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.

Euclidean positivity, controlled limits and reconstruction boundaries

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Tensor products of tempered distributions

Statement

Let p,q≥1, let u∈S′(Rp) and v∈S′(Rq), and use the Schwartz seminorms pαβ(f)=sup⁡x∣xα∂βf(x)∣. The iterated pairing

w(Φ):=u ⁣(x↦v ⁣(y↦Φ(x,y))),Φ∈S(Rp+q),

defines a tempered distribution w∈S′(Rp+q). It satisfies w(φ⊗ψ)=u(φ)v(ψ) for Schwartz functions φ,ψ. It agrees with the distribution tensor product on compactly supported tests, is unique with these product values, and its finite iterates are associative.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Integers p,q≥1, u∈S′(Rp) and v∈S′(Rq).

[F1]

Schwartz space and its seminorms: the seminorms pαβ define the Schwartz space.

[F2]

Schwartz topology and convergence: a neighbourhood of zero restricts only finitely many seminorms.

[F3]

Tempered distribution: u and v are continuous complex-linear functionals on their Schwartz spaces.

[F4]

Test function cutoffs and euclidean localization: a compact set inside an open set admits a smooth compactly supported cutoff equal to one near that compact set.

[F5]

Finite sums of product tests are dense on product open sets: finite sums of compactly supported product tests are dense in the compactly supported smooth test topology, with approximating supports in a fixed compact product.

[F6]

Tensor product distributions and iterated pairings: on compactly supported tests the distribution tensor product is the iterated pairing, has the product values, is unique, and iterates associatively.

Proof

Given: [F1]–[F6].

1.1F1F2F3givenalgebra

By continuity [F3], choose a basic neighbourhood Vu={f:pαjβj(f)<εj, 1≤j≤k} on which ∣u(f)∣<1. Intersecting with p00(f)<1 if necessary ensures k≥1. Set Mu=max⁡1≤j≤k{∣αj∣,∣βj∣}, PMu(f)=max⁡∣α∣,∣β∣≤Mupαβ(f), and cu=2max⁡jεj−1. For D(f)=max⁡j(pαjβj(f)/εj)>0, the test f/(2D(f)) lies in Vu, so ∣u(f)∣≤2D(f)≤cuPMu(f). If D(f)=0, every positive scalar multiple of f lies in Vu, forcing u(f)=0 and the same bound. Applying this argument to v gives finite Mv,cv with ∣v(g)∣≤cvPMv(g).

2.1F1F2F3step 1.1given

For fixed Φ∈S(Rp+q), the map x↦Φ(x,⋅) is smooth with values in S(Rq): Taylor's formula in the x coordinates, with its remainder differentiated in y, tends to zero in each pγδ on every compact x set because every mixed Schwartz seminorm of Φ is finite. Continuity of v therefore makes h(x):=v(Φ(x,⋅)) smooth and gives ∂xβh(x)=v(∂xβΦ(x,⋅)). For every α,β, [F3] and step 1.1 yield sup⁡x∣xα∂xβh(x)∣≤cvmax⁡∣γ∣,∣δ∣≤Mvsup⁡x,y∣xαyγ∂xβ∂yδΦ(x,y)∣<∞. Thus h∈S(Rp).

3.1F1F3F6step 1.1step 2.1givenalgebra

Define w(Φ)=u(h). Applying the bound in step 1.1 to the finitely many x seminorms with indices at most Mu, and then the displayed estimate in step 2.1, bounds ∣w(Φ)∣ by a finite constant times the maximum of finitely many product Schwartz seminorms of Φ. Hence w is continuous on S(Rp+q). For Φ=φ⊗ψ, the inner pairing is φ(x)v(ψ), giving the claimed product value; on compactly supported tests the formula is the same iterated pairing as [F6].

4.1F1F4F5step 3.1∎

Finite sums of Schwartz product tests are dense in S(Rp+q). Indeed, choose χ∈Cc∞(Rp) and η∈Cc∞(Rq) equal to one near the unit balls by [F4], and set χR(x)=χ(x/R) and ηR(y)=η(y/R). The product rule and rapid decay show χR(x)ηR(y)Φ(x,y)→Φ(x,y) in every product Schwartz seminorm: the undifferentiated tails lie outside balls of radius proportional to R, and each differentiated cutoff contributes a factor R−j on the same tails. For fixed R, [F5] approximates this compactly supported smooth function by finite sums of product tests with common compact support; on that support, uniform convergence of all derivatives implies convergence in every Schwartz seminorm. Thus any two continuous functionals with the same product values agree on a dense subspace and hence everywhere. The same density argument, iterated over finitely many factors, shows that different parenthesizations of the constructed tensor product agree; this also agrees with the compact-test associativity in [F6].

DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: Not applicableverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Euclidean Schwinger hierarchies and controlled limit data

Definition

Fix an integer d≥1, write Euclidean space as Ed=R×Rd−1 with coordinates x=(t,x), and put Sd=S(Ed;C) and Sd,n=S(Edn;C) for n≥1, with Sd,0=C. For d=1, R0 is the one-point vector space with unit measure. A Schwinger hierarchy is a sequence S=(Sn)n≥0 with S0=1 and each Sn∈Sd,n′; its moments on elementary tests are ⟨Sn,f1⊗⋯⊗fn⟩. The associated unital algebraic test algebra is Td=⨁n≥0algSd⊗algn with concatenation multiplication, unit 1∈Sd,0=C, and involution (f1⊗⋯⊗fn)∗=f‾n⊗⋯⊗f‾1 and (c1)∗=c‾1. The moments define ωS:Td→C by linear extension. At d=4 this is the same four-dimensional algebra and moment convention used by the positive-tempered-moment definition.

Ordinary moment positivity means ωS(1)=1 and ωS(a∗a)≥0 for every a∈Td. It is distinct from reflection positivity. Let ϑ(t,x)=(−t,x) and Ed,+={(t,x):t>0}. The positive-time polynomial algebra Td,+ is the unital star subalgebra generated by tests in Cc∞(Ed,+;C). Define the antilinear reflection Θ by Θf=f∘ϑ‾ on degree one, Θ(c1)=c‾1, and Θ(ab)=Θ(b)Θ(a). Reflection positivity is ωS(Θa a)∈[0,∞) for every a∈Td,+. For the finite-site version, fix a finite set J, a permutation ρ:J→J with ρ2=id⁡, and a specified subset J+⊆J. Let AJ=C[zj:j∈J] be the commutative polynomial algebra with zj∗=zj and conjugation of coefficients, and let AJ,+ be its unital subalgebra generated by zj for j∈J+. Define ΘJ by conjugating coefficients and replacing every zj by zρ(j). For a specified complex-linear functional ω:AJ→C with ω(1)=1, ordinary positivity means ω(a∗a)∈[0,∞) for all a∈AJ, and reflection positivity means ω((ΘJa)a)∈[0,∞) for all a∈AJ,+. One may also use Q=AJ/I for an ideal I⊆AJ invariant under both ∗ and ΘJ, provided I⊆ker⁡ω:={a∈AJ:ω(a)=0}. Writing [a]=a+I, define [a]∗=[a∗], Θ‾J[a]=[ΘJa], the positive-site algebra Q+={[a]:a∈AJ,+}, and the normalized complex-linear functional ω‾([a])=ω(a). The kernel condition makes this value independent of the representative: if a−b∈I, then ω(a)−ω(b)=ω(a−b)=0. On Q, ordinary positivity means ω‾(u∗u)∈[0,∞) for every u∈Q, and reflection positivity means ω‾((Θ‾Ju)u)∈[0,∞) for every u∈Q+. Equivalently, one may specify a normalized complex-linear functional ω‾ on Q first and set ω(a)=ω‾([a]); this automatically satisfies the kernel condition. An exchanging pair of sites is J={−,+} with ρ(−)=+, ρ(+)=−, and J+={+}.

A regulated hierarchy is a family Sλ=(Snλ)n≥0 indexed by a nonempty directed set (Λ,⪯), where directed means every two indices have a common upper bound. A distributional continuum limit is a hierarchy S such that for every fixed n and every Φ∈Sd,n, ⟨Snλ,Φ⟩→⟨Sn,Φ⟩ as λ advances in Λ. A limit contract records these pairings, the regulator family, and any additional uniform estimates; pointwise-in-n convergence by itself asserts no uniform bound as n varies.

For explicit comparison, define the Schwartz seminorm Pk(Φ)=max⁡∣α∣,∣β∣≤ksup⁡x∈Edn∣xα∂βΦ(x)∣ on Sd,n. A per-order uniform continuity record is a choice, for each fixed n, of rn∈N0 and Cn≥0 such that ∣⟨Snλ,Φ⟩∣≤CnPrn(Φ) for every λ∈Λ and Φ∈Sd,n. Separately, a uniform-order bound on the limit hierarchy is the explicit cross-order condition that there exist fixed s∈N and A,B,q>0 with ∣⟨Sn,Φ⟩∣≤ABn(n!)qPsn(Φ) for every n≥1 and Φ∈Sd,n. This bound is recorded separately and is not inferred from distributional convergence or asserted equivalent to a corrected Osterwalder–Schrader regularity hypothesis.

For γ(x)=Rx+a with R∈O(d) and a∈Ed, define (UγΦ)(x1,…,xn)=Φ(γ−1x1,…,γ−1xn). Euclidean invariance means ⟨Sn,UγΦ⟩=⟨Sn,Φ⟩ for every such γ and Φ∈Sd,n. Permutation symmetry means invariance of the pairing under each permutation of its n argument blocks. Clustering means that for every n,m≥1, f∈Sd,n and g∈Sd,m,

⟨Sn+m,f⊗τae0g⟩⟶⟨Sn,f⟩⟨Sm,g⟩(a→+∞),

where e0=(1,0) and (τae0g)(x1,…,xm)=g(x1−ae0,…,xm−ae0). This contract definition asserts neither existence of a regulated limit nor any of these additional properties.

Remarks

The reflection form, the ordinary positive-moment form, and the clustering limit are three distinct interfaces. Fixed-order distributional convergence can pass a reflection quadratic form; it does not by itself establish clustering or a uniform-order growth bound. The locally defined uniform-order bound above is not asserted equivalent to an Osterwalder–Schrader hypothesis. Any later reconstruction claim must state the exact corrected theorem version and prove its test-space and order-growth hypotheses. This definition does not invoke a reconstruction theorem or assert construction of a null-quotient Hilbert space, positive-time translation semigroup, self-adjoint generator, analytic continuation, locality, or spectrum condition.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Reflection positivity passes to a distributional limit

Statement

Let Sλ and S be regulated and limit Schwinger hierarchies for one fixed dimension d≥1. Assume each Sλ is reflection positive on the same positive-time algebra and, for every fixed n and every Φ∈S(Rdn), ⟨Snλ,Φ⟩→⟨Sn,Φ⟩. Then S is reflection positive. Euclidean invariance and permutation symmetry also pass to the limit when the same fixed continuous test transformations preserve those properties at every regulator. These hypotheses yield no clustering or order-uniform growth conclusion.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A directed regulator set Λ, hierarchies Sλ and S as in the earlier limit-data definition, and the two assumptions in the Statement.

[A1]

Every Sλ is reflection positive on the common positive-time polynomial algebra.

[A2]

For each fixed order n, the distributions Snλ converge pointwise on every fixed test Φ∈S(Rdn) to Sn.

[F1]

The limit-data definition fixes the positive-time algebra, reflection form, Euclidean pullbacks, and permutation action.

Proof

Given: [A1], [A2], [F1].

1.1A1A2F1givenalgebra

For each n≥1, define the product-test map Jn:Sd⊗algn→Sd,n by Jn(f1⊗⋯⊗fn)(x1,…,xn)=∏i=1nfi(xi) and linear extension; the product of Schwartz functions is a Schwartz function. Set J0(c)=c and, for a∈Td, define QS(a):=ωS(Θa a). Fix a finite positive-time polynomial a=∑j=0Naj, with each aj a finite sum of degree-j product tests. Expanding concatenation and the moment functional gives the finite sum QSλ(a)=∑j,k=0N⟨Sj+kλ,Jj+k((Θaj)ak)⟩. Every test in this finite sum is fixed independently of λ, so [A2] gives QSλ(a)→QS(a). By [A1], every value QSλ(a) is a nonnegative real number. Since [0,∞) is closed in C, its limit QS(a) is also a nonnegative real number. As a was arbitrary, S is reflection positive.

2.1A2F1step 1.1algebra∎

Fix one Euclidean isometry γ(x)=Rx+b and one order-n test Φ. The pullback Φ↦Φ∘(γ−1)×n is continuous on Schwartz space: the chain rule writes each derivative as a finite linear combination of derivatives of Φ evaluated at the inverse affine image, and each polynomial weight in x becomes a finite sum of polynomial weights in the new variable with fixed coefficients. Thus each transformed Schwartz seminorm is bounded by finitely many original seminorms. If every Snλ is invariant under this fixed pullback, [A2] applied to both Φ and its pullback passes the equality to Sn. A permutation of argument blocks is a coordinate permutation and preserves the same seminorms exactly, so the same limit argument passes permutation symmetry. Step 1.1 uses only a fixed finite number of orders and tests; it supplies neither a uniform-in-n bound nor a limit as a translation parameter tends to infinity, so it proves no order-uniform growth or clustering claim.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Massive free Euclidean covariance is reflection positive

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let d≥1 be an integer, Ed=R×Rd−1, and m>0. Set ΔE=∂t2+∑j=1d−1∂xj2, and for p=(p0,k)∈Rd use the Fourier transform f^(p)=∫Ede−ip⋅xf(x) dx and its blockwise version on products. When d=1, give R0 its one-point measure of mass one. For Ψ∈S(Ed×Ed) and N∈N, write

PN(Ψ)=max⁡∣α∣,∣β∣≤Nsup⁡(x,y)∈Ed2∣(x,y)α∂βΨ(x,y)∣.

Define the translation-invariant two-point distribution Cm(2) by its double Fourier formula

⟨Cm(2),Φ⟩=(2π)−d∫RdΦ^(−p,p)p02+∣k∣2+m2 dp,Φ∈S(Ed×Ed).

For f,g∈S(Ed) put Cm(f,g)=⟨Cm(2),f⊗g⟩. Then Cm(fˉ,f)≥0. For f,g∈Cc∞(Ed,+;C), where Ed,+={t>0}, let ϑ(t,x)=(−t,x) and f^(t,k)=∫Rd−1e−ik⋅xf(t,x) dx. With ωk=∣k∣2+m2,

Cm(f∘ϑ‾,g)=∫Rd−1dk(2π)d−12ωk ∫0∞e−ωktf^(t,k) dt‾∫0∞e−ωksg^(s,k) ds.

Thus the reflected two-point form is a Gram form. Define S0=1, Sn=0 for odd n, and for even n=2r define the Schwinger distributions by

⟨S2r,f1⊗⋯⊗f2r⟩=∑π∈Pair⁡(2r)∏{i,j}∈πCm(fi,fj),

where Pair⁡(2r) is the finite set of partitions of {1,…,2r} into two-element subsets. These are tempered distributions whose associated normalized moment functional on Td is positive and reflection positive on the positive-time algebra. This assertion does not assert a probability measure on S′(Ed) or any Osterwalder–Schrader reconstruction.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Full Axiom of Choice, an integer d≥1, a parameter m>0, the Fourier convention and Cm(2) in the Statement, and the positive-time algebra of Definition Euclidean Schwinger hierarchies and controlled limit data.

[A1]

Assume the full Axiom of Choice; it is an explicit hypothesis of the finite-dimensional normal-law supplier. The Axiom of Choice

[F1]

Euclidean Schwinger hierarchies and controlled limit data: Sd,n=S(Edn), Td is the algebraic tensor test algebra, and Θ is the anti-linear time-reflection involution used to form ωS(Θa a).

[F2]

Tensor products of tempered distributions: finite tensor products of tempered distributions are tempered, are uniquely determined by their Schwartz product-test values, and associate.

[F3]

Positive tempered moments on the tensor test algebra: at d=4, the tensor test algebra, its involution, and ordinary positivity ωS(1)=1, ωS(a∗a)≥0 have exactly the convention used here; the dimension-d version is defined in [F1].

[F4]

Finite Euclidean quartic interacting measure: under the Axiom of Choice, for every finite positive-semidefinite covariance matrix G, γG=NN(0,G) is a Borel probability law, including singular G.

[F5]

Finite Gaussian normalization and Wick moments: under full Choice, moments of every finite centered Gaussian vector are finite and equal the sum over covariance pairings.

[F6]

Fourier transform of a tempered distribution and Fourier transform is a topological automorphism of Schwartz space: the Fourier transform maps Schwartz functions continuously to themselves and extends by bilinear transposition to tempered distributions.

[F7]

Fourier inversion on Schwartz space: with the e−2πix⋅ξ convention, Fourier inversion holds on Schwartz functions; the substitution p=2πξ gives the stated e−ip⋅x convention and factor (2π)−d.

Proof

technique · direct Fourier-kernel construction and finite Gaussian Wick pairing

Given: [A1], m>0, d≥1, and [F1]–[F7].

1.1A1F6F7givenalgebra

The full Axiom of Choice assumed in [A1] implies Countable Choice: if (Xn)n∈N is any sequence of nonempty sets, AC supplies a choice function g on the family {Xn:n∈N}, and n↦g(Xn) chooses from every Xn. Thus the actual Countable Choice hypotheses of [F6] and [F7] are satisfied before those suppliers are used. The full Fourier transform Φ^ of Φ∈S(Ed×Ed) is Schwartz by [F6]. For ∣p∣≥1, some coordinate pj satisfies ∣pj∣≥∣p∣/d; the monomial-weight seminorm PN includes the weight given by the Nth power of that coordinate in the first Fourier block. For ∣p∣<1, its zero-weight seminorm bounds the value. Thus, with the finite dimension/order constant Kd,N:=2NdN/2, ∣Φ^(−p,p)∣≤Kd,NPN(Φ^)(1+∣p∣)−N. For an integer N>d, this proves absolute convergence and bounds the defining pairing by (2π)−dm−2Kd,NPN(Φ^)∫Rd(1+∣p∣)−N dp. The last integral is finite: dyadic annuli have volume O(2jd) while the integrand is O(2−jN). Fourier continuity in [F6] bounds PN(Φ^) by finitely many Schwartz seminorms of Φ, so Cm(2) is continuous and tempered. Under simultaneous translation by a∈Ed, the full Fourier transform acquires the factor e−i(q1+q2)⋅a; at (q1,q2)=(−p,p) this factor is 1, proving translation invariance. On product tests, Cm(fˉ,g)=(2π)−d∫Rdf^(p)‾ g^(p)p02+∣k∣2+m2 dp, which is nonnegative for g=f.

2.1A1F1F2F3F4F5step 1.1

The zeroth term S0=1 is a continuous functional on C, and every odd-order term Sn=0 is the zero continuous functional. For even n, each pairing π partitions the n test-variable blocks into disjoint pairs. The corresponding tensor product of copies of Cm(2) is a tempered distribution by [F2]; the finite sum over π is therefore in Sd,n′. Its values on elementary tests are the displayed Wick formula. The bilinear form Cm is symmetric by changing p to −p in step 1.1, so the sum is invariant under every permutation of its argument blocks. For any finite list of real Schwartz tests, Gij=Cm(fi,fj) is symmetric and real: for real fi, f^i(−p)=f^i(p)‾, so the Fourier pairing is Hermitian, while symmetry makes it real. It is positive semidefinite because ∑i,jzˉiGijzj=Cm(∑izifi‾,∑jzjfj)≥0. By [A1] and [F4] the finite centered Gaussian law γG exists, including when G is singular, and [F5] shows its moments are exactly the displayed pairing values. Splitting complex tests into real and imaginary parts gives the same multilinear extension. The symmetry of the moments makes the algebraic moment functional commute on this finite family of generators, so every finite polynomial a satisfies ωS(a∗a)=EγG∣a(Q)∣2≥0 and ωS(1)=S0=1.

2.2F6F7step 1.1givenalgebra

By step 1.1, the Countable Choice hypotheses of [F6] and [F7] are satisfied. Put ωk=∣k∣2+m2>0. The function Kω(u)=e−ω∣u∣/(2ω) is integrable. Splitting its Fourier transform into the two half-lines gives ∫Re−ip0uKω(u) du=12ω(1ω+ip0+1ω−ip0)=1p02+ω2. By injectivity of the Fourier automorphism on tempered distributions [F6], this identifies the inverse kernel of (p02+ω2)−1; the inverse normalization is 1/(2π) under the stated convention [F7]. Since f,g are compactly supported in t>0, reflecting the first time variable changes t−s to −(t+s); its absolute value is t+s. Integrating the spatial variables by their Fourier transforms yields the stated formula. The exchanges of integrals are valid: ∫R(p02+ωk2)−1dp0=π/ωk≤π/m, while repeated spatial integration by parts gives rapid k-decay of f^(t,k) and g^(s,k) uniformly on their compact time supports.

3.1F1F2F5step 2.1step 2.2givenalgebra∎

Define hf(k)=∫0∞e−ωktf^(t,k) dt and use the measure dνm(k)=dk/((2π)d−12ωk), with the one-point convention from the Statement when d=1. Compact time support and the rapid spatial decay just proved give hf∈L2(νm), and step 2.2 gives Cm(f∘ϑ‾,g)=⟨hf,hg⟩L2(νm), where ⟨u,v⟩L2(νm):=∫u(k)‾v(k) dνm(k) is linear in its second argument. To pass from this Gram form to the full Gaussian reflection form, fix any finite set of positive-time tests f1,…,fN used by a. Since all Sn are symmetric, their moment functional on this finite set of field variables factors through its commutative polynomial algebra. Write X(fi) for the degree-one generator fi in Td. The formal Wick exponential W(z)=exp⁡ ⁣(∑iziX(fi)−12∑i,jzizjCm(fi,fj)) has polynomial coefficients; no analytic convergence is asserted. Write si# for the formal conjugate of si: reflection conjugates coefficients, so ΘW(s) uses si# and conjugates the coefficients of the quadratic counterterm. Put Gij=Cm(fi,fj) and Rij=Cm(fi∘ϑ‾,fj). Applying [F5] to the joint finite real list consisting of the real and imaginary parts of fi and fi∘ϑ‾ gives, by complex multilinearity, the coefficientwise formal identity. Each coefficient on the right is the sum over pairings of the corresponding finite test list: the quadratic exponential chooses unordered pairs, and its factorial denominator cancels their ordering multiplicity. Thus the identity follows coefficient by coefficient, with no convergence of an infinite series asserted. ωS ⁣(exp⁡ ⁣(∑isi#X(fi∘ϑ‾))exp⁡ ⁣(∑jzjX(fj)))=exp⁡ ⁣(12∑i,jsi#Gij‾sj#+∑i,jsi#Rijzj+12∑i,jziGijzj). The identity Cm(fi∘ϑ‾,fj∘ϑ‾)=Gij‾ for the reflected covariance follows from f∘ϑ‾^(p0,k)=f^(p0,−k)‾: substitute this in the Fourier formula for Cm and change k to −k, using the real multiplier p02+∣k∣2+m2. Multiplying by the two Wick counterterms therefore cancels the first and third quadratic sums and leaves ωS(ΘW(s) W(z))=exp⁡ ⁣(∑i,jsi#Cm(fi∘ϑ‾,fj)zj), where s and z are independent formal variables and the symbol si# is conjugated when coefficients are evaluated. The coefficient of unequal degrees in s#,z is zero. Differentiating k times in each variable gives the cross-pairing matrix ∑σ∈Σk∏j=1kRijℓσ(j), where Riℓ=⟨hfi,hfℓ⟩. Write the finite Wick expansion of a polynomial as a=∑k=0K∑i1,…,ikai1…ik(k)∂zi1⋯∂zikW(0), with symmetric coefficient tensors, and let Ak=∑ai1…ik(k)ei1⊗⋯⊗eik. The triangular relation between ordinary monomials and Wick polynomials, whose leading terms agree and whose remaining terms have lower degree, proves that every finite polynomial has such a finite expansion. Let H:CN→L2(νm) be the linear map Hei=hfi, and let Sym⁡ be the average over the k! permutations of tensor factors. Expanding the squared norm of Sym⁡H⊗kAk gives 1/k! times the sum over those permutations, so the displayed cross-pairing matrix makes the degree-k reflected quadratic form exactly k!∥Sym⁡H⊗kAk∥2≥0. There are no cross terms between different degrees. Therefore for every a∈Td,+, ωS(Θa a) is a finite sum of nonnegative squared norms.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

None yet.

Sources