Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
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.

Simple-level reduced-resolvent coefficients

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)) and adopt the hypotheses of Contour perturbation projection: H0 self-adjoint with isolated simple eigenvalue E, gap g>0, normalized eigenvector ψ0 with P0ψ0=ψ0, V=V∗∈B(H) with v=∥V∥, and q=2∣λ∣v/g<1/2. Write Q=I−P0, HQ=H0∣D(H0)∩QH on the reducing space QH, and define the reduced inverse S=ιQ(HQ−E)−1Q:H⟶D(H0)∩QH, where ιQ:QH↪H is the inclusion (and the zero complementary space gives the zero map). Then S is bounded with ∥S∥≤1/g; no inverse of H0−E on all of H is asserted. Let Pλ, Eλ be the perturbed projection and its unique eigenvalue inside the contour, as in Contour perturbation projection. Define the gauge-normalized eigenvector ψ(λ):=Pλψ0⟨Pλψ0,ψ0⟩. Then ψ(λ) is analytic in λ with ∥ψ(λ)∥≤3 for q<1/2, ⟨ψ(λ),ψ0⟩=1, and (H0+λV)ψ(λ)=Eλψ(λ). Moreover the first and second coefficients are E′(0)=⟨Vψ0,ψ0⟩,ψ′(0)=−SVψ0,E′′(0)=−2⟨VSVψ0,ψ0⟩, where all pairings are finite and the second derivative involves the whole complementary spectral subspace, not only bound states. Equivalently Eλ=E+λ⟨Vψ0,ψ0⟩−λ2⟨VSVψ0,ψ0⟩+O(λ3) for ∣λ∣ in the disk of the remainder estimate; the O(λ3) is made explicit in Analytic perturbation remainder.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: CC and the data of the Statement, with arbitrary complex H and inner product linear in the first variable; q=2∣λ∣v/g<1/2.

[F1]

CC spectral calculus on an arbitrary complex Hilbert space by compatible vector-local Cayley subspaces gives the PVM, exact bounded/unbounded multiplier domains, support/spectrum characterization and distance resolvent bound on arbitrary Hilbert spaces under CC. The spectral projection Q reduces H0 including its domain. Its restriction HQ is self-adjoint, by the restricted nonreal inverses and the adjoint-domain argument; equivalently the restricted PVM has the exact self-adjoint multiplication domain. The reduced inverse at E is constructed in step 1.1. No AC spectral theorem or separability assumption is used.

[F2]

The current Contour perturbation projection supplies the holomorphic rank-one Riesz projection Pλ, unique holomorphic eigenvalue Eλ inside ∣z−E∣=g/2, PλH⊆D(H0), and bounded holomorphic HλPλ throughout q<1. It gives ∥Pλ−P0∥≤q/(1−q)<1 when q<1/2; this exact supplied bound, rather than an unsupported inference that it is at most 1/2, is the bound used below. For complex λ it is a Riesz projection, not an orthogonal PVM projection.

[F3]

Resolvent and spectrum of an unbounded operator, A bounded linear operator between normed spaces, The operator norm as the least bound and as the unit-sphere or unit-ball supremum, Projection valued measure, Symmetric, self-adjoint and essentially self-adjoint operators and Hilbert space specify inverses, the bounded Neumann series and operator norms, spectral projections and domains. P0x=⟨x,ψ0⟩ψ0 and H0ψ0=Eψ0.

Proof

1.1F1F3givenalgebra

[The actual complementary inverse] The restricted PVM of HQ has zero projection at E, and its spectral support is contained in σ(H0)∖{E}. Indeed its representing measures are restrictions to QH, and the neighborhood characterization of [F1] shows that no spectral point can occur in the gap ∣t−E∣<g. The multiplier b(t)=1/(t−E) on this restricted support has ∣b∣≤1/g and bounded tb(t), so its calculus maps QH into exactly D(HQ) and gives the two-sided inverse SQ=(HQ−E)−1 with norm at most 1/g. Extend it by zero on P0H to get the stated S. It is self-adjoint because its multiplier is real, and SP0=P0S=0, (H0−E)S=Q on H and S(H0−E)=Q on D(H0). This uses the whole complementary spectral support, including any continuous part.

2.1step 1.1F1F2F3algebra

[Spectral inclusion and an exact Q-block inverse] Put δ=∣λ∣v and eλ=Eλ−E. Whenever dist⁡(z,σ(H0))>δ, [F1] makes ∥λV(z−H0)−1∥<1 and the correct Neumann factor (z−Hλ)=[I−λV(z−H0)−1](z−H0) gives a two-sided inverse on the actual domain. Hence every spectral point of Hλ has distance at most δ from σ(H0). Since Eλ lies inside the g/2 circle and δ<g/4, all spectral points of H0 other than E have distance greater than g/2 from it; therefore ∣eλ∣≤δ. On QH consider Tλ=HQ−E−eλ+λQVQ, on D(HQ). The bounded perturbation Dλ=λQVQ−eλI has norm at most 2δ=qg<g. The factorization Tλ=(I+DλSQ)(HQ−E) yields the two-sided inverse Bλ=SQ(I+DλSQ)−1, mapping QH into the exact D(HQ), with ∥Bλ∥≤1/[g(1−q)]. These inverses are holomorphic in λ because eλ is and the geometric series converges locally uniformly.

3.1step 2.1F2F3algebra

[The gauge denominator and full-radius norm bound] If u≠0 is an eigenvector in PλH and P0u=0, the projected eigenvalue equation is Tλu=0, contradicting step 2.1; thus every nonzero eigenvector has a nonzero ψ0 coefficient. Also Pλψ0≠0 because ∥Pλ−P0∥<1 by [F2]. It is an eigenvector, so its gauge denominator ⟨Pλψ0,ψ0⟩ is nonzero throughout the full q<1/2 disk. Division gives the holomorphic eigenvector of the Statement, with ⟨ψ(λ),ψ0⟩=1. Write ψ=ψ0+χ, χ∈QH. The Q-block equation is Tλχ=−λQVψ0, so χ=−λBλQVψ0 and ∥χ∥≤q/[2(1−q)]<1/2, in particular ∥Qψ∥≤q. Orthogonality gives ∥ψ∥2=1+∥χ∥2<5/4, so the original public bound ∥ψ∥≤3 holds on the entire stated complex disk. Graph analyticity also holds: H0Pλ=HλPλ−λVPλ is bounded holomorphic by [F2], and division by the same nonzero scalar gives holomorphy of both ψ and H0ψ. Thus differentiating the unbounded eigenvalue equation is justified in the exact graph domain.

4.1step 3.1F3algebra

[The holomorphic gauge energy identity] Pair the eigenvalue equation with the fixed ψ0 in the second argument. Self-adjointness of H0 and the gauge give ⟨H0ψ,ψ0⟩=⟨ψ,H0ψ0⟩=E and ⟨Eλψ,ψ0⟩=Eλ. Consequently Eλ=E+λ⟨Vψ(λ),ψ0⟩, a holomorphic scalar identity with a fixed second vector. Since ψ(0)=ψ0, its derivative is E′(0)=⟨Vψ0,ψ0⟩. The gauge gives ⟨ψ′(0),ψ0⟩=0. No unit-norm claim for the gauge vector, or holomorphic pairing with a moving second vector, is used.

5.1step 1.1step 3.1step 4.1F3algebra∎

[Vector derivative and second energy coefficient] Differentiate the eigenvalue equation at zero using graph analyticity in step 3.1: (H0−E)ψ′(0)=−Vψ0+E′(0)ψ0. Apply the actual S and use the gauge, so Qψ′(0)=ψ′(0); step 1.1 gives ψ′(0)=−SVψ0. Differentiating the holomorphic scalar identity of step 4.1 twice gives E′′(0)=2⟨Vψ′(0),ψ0⟩=−2⟨VSVψ0,ψ0⟩. All quantities are finite because V,S are bounded. The second coefficient is real because VSV is self-adjoint, but no real-part operation is inserted into a complex derivative. Taylor expansion gives exactly the first two terms and O(λ3) of the Statement; the companion remainder item supplies its explicit bound. The public analytic radius and all coefficient claims are retained under CC on arbitrary H.

Counterchecks and the projection-bound distinction

A literal inverse (H0−E)−1 on H does not exist: for H0=diag⁡(1,2) and E=1, its kernel contains the unit eigenvector (1,0). The reduced QH inverse is well-defined and is the intended mathematical object.

For the same H0, take V=(0110) and λ=1/10, so q=1/5<1/2. The lower eigenvalue is Eλ=(15−26)/10≠0 and the gauge vector is ψ=(1,5−26). Thus ∥ψ∥2=1+(5−26)2>1 and ⟨Hλψ,ψ⟩=Eλ∥ψ∥2≠Eλ. This is an exact counterexample to the replaced moving-vector energy identity; the fixed-vector identity in step 4.1 gives Eλ correctly.

The original internal assertion ∥Pλ−P0∥≤1/2 was stated for q<1/2. The repaired contour supplier proves only ∥Pλ−P0∥≤q/(1−q)<1 on that predicate, which by itself does not imply the asserted half-bound when q>1/3. This draft does not call the stronger half-bound false: lack of its proof from that estimate is not a counterexample. The complete gauge/radius/norm argument above uses the actual supplied bound and the exact Q-block equation, so no half-bound premise or radius narrowing is needed.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources