Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-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.

Finite Euclidean quartic interacting measure — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

The one-coordinate quartic probability measure exists for every nonnegative coupling even though its finite-order asymptotic perturbation series has zero radius of convergence. The quadratic Wick pairing is computed exactly. The Wick-subtracted quartic satisfies an explicit quadratic coercivity bound; its form-domain conclusion is stated conditionally on the current QFT-IR01 coercive-form draft, whose interface is checked here and whose independent review remains pending.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

An existing interacting measure has zero-radius perturbation series

Statement refuted

Every finite-dimensional Euclidean quartic partition function with nonnegative coupling has a perturbation Taylor series at zero coupling with positive radius of convergence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let Q∼N(0,1) be the one-dimensional centered Gaussian and put U(q)=q4/4!.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice is the explicit hypothesis of the finite-dimensional Gaussian-law suppliers. The Axiom of Choice

[F1]

Finite Euclidean quartic interacting measure defines the Borel Gaussian reference law γC and the partition integral Z(λ)=EγC[e−λU].

[F2]

For a finite Gaussian covariance, polynomial insertions have all Wick-pairing moments. In one dimension with variance one, E[Q2m]=(2m−1)!! and odd moments vanish. Finite Gaussian normalization and Wick moments

[F3]

The finite Euclidean partition integral is positive and finite for every λ≥0, and its order-M coefficients are (−1)kE[Uk]/k!. Finite interacting asymptotic Wick expansion with remainder

Counterexample

Given: Use the measure and coefficients of [F1]–[F3] with N=1, covariance C=1, and U(q)=q4/4!.

1.1A1F1F3algebra

By [F1], Z(0)=∫1 dγ1=1. For λ>0, [F3] gives 0<Z(λ)<∞ and identifies the formal coefficients as (−1)nE[Un]/n!.

1.2F2algebra

With U(q)=q4/4!, [F2] gives an=E[Q4n](4!)nn!=(4n−1)!!(4!)nn!=(4n)!(4!)nn! 22n(2n)!. The pairing count follows by pairing the first of 4n factors with any of the other 4n−1 factors and repeating on the remaining factors.

2.1step 1.2algebra

Dividing successive coefficients from step 1.2 yields an+1an=(4n+1)(4n+3)24(n+1)⟶∞. Hence for each λ>0 the absolute term ratio λan+1/an eventually exceeds 2, so the terms do not tend to zero and the formal series diverges at every nonzero λ; its radius of convergence is zero.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1∎

The exact probability measure still exists for all λ≥0 by step 1.1, while its perturbation series has zero radius by step 2.1. This refutes the Statement without asserting Borel summability or any continuum-field result.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Explicit stability of a Wick-subtracted quartic

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume the Axiom of Choice and Countable Choice. Let q∈R, C≥0, λ>0, and let a>0 be a kinetic coefficient.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice is carried by the finite Gaussian Wick-power definition. The Axiom of Choice

[A2]

Countable Choice is the explicit set-theoretic hypothesis used by the current coercive-form draft supplier; it is stated here rather than hidden. The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)

[F1]

The finite covariance Wick definition gives :q4:C=q4−6Cq2+3C2. Finite covariance Wick normal powers

[L1]

Current batch-59 draft carrier; independent review remains pending. The current batch-59 manifest lists Coercive polynomial form completion and injection at item level 1 with design state “Authored draft with complete local argument; independent review remains pending.” Its actual statement assumes Countable Choice and the finite data of def-qft-regulated-polynomial-hamiltonian: N≥1, coefficients aj>0, and a real polynomial V satisfying V(q)≥c∣q∣2−C0 for c>0 and C0≥0. Put W=V+C0+1. It asserts that the completion of Cc∞(RN) under ∥u∥Q2=∑jaj∥∂ju∥22+∫RN(W+1)∣u∣2 dq injects continuously into L2 with dense image, has the indicated weak derivatives and weighted norm, and satisfies the displayed norm identity. I inspected its complete current proof and transitive suppliers: its direct dependencies are the current draft definition def-qft-regulated-polynomial-hamiltonian, published lem-l-two-with-the-integral-pairing-is-a-hilbert-space, published thm-c-c-infinity-rn-is-dense-in-l-p-of-rn, published thm-cauchy-schwarz-in-an-inner-product-space, and published def-countable-choice. The carrier exists in the current manifest and its interface matches the use below, but it remains an unreviewed draft; this batch keeps the form-domain consequence explicitly conditional on [L1].

Example

For the one-coordinate Wick potential V(q):=λ:q4:C, every prescribed α>0 has an explicit constant C0=15λC2+α2/(2λ) such that V(q)≥αq2−C0 for all q. Therefore the potential satisfies the coercivity hypothesis of [L1]. Conditional on the current QFT-IR01 draft argument and its stated hypotheses, the shifted kinetic-plus-potential form has the dense, continuously injected form completion stated in [L1]. This example establishes a lower bound and a conditional form-domain consequence; it does not assert self-adjointness or an interacting Hamiltonian here.

Verification

technique · complete the square, then apply the current coercive-form draft interface conditionally

Given: C≥0, λ>0, α>0, a>0, and [A1]–[A2].

1.1F1algebra

Put y=q2≥0. By [F1], :q4:C−12q4=12y2−6Cy+3C2=12(y−6C)2−15C2≥−15C2. Thus :q4:C≥12q4−15C2.

2.1step 1.1algebra

The identity λ2q4−αq2+α22λ=λ2(q2−αλ)2≥0 gives λ2q4≥αq2−α22λ. Multiplying the inequality of step 1.1 by λ>0 and combining yields V(q)=λ:q4:C≥αq2−(15λC2+α22λ).

3.1A1A2L1step 2.1given∎

Take N=1, the positive kinetic coefficient a, c=α, and C0=15λC2+α2/(2λ)≥0. Step 2.1 verifies the exact polynomial lower bound required by [L1]. The current draft statement’s hypotheses therefore match this example, and its stated completion applies conditionally on that supplier argument. The batch does not represent the draft as independently approved.

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-15 (gpt-6-luna, gpt-6.1-sol, and delegated Codex review/repair agents; see completed run evidence)Open item page →

Finite Wick quadratic pairing

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume the Axiom of Choice and let Q∼N(0,C) be a centered scalar Gaussian with variance C≥0.

[A1]

The finite-dimensional normal-law suppliers explicitly assume the Axiom of Choice. The Axiom of Choice

[F1]

A centered scalar normal with covariance C is a one-dimensional instance of the multivariate normal law. Multivariate normal law, including singular covariance

[F2]

The finite covariance Wick definition gives :Q2:C=Q2−C. Finite covariance Wick normal powers

[F3]

The Gaussian pairing formula gives E[Q2]=C and E[Q4]=3C2. Finite Gaussian normalization and Wick moments

Example

For a finite centered Gaussian coordinate, the expectation of the product of two Wick-subtracted quadratic powers is

E[(:Q2:C)(:Q2:C)]=2C2.

Verification

technique · expand the finite polynomials and apply the fourth-moment pairing formula

Given: C≥0 and [A1].

1.1F2algebra

By [F2], (:Q2:C)(:Q2:C)=(Q2−C)2=Q4−2CQ2+C2.

2.1A1F1F3step 1.1algebra∎

Taking expectations and substituting [F3] gives 3C2−2C⋅C+C2=2C2. This also holds at the degenerate endpoint C=0, where the law is concentrated at zero. The Gaussian law is available under the stated Choice hypothesis [A1].

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

None yet.

Sources