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 and nonnegative homogeneity of the nonnegative integral
Statement
Let be an arbitrary measure space. Let be measurable and let .
- If , then .
- If , then . For , the integral of the zero function is . Neither clause forms the undefined extended-real product .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An arbitrary measure space ; nonnegative measurable functions and a scalar .
The nonnegative integral is the supremum of simple minorants (The nonnegative Lebesgue integral).
On simple functions, the nonnegative and simple integrals agree (The nonnegative integral agrees with the simple integral on simple functions).
The simple integral is homogeneous for positive scalars and has zero integral on the zero simple function (The simple integral is monotone, homogeneous, and additive).
Proof
If , every simple minorant of is also a simple minorant of . Taking suprema in [L1] gives .
The zero function has just one nonnegative simple minorant: itself. [L1, L2, L3] Its simple integral is by [L3], so [L1] gives integral for the zero function, even on a space of infinite measure.
For , multiplication by bijects simple minorants of with those of . The inverse divides by and preserves nonnegativity and simplicity. By [L2] and [L3], the corresponding simple integrals differ by the factor . Multiplication by a positive finite real commutes with the supremum in , including when that supremum is infinite. Hence . Together with steps 1.1 and 1.2, this proves both clauses.