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.
Monotonicity of and of
Statement
Let be an ordered field (Ordered field), let and let , with powers as in Integer powers .
- Signs. If then , and if then .
- Strict monotonicity in the base. If and then . Consequently, for and : and , and is injective on .
- Comparison with the base. If and then ; if and then ; and if then .
- Monotonicity in the exponent. If then whenever in ; if then for all ; and if then whenever .
Statement references
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An ordered field , elements and naturals .
Definition of powers (Integer powers ): and .
Induction principle (The principle of mathematical induction).
Sign and scaling rules: a product of positives is positive, and for , (Sign rules for products and monotonicity of multiplication); the positives are closed under addition and satisfy trichotomy (Ordered field); and (The multiplicative identity is positive, which is where that fact is proved: neither of the two items just named states it).
Multiplying inequalities of nonnegatives: if and then , and if and then (Multiplying inequalities of positives).
Trichotomy and transitivity of the order: for exactly one of , , holds, and and are transitive (Ordered field).
The order on the exponents: holds exactly when for some natural (Order on the natural numbers), and holds exactly when (Discreteness: is the immediate successor); combining the two, holds exactly when for some natural .
Proof
Base case : , so claim 1 holds; claim 2 is vacuous at ; and , so claim 3 holds at in the nonstrict readings.
Inductive hypothesis: fix and assume, for all : and ; and , with when moreover and .
Signs at : if then is a product of two nonnegatives, hence , and if it is a product of two positives, hence .
Strict monotonicity at , assuming : then , and the hypothesis gives with by step 1.2; if then since ; if then by multiplying by , and by multiplying by , so by transitivity; and in either case gives by [L4].
By the induction principle, claims 1 and 2 hold for every , in the form: ; ; and with gives .
The equivalences of claim 2 follow by trichotomy: for and , if then neither (which would give ) nor (which would give ) is possible, so ; the form is the negation of the form with and exchanged; and injectivity is the case , where and are both excluded.
Claim 4: for we have , multiplying by , so is strictly increasing in , and hence whenever : writing with and inducting on , the case is that one-step inequality and the passage from to is by transitivity; for an induction gives for all ; and for we have , so is strictly decreasing in and the same induction on the gap gives for .
Claim 3: if and then applying step 4.1 to gives , and since by the same argument and ; if the same computation gives ; and if then .
All four claims are proved: signs and strict monotonicity in the base by the induction of steps 1.1 and 3.1, the order equivalences and injectivity by trichotomy, and the comparisons with the base and the behaviour in the exponent by steps 6.1 and 5.2.