Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

Volume-independent finite-range commutator path bound

Statement

Let Φ be an interaction of Uniformly bounded finite-range quantum spin interaction with parameters M,R,κ,ℏ. Let μ>0, let Λ⊂Zd be finite, let X⊆Λ be finite and nonempty, and let Y⊂Zd be any finite nonempty set. Take A∈AX and B∈AY, with both embedded in the common finite algebra AΛ∪Y. Then for every t∈R,

∥[αtΛ(A),B]∥≤2∥A∥ ∥B∥ ∣X∣exp⁡ ⁣(2κMeμRℏ∣t∣−μdist⁡∞(X,Y)).

Here the finite-volume dynamics is extended by the identity on sites outside Λ, as in Uniformly bounded finite-range quantum spin interaction. The parameter μ is measured per lattice step in the dimensionless max-coordinate metric. The bound is uniform over finite volumes containing X; it is an operator-norm estimate for the stipulated spin model, not a relativistic light cone.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: d≥1, finite q≥1, ℏ>0, a finite-range interaction Φ with M≥1, R<∞, and κ<∞, a finite volume Λ, nonempty X⊆Λ, finite nonempty Y⊆Zd, and A∈AX, B∈AY embedded in AΛ∪Y.

[F1]

Uniformly bounded finite-range quantum spin interaction: each Φ(Z) is a self-adjoint local matrix, nonzero only for ∣Z∣≤M and diam⁡∞Z≤R, and sup⁡x∑Z∋x∥Φ(Z)∥=κ<∞.

[F2]

Local spin matrix algebras and their factor inclusions: each finite-region algebra is a finite-dimensional matrix algebra with its induced operator norm; operators in disjoint tensor factors commute.

[F3]

Local spin factor inclusions preserve the operator norm: the factor inclusion T↦T⊗I is an isometric unital ∗-homomorphism, so local norms agree in larger finite volumes.

Proof

technique · direct finite-volume variation of constants followed by an interaction-path expansion

Given: The interaction, finite-volume dynamics, local matrix norms, and support hypotheses above.

1.1givenF1F2F3algebra

Fix B∈AY and define CBΛ(S,s):=sup⁡D∈AS, D≠0∥[αsΛ(D),B]∥∥D∥ for every nonempty S⊆Λ, with all operators viewed in AΛ∪Y. For A∈AX, put HXΛ=∑∅≠Z⊆XΦ(Z) and AX(s)=e−isHXΛ/ℏAeisHXΛ/ℏ. The finite matrix exponential is unitary because its adjoint is eisHXΛ/ℏ and the two commuting exponential series multiply to I; hence AX(s) ranges over all of AX and preserves norm. Differentiating finite matrix exponentials and using the Jacobi identity, the terms contained in X cancel and the terms disjoint from X commute with AX(s). With KX(s)=∑Z⊆Λ: Z∩X≠∅, Z⊈XαsΛ(Φ(Z)), the remaining commutator f(s)=[αsΛ(AX(s)),B] satisfies f′(s)=iℏ[KX(s),f(s)]−iℏ∑Z⊆ΛZ∩X≠∅,Z⊈X[αsΛ(AX(s)),[αsΛ(Φ(Z)),B]]. For the homogeneous equation, the finite matrix ODE U′(s)=(i/ℏ)KX(s)U(s) has a solution on every compact interval: its Picard series converges uniformly because the nth iterated integral is bounded by (Tsup⁡s∥KX(s)∥/ℏ)n/n!. Each KX(s) is self-adjoint, so differentiating U(s)∗U(s) gives zero; since U(0)=I, U(s)∗U(s)=I. In finite dimension this makes U(s) unitary, so conjugation by its propagator preserves the matrix norm. This argument also applies after reversing the time parameter, because the reversed homogeneous generator is still skew-adjoint. Set σ=1 if t≥0 and σ=−1 if t<0, and write s=σu for 0≤u≤∣t∣. The equation for f(σu) has homogeneous commutator generated by σiKX(σu)/ℏ and a source multiplied by σ; the source sign does not change its norm. Variation of constants therefore gives the same norm estimate for either sign of t, with intermediate dynamics evaluated at signed times: CBΛ(X,t)≤CBΛ(X,0)+2ℏ∑Z⊆ΛZ∩X≠∅∥Φ(Z)∥∫0∣t∣CBΛ(Z,σu) du. We enlarged the sum from crossing terms to all terms meeting X, which only increases its nonnegative right-hand side.

2.1givenF1step 1.1algebra

Iterate this integral inequality. All intermediate times retain sign σ; in absolute-time parameters the iterated region is 0≤un≤⋯≤u1≤∣t∣, whose volume is ∣t∣n/n!. Thus the same factorial weights apply for either sign of time. The zero-length term is at most 2∥B∥1X∩Y≠∅. A length-n contribution, n≥1, is a chain Z1,…,Zn⊆Λ with Z1∩X≠∅, Zj+1∩Zj≠∅, and Zn∩Y≠∅, weighted by ∏j=1n∥Φ(Zj)∥ and (2∣t∣/ℏ)n/n!. The first interaction sum is at most κ∣X∣; each later sum is at most κ∣Zj∣≤κM, so the total length-n weight is at most κ∣X∣(κM)n−1. After N iterations, the unresolved remainder is bounded by 2∥B∥(2∣t∣/ℏ)N+1κ∣X∣(κM)N/(N+1)!; it tends to zero. Hence no infinite path expansion is assumed without convergence.

3.1givenF1step 2.1algebra∎

If X∩Y=∅, any contributing length-n chain satisfies dist⁡∞(X,Y)≤nR: choose a site in each successive nonempty intersection and apply the triangle inequality, using diam⁡∞Zj≤R at each of the n steps. Thus its indicator is at most eμ(nR−dist⁡∞(X,Y)). Since M≥1, κ∣X∣(κM)n−1≤∣X∣(κM)n. Summing the resulting exponential series gives CBΛ(X,t)≤2∥B∥ ∣X∣e−μdist⁡∞(X,Y)(e2κMeμR∣t∣/ℏ−1). If X∩Y≠∅, then the distance is zero and the zero-length term together with the same series is bounded by 2∥B∥ ∣X∣e2κMeμR∣t∣/ℏ. In either case, multiplying by ∥A∥ proves the stated estimate.

Remarks

The path expansion counts support incidence, not a trajectory of a particle. The schematic below shows a length-three chain; every arrow means that the adjacent support sets intersect, and each interaction support has max-metric diameter at most R. It records the incidence pattern only. The proof uses the stated metric triangle inequality, not the drawing.

diagram failed to render:
\begin{tikzpicture}[>=stealth]
  \node (x) at (0,0) {$X$};
  \node (z1) at (2,0) {$Z_1$};
  \node (z2) at (4,0) {$Z_2$};
  \node (z3) at (6,0) {$Z_3$};
  \node (y) at (8,0) {$Y$};
  \draw[->] (x) -- node[above] {$\cap\ne\varnothing$} (z1);
  \draw[->] (z1) -- node[above] {$\cap\ne\varnothing$} (z2);
  \draw[->] (z2) -- node[above] {$\cap\ne\varnothing$} (z3);
  \draw[->] (z3) -- node[above] {$\cap\ne\varnothing$} (y);
\end{tikzpicture}

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources