Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: 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.

Averaging for fast periodic oscillations: order-ε agreement on the O(1/ε) time scale

Statement

Let n≥1, P>0, let O⊆Rn be open, and let f:R×O→Rn be continuous, continuously partially differentiable in the second variable and P-periodic in time, with average fˉ and deviation g as in Periodic averaging data: the average field, the oscillatory part and the periodic deviation. Here Dxf(t,x) is the total derivative in the state variable defined in Elementary bounds for the periodic average, the deviation and its time derivative. Let x0∈O, let 0<ρ<R with B‾(x0,R)⊆O (Open ball, closed ball and sphere in a metric space), and let M,L≥0 satisfy

∥f(t,x)∥2≤M,∥Dxf(t,x)∥≤L(t∈R, x∈B‾(x0,R)),

∥⋅∥ being the operator norm (The operator norm as the least bound and as the unit-sphere or unit-ball supremum). Put

B:=2MP,B1:=2LP,K:=eLA[B+(LB+B1M)A],

where ε>0 and A>0 are parameters. Suppose y:[0,A/ε]→B‾(x0,R−ρ) is a solution of the averaged system

y′(t)=εfˉ(y(t)),y(0)=x0.

If εK<ρ, then the solution x of x′(t)=εf(t,x(t)), x(0)=x0 exists on all of [0,A/ε] and satisfies, for every t∈[0,A/ε],

∥x(t)−y(t)∥2≤εK=ε eLA[B+(LB+B1M)A].

Remarks

  • Scaling. The two curves agree to order ε on the time interval of length A/ε, For a fixed period P, this horizon contains A/(εP) periods. The constant is explicit and grows like AeLA; no claim is made for times longer than A/ε or beyond the trapping radius ρ.
  • Scope. f, y, g, ε, A are mathematical objects; no physical identification or empirical claim is made. The theorem compares two explicitly specified ODE solutions; the averaged system is a different model, not an exact description.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The data n,P,O,f,x0,ρ,R,M,L, the derived fˉ,g,B,B1, and the parameters ε>0, A>0, with a solution y:[0,A/ε]→B‾(x0,R−ρ) of the averaged system.

[F1]

Derivative-to-Lipschitz bound and periodic-deviation bounds: for each fixed t, the map x↦f(t,x) is L-Lipschitz on the convex ball B‾(x0,R). Indeed, for x,y in the ball the segment x+s(y−x) lies in it, the composite s↦f(t,x+s(y−x)) is differentiable with derivative Dxf(t,x+s(y−x))(y−x), and the vector-valued fundamental theorem estimate gives ∥f(t,x)−f(t,y)∥2≤L∥x−y∥2 (If all partial derivatives exist on a neighbourhood and are continuous at a point, then the map is totally differentiable there with Jacobian derivative, The chain rule for total derivatives: D(g∘f)(a)=Dg(f(a))∘Df(a), If f:[a,b]→Rm is differentiable with integrable f′ then ∫abf′=f(b)−f(a); and a bounded derivative makes f Lipschitz). Thus Elementary bounds for the periodic average, the deviation and its time derivative applies and gives ∥fˉ(x)∥2≤M and ∥fˉ(x)−fˉ(y)∥2≤L∥x−y∥2 on the ball; ∥g(t,x)∥2≤B=2MP for t∈R, x∈B‾(x0,R); ∥Dxg(t,x)∥≤B1=2LP there; ∂tg(t,x)=f(t,x)−fˉ(x); and g is totally differentiable on R×O. [given]

[F2]

The field Fε(t,x):=εf(t,x) is continuous. Near any (t∗,x∗)∈R×O, choose a time interval and a convex state ball contained in R×O on which continuity of Dxf bounds its operator norm by some finite C. For each fixed time in that interval, the line-segment argument of [F1], with C in place of L, gives ∥Fε(t,x)−Fε(t,y)∥2≤εC∥x−y∥2 for states in that ball. This is local Lipschitz continuity in the state variable as defined in Local Lipschitz continuity in the state variable, locally uniform in time and parameters, so the Picard-Lindelof theorem gives a unique maximal solution of the initial-value problem (First-order systems, initial value problems, and solutions on intervals, Every Picard–Lindelöf initial value problem has one maximal solution on an open interval, Extensions, maximal solutions, maximal intervals, and global solutions). Every such solution satisfies the Volterra equation x(t)=x0+∫0tεf(s,x(s)) ds (A first-order initial value problem is equivalent to its Volterra integral equation), and compact continuation extends a maximal solution whose graph stays in a compact subset of [0,∞)×O near a finite endpoint (Compact continuation for locally Lipschitz ODEs: a solution whose graph stays in a compact subset of the domain near a finite endpoint extends past it). [given]

[F3]

Chain rule: for a totally differentiable curve G on R×O and a differentiable curve t↦x(t), the composite t↦G(t,x(t)) is differentiable with derivative ∂tG+DxG⋅x′ (The chain rule for total derivatives: D(g∘f)(a)=Dg(f(a))∘Df(a)). [given]

[F4]

Integral inequalities: ∥∫abϕ∥2≤∣∫ab∥ϕ∥2∣ and monotonicity for real integrands (For a≤b and f:[a,b]→Rm integrable when a<b, ∥∫abf∥2≤∫ab∥f∥2; for a<b, ∥f∥2 is integrable, If f≤g on [a,b] and both are integrable then ∫abf≤∫abg; and m(b−a)≤∫abf≤M(b−a), The derivative and the Riemann integral of a vector-valued function: an intrinsic derivative and a componentwise integral); Gronwall: if continuous u≥0 satisfies u(t)≤L0+M0t+K0∫0tu on [0,T] with constants ≥0, then u(t)≤(L0+M0t)eK0t (apply the nondecreasing-a clause of Gronwall's integral inequality with variable and constant coefficients with a(t)=L0+M0t and b(t)=K0). [given]

Proof

technique · direct; conjugate the fast curve by the periodic deviation, apply Gronwall to the difference with the averaged curve, and control the trapping radius by the final constant
1.1F1F2F3given

By [F2] let x:(α,β)→O be the unique maximal solution of x′=εf(t,x) with x(0)=x0, where α<0<β. Define τR:=inf⁡{t∈[0,β):∥x(t)−x0∥2=R}, with τR:=+∞ if this set is empty, and T0:=min⁡{A/ε,β,τR}. For 0≤t<T0 one has x(t)∈B(x0,R), so the bounds of [F1] apply; also g is totally differentiable near (t,x(t)), as required by [F3].

2.1step 1.1F1F3F4algebra

Estimate on [0,T0). Put d(t):=x(t)−εg(t,x(t)) and w:=d−y. Since g(0,x0)=0, w(0)=0. By [F3] and ∂tg=f−fˉ, d′=εf−ε(∂tg+Dxg⋅x′)=εf−ε(f−fˉ)−ε2Dxg⋅f=εfˉ(x)−ε2Dxg(t,x)f(t,x), so w′=ε(fˉ(x)−fˉ(y))−ε2Dxg(t,x)f(t,x) for 0≤t<T0. Using [F1], ∥fˉ(x)−fˉ(y)∥2≤L∥x−y∥2≤L∥w∥2+εLB because ∥x−y∥2≤∥x−d∥2+∥d−y∥2=ε∥g(t,x(t))∥2+∥w∥2≤εB+∥w∥2, and ∥ε2Dxg⋅f∥2≤ε2B1M. Therefore, by [F4], ∥w(t)∥2≤∫0t(εL∥w(s)∥2+ε2(LB+B1M))ds, and the Gronwall inequality of [F4] with L0=0, M0=ε2(LB+B1M), K0=εL gives ∥w(t)∥2≤ε2(LB+B1M) t eεLt≤ε(LB+B1M)A eLA for t<T0≤A/ε. Hence ∥x(t)−y(t)∥2≤∥w(t)∥2+εB≤ε[B+(LB+B1M)AeLA]≤εK.

3.1step 2.1F1F2given∎

No exit and continuation. If τR<min⁡{β,A/ε}, continuity lets the estimate of step 2.1 pass to t=τR; then R=∥x(τR)−x0∥2≤∥x(τR)−y(τR)∥2+∥y(τR)−x0∥2≤εK+(R−ρ)<R, a contradiction. Hence for every 0≤t<min⁡{β,A/ε}, step 2.1 and the hypothesis on y give ∥x(t)−x0∥2≤εK+(R−ρ)<R. If β≤A/ε were finite, the graph of x near β would stay in the compact subset [0,A/ε]×B‾(x0,R) of [0,∞)×O, so compact continuation [F2] would extend x past β, contradicting maximality. Thus β>A/ε, and x is defined on all of [0,A/ε]; continuity extends the estimate of step 2.1 to the endpoint, proving the claim.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources