Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Conforming Ritz eigenvalue upper bounds

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice and Countable Choice. Let H≠{0} be a complex Hilbert space, let A=A∗ satisfy A≥−cI for some c≥0, and set Q(A)=D((A+cI)1/2). Define the associated closed form by

qA(u,v)=⟨(A+cI)1/2u,(A+cI)1/2v⟩−c⟨u,v⟩(u,v∈Q(A)).

Let σess(A) be the essential spectrum, the complement in σ(A) of isolated eigenvalues of finite multiplicity, and put α=inf⁡σess(A), with α=+∞ when this set is empty. For k≥1, define

λk(A)=inf⁡L⊆Q(A) linear, dim⁡L=k sup⁡u∈L∥u∥=1qA[u],qA[u]=qA(u,u),

where the infimum over an empty family is +∞. For a finite-dimensional conforming subspace V⊆Q(A) and 1≤k≤dim⁡V, define its kth Ritz value

θk(V)=inf⁡L⊆V linear, dim⁡L=k sup⁡u∈L∥u∥=1qA[u].

Then θk(V)≥λk(A). If V1⊆V2⊆⋯⊆Q(A) are finite-dimensional subspaces whose union is dense in Q(A) in the form norm ∥u∥Q(A)2=qA[u]+(c+1)∥u∥2, then for every fixed k with λk(A)<α the values θk(Vn), defined once dim⁡Vn≥k, decrease to λk(A), the kth isolated eigenvalue below the essential spectrum counted with multiplicity.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Choice and Countable Choice; H,A,c,Q(A),qA,α, and λk(A) as in the Statement; conforming finite-dimensional subspaces V⊆Q(A) and a nested sequence (Vn) dense in the form norm.

[A1]

Choice and Countable Choice are the set-theoretic assumptions used by the stated form min–max supplier (The Axiom of Choice, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

[F1]

The discrete spectrum consists of isolated eigenvalues of finite multiplicity; the essential spectrum is its complement in σ(A), and α=inf⁡σess(A) with the empty-set convention (Discrete and essential spectrum of a self-adjoint operator).

[F2]

For a self-adjoint A≥−cI, the form domain is Q(A)=D((A+cI)1/2), its form norm is ∥u∥Q(A)2=qA[u]+(c+1)∥u∥2, and λk(A) is the infimum over all k-dimensional form subspaces; when λk(A)<α, it is the kth eigenvalue below α, counted with multiplicity (Form min-max below the essential spectrum).

[F3]

Put S=(A+cI)1/2, defined by the real Borel functional calculus on σ(A)⊆[−c,∞). Then S is self-adjoint, D(S)=Q(A), and the product rule gives S2=A+cI with D(S2)=D(A): indeed, the respective spectral integrability conditions are ∫(x+c) dμu(x)<∞ and ∫(x+c)2 dμu(x)<∞, and the latter is equivalent to ∫x2 dμu(x)<∞ because x≥−c and μu is finite. The shifted form a(u,v)=qA(u,v)+(c+1)⟨u,v⟩=⟨Su,Sv⟩+⟨u,v⟩ is an inner product and its norm satisfies ∥u∥Q(A)2=∥Su∥2+∥u∥2, the graph norm of the closed operator S, so Q(A) is complete and qA is closed. Thus for u∈D(A) and v∈Q(A), Su∈D(S) and self-adjointness of S gives qA(u,v)=⟨Su,Sv⟩−c⟨u,v⟩=⟨S2u,v⟩−c⟨u,v⟩=⟨Au,v⟩. This uses the first-variable-linear inner-product convention and the spectral theorem and unbounded Borel functional calculus (Spectral theorem for unbounded self-adjoint operators (PVM form), Unbounded Borel functional calculus: domains, products, spectral mapping).

[F5]

The Cauchy–Schwarz inequality holds for the form inner product and the Hilbert-space inner product (Cauchy–Schwarz: ∣⟨x,y⟩∣≤∥x∥ ∥y∥, with equality exactly for dependent pairs).

[F6]

On a basis of a conforming finite subspace, the procedure forms the exact Gram matrix G and form matrix M, sets B=G−1/2MG−1/2, selects an orthonormal eigenbasis Byj=ρjyj ordered by ρ1≤⋯≤ρm, and returns cj=G−1/2yj (Conforming Rayleigh–Ritz procedure).

Proof

1.1F3F4F6algebra

Fix V with m=dim⁡V≥k. Choose a basis ϕ1,…,ϕm of V and use [F6], writing Mij=qA(ϕj,ϕi) to distinguish the form matrix from the operator A. The Hermitian identity for qA follows from its defining inner products; [F3] verifies the remaining closed-form input conditions. For z≠0, z∗Gz=∥∑iziϕi∥2>0. By [F4], diagonalizing G gives the positive square root G1/2 and its inverse G−1/2, both Hermitian, and G1/2G−1/2=I. Multiplying G−1/2MG−1/2yj=ρjyj by G1/2 gives Mcj=ρjG1/2yj=ρjGcj, and cj∗Gcl=yj∗G−1/2GG−1/2yl=yj∗yl=δjl. Conversely Mc=ρGc implies B(G1/2c)=ρG1/2c, so these are all generalized eigenvalues with multiplicities. Their linear combinations ej:=∑i=1m(cj)iϕi form an orthonormal eigenbasis of V: Gram normalization gives orthonormality, and the coefficient eigenvalue equation gives qA(ej,ei)=ρjδij. For any k-dimensional L⊆V, the dimension formula forces L∩span⁡{ek,…,em}≠{0}; a unit vector in this intersection has form value at least ρk. The subspace span⁡{e1,…,ek} has supremum exactly ρk. Hence θk(V)=ρk, the kth generalized Ritz eigenvalue.

1.2A1F1F2givenchoosealgebra

Suppose λk(A)<α. By [F2], λ1≤⋯≤λk=λk(A) are the first k isolated eigenvalues below α, counted with multiplicity. Each corresponding eigenspace is finite-dimensional by [F1]. If x≠0 is an eigenvector with eigenvalue λ, self-adjointness gives λ∥x∥2=⟨Ax,x⟩=⟨x,Ax⟩=λ‾∥x∥2, so λ is real. For x∈ker⁡(A−λiI) and y∈ker⁡(A−λjI) with λi≠λj, this reality and self-adjointness give λi⟨x,y⟩=⟨Ax,y⟩=⟨x,Ay⟩=λj⟨x,y⟩, so the eigenspaces are orthogonal. Within each finite-dimensional eigenspace choose an orthonormal basis and take as many vectors as its multiplicity among λ1,…,λk; concatenating these finite lists gives orthonormal eigenvectors u1,…,uk∈D(A) with Auj=λjuj.

2.1A1F2step 1.1

Every k-dimensional subspace of V is a k-dimensional subspace of Q(A), so the infimum defining θk(V) is over a subfamily of the one defining λk(A). Therefore θk(V)≥λk(A).

2.2F3step 1.2algebra

For u=∑j=1kcjuj with ∑j∣cj∣2=1, orthonormality gives ∥u∥=1, while [F3] gives qA(uj,ui)=⟨Auj,ui⟩=λjδij. Hence qA[u]=∑jλj∣cj∣2≤λk(A).

3.1step 2.1algebra

For nested Vn, every k-subspace of Vn is a k-subspace of Vn+1; thus θk(Vn+1)≤θk(Vn). By step 2.1 this sequence is bounded below by λk(A), so it has a limit at least λk(A).

3.2A1F5step 2.2givenalgebra

Let ε>0 and put M=(∑j=1k∥uj∥Q(A)2)1/2. For each j, density gives an approximation from some Vnj; taking N=max⁡jnj and using nesting, choose all wj∈VN with ∥wj−uj∥Q(A)<δ. For coefficients c with ∑j∣cj∣2=1, put w=∑jcjwj and u=∑jcjuj. Then ∥w−u∥Q(A)≤kδ and ∥u∥=1, so ∥w∥≥1−kδ; taking kδ<1/2 ensures the wj are linearly independent. Writing a(x,y)=qA(x,y)+(c+1)⟨x,y⟩, [F5] and a[x]≥∥x∥2 give ∣qA(x,y)∣≤(c+2)∥x∥Q(A)∥y∥Q(A). Since ∥u∥Q(A)≤M and ∥w∥Q(A)≤M+kδ, this yields ∣qA[w]−qA[u]∣≤(c+2)kδ(2M+kδ) uniformly in c. Also ∣∥w∥2−1∣≤kδ(2+kδ) uniformly, so for sufficiently small δ, ∥w∥2≥1/2. The bound just proved for qA[w]−qA[u] and the uniform bound ∣qA[u]∣≤max⁡j∣λj∣ then show that qA[w]/∥w∥2 converges uniformly to qA[u]. The values qA[u]=∑jλj∣cj∣2 are at most λk(A) by step 2.2; hence choose δ small enough that every such w satisfies qA[w]/∥w∥2≤λk(A)+ε.

4.1step 3.1step 3.2step 2.1algebra∎

The span of w1,…,wk is a k-dimensional subspace of VN, so step 3.2 gives θk(VN)≤λk(A)+ε. By monotonicity from step 3.1 the same upper bound holds for all n≥N. As ε>0 is arbitrary, the limit in step 3.1 is at most λk(A); combined with its lower bound from step 2.1 it equals λk(A).

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources