Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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.

Nondegenerate frequency reduction: translating the action variable by the inverse frequency map and the ε≤cα2 smallness

Statement

Let n≥2, τ>n−1, μ:=τ+3n+2, α>0, s0>0, 0<σ0≤min⁡(1,s0/24), and let c1∈(0,1] be the one-step smallness constant (the constant c of the estimates of One KAM step: the affine generator, its canonical time-one flow, and the quadratic remainder bound). Let the following data be given.

  1. An open set U⊆Cn, a compact set K⊆U∩Rn, a radius 0<r0≤1 with {J∈Cn:dist⁡∞(J,K)<2r0}⊆U, a nonempty set Ω⊆Rn and a conjugation-invariant open complex neighbourhood Ω′⊆Cn containing Ω; and a holomorphic map b:Ω′→U with Dh(b(ν))=ν for every ν∈Ω′, where h:U→C is holomorphic and b(Ω)+(Br0∩Rn)⊆K. (In the applications b=(Dh)−1 on a regular frequency patch, supplied by the real analytic inverse function theorem; here it is part of the data.)
  2. A constant M2≥1 with ∣ITD2h(J) I∣≤M2∣I∣∞2 for all I∈Cn and all J∈{J′:dist⁡∞(J′,K)<2r0}.
  3. A holomorphic function F on {J:dist⁡∞(J,K)<2r0}×Ss0, 2π-periodic in ϑ, with ∣F∣≤ε.

Put r:=ε/M2 and assume 0<r≤r0. Then:

  1. Taylor decomposition. For every ν∈Ω and ∣I∣∞≤r, h(b(ν)+I)=h(b(ν))+ν⋅I+Ph(I,ν),∣Ph(I,ν)∣≤M2∣I∣∞2.
  2. Effective perturbation. The function G(I,ϑ,ν):=h(b(ν)+I)−h(b(ν))−ν⋅I+F(b(ν)+I,ϑ) is holomorphic on Dr,s0,h0′(Ω) whenever Oh0′(Ω)⊆Ω′ and b(Oh0′(Ω))+Br⊆{J:dist⁡∞(J,K)<2r0}, 2π-periodic in ϑ, and satisfies ∣G∣≤M2r2+ε=2ε.
  3. α2-smallness. If ε≤c124⋅α2σ02μM2, then ∣G∣≤c1αrσ0μ; equivalently the relative smallness E:=∣G∣/(αrσ0μ) satisfies E≤c1.
  4. Transfer to the physical Hamiltonian. Let H(p,ϑ):=h(p)+F(p,ϑ) and suppose that the parameter Hamiltonian Hpar(I,ϑ,ν):=h(b(ν))+ν⋅I+G(I,ϑ,ν) satisfies the hypotheses of The parameter KAM limit: invariant quasi-periodic motion with frequency ν and Lagrangian images on Dr,s0,h0′(Ωα,τ) (same sequences, same one-step construction, with P0:=G), with limit phase family Φ∞=(ΦI,Φϑ) and limit original-parameter map χ∞. Then for every ν∈Ωα,τ the physical family Ψν(ϑ):=(b(χ∞(ν))+ΦI(0,ϑ,ν), Φϑ(0,ϑ,ν)) satisfies XH(Ψν(ϑ))=∑j=1nνj ∂ϑjΨν(ϑ),Ψν∗ω=0, where ω=∑jdϑj∧dIj and XH=(−Hϑ,HI) is taken in the action-angle coordinates (p,ϑ); that is, the image is an invariant Lagrangian torus of the physical Hamiltonian H with frequency ν.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The data of clauses 1-3, the constant c1, and in clause 4 the hypotheses of The parameter KAM limit: invariant quasi-periodic motion with frequency ν and Lagrangian images for Hpar with P0=G.

[F1]

Domain and norm notation Dr,s,h(Ω), Br, Ss, Oh(Ω), holomorphy and sup-norms; the (α,τ)-label set Ωα,τ (Analytic KAM data: angular tori, action-angle neighbourhoods, Fourier cutoffs and Diophantine frequency labels, Open ball, closed ball and sphere in a metric space).

[F2]

Calculus: the chain rule gives ddth(b(ν)+tI)=Dh(b(ν)+tI) I and d2dt2h(b(ν)+tI)=ITD2h(b(ν)+tI) I; the second-order Taylor formula with integral remainder is u(1)−u(0)−u′(0)=∫01(1−t)u′′(t) dt (The chain rule for total derivatives: D(g∘f)(a)=Dg(f(a))∘Df(a), The second fundamental theorem: if G is differentiable on [a,b] with G′=f and f is integrable, then ∫abf=G(b)−G(a), Directional derivatives and partial derivatives of a map U⊆Rm→Rn, Intervals of R: the nine order-convex forms, nondegeneracy, and length).

[F3]

Hamiltonian conventions: Xf=Jact∇f=(−fϑ,fI) with Jact:=(0−InIn0) in the action-first order (I,ϑ) and ω=∑jdϑj∧dIj (The Hamiltonian field of a C2 function on a phase domain is J∇H, and the Poisson bracket is ∑i(∂qif ∂pig−∂pif ∂qig), A phase domain, its canonical one-form and its standard symplectic two-form); a C1 map C is canonical iff DCTJact DC=Jact, which holds for translations because DC=I2n (A C1 map between phase domains preserves the standard two-form iff DCTJ DC=J, and a canonical diffeomorphism carries XH∘C to XH clause 1).

[F4]

The conclusions of The parameter KAM limit: invariant quasi-periodic motion with frequency ν and Lagrangian images: for the parameter Hamiltonian of its statement, XH(Ψ∞(0,ϑ,ν);χ∞(ν))=∑jνj∂ϑjΨ∞(0,ϑ,ν) on the real slice, and the pullback of ω along the real slice vanishes.

Proof

technique · direct; expand the integrable part to second order along the action segment, bound by the Hessian constant, choose $r$ to balance the two error terms, and translate the parameter family back to the physical variables
1.1givenF1F2algebra

Taylor decomposition. Fix ν∈Ω, ∣I∣∞≤r and put u(t):=h(b(ν)+tI) for t∈[0,1]; by [F2] u is C2 with u′(0)=Dh(b(ν))I=ν⋅I and u′′(t)=ITD2h(b(ν)+tI)I, so the integral remainder formula and the Hessian hypothesis give h(b(ν)+I)−h(b(ν))−ν⋅I=∫01(1−t)u′′(t) dt with ∣u′′(t)∣≤M2∣I∣∞2≤M2r2, hence ∣Ph(I,ν)∣≤12M2r2≤M2r2. This is clause 1.

2.1step 1.1givenF1algebra

The effective perturbation. G is a sum of compositions of holomorphic maps (b, h, F) and hence holomorphic on Dr,s0,h0′(Ω), and it is 2π-periodic in ϑ because F is; for each complex ν∈Oh0′(Ω) the containment hypothesis puts the whole Taylor segment b(ν)+tI in the Hessian-control tube. Repeating the integral remainder argument of step 1.1 there gives the same bound, so with ∣F∣≤ε, ∣G∣≤M2r2+ε=2ε since r2=ε/M2. This is clause 2.

3.1step 2.1givenalgebra

The α2-smallness. Since all quantities are positive, 2ε≤c1αrσ0μ is equivalent to 4ε2≤c12α2σ02με/M2, i.e. to ε≤c124α2σ02μ/M2; under that hypothesis ∣G∣≤2ε≤c1αrσ0μ, i.e. E≤c1. This is clause 3.

3.2step 2.1givenF3F4algebra

Transfer of the invariance. Put Tν(I,ϑ):=(b(χ∞(ν))+I,ϑ) and Hpar( ⋅ , ⋅ ,χ∞(ν))=H∘Tν by the definitions of H and Hpar; for the fixed original parameter χ∞(ν), Tν is a translation, DHpar=DH∘DTν=(DH)∘Tν and XH(Tνz)=XHpar(z;χ∞(ν)) for every z in the domain, while Tν is canonical by [F3] (DTν=I2n). Writing Ψν=Tν∘Φ∞(0, ⋅ ,ν) and using [F4], XH(Ψν(ϑ))=XHpar(Φ∞(0,ϑ,ν);χ∞(ν))=∑jνj∂ϑjΦ∞(0,ϑ,ν)=∑jνj∂ϑjΨν(ϑ).

4.1step 3.2F3F4algebra∎

Lagrangian character and conclusion. By [F3] and [F4] the pullback satisfies Ψν∗ω=Φ∞(0, ⋅ ,ν)∗(Tν∗ω)=Φ∞(0, ⋅ ,ν)∗ω=0 on the real slice; with step 3.2 this says that the image of Ψν is an invariant Lagrangian torus of H with frequency ν, which is clause 4.

Remarks

  • Where nondegeneracy enters. Only through the existence of the inverse frequency map b and through the Hessian bound M2; no convexity or Legendre-Fenchel duality is used, and h need not be convex.
  • The threshold. The reduction produces the classical condition ε≤cα2 on a fixed analytic domain: σ0 and M2 are fixed once the domain and the integrable part are fixed, so the factor α2σ02μ/M2 is exactly a constant times α2. No statement is made about optimality of the constant.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources