crossing γ has opposite spins on Aγ and becomes aligned after the flip; its contribution to HBn+ changes from +J to −J, a decrease of 2J. Every other bond has both endpoints inside or both outside Cγ, so its spin product is unchanged. Therefore HBn+(σ)=HBn+(flipCγσ)+2J∣γ∣ on Aγ.

3.1F2step 2.1algebra∎

By [F2], summing e−βH(σ) over Aγ equals e−2βJ∣γ∣ times the weight sum over the image of the injective flip map. That image is a subset of all box configurations, so its total weight is at most the full partition function. Dividing by that positive partition function proves the bound.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources