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.
Nonsmooth Equilibrium — Examples
1 · Prerequisites
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Compactness in Metric Spaces
- Completeness, Completion, and Uniform Continuity
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Continuity, IVT, EVT, and Uniform Continuity
- Convex and Semicontinuous Functions on Rⁿ
- Countability and Uncountability
- Filters and Ultrafilters
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Limits of Real Functions
- limsup, liminf, and Subsequential Limits
- Linear Independence, Bases and Dimension
- Linear Transformations, Rank-Nullity and Quotient Spaces
- Metric Spaces
- Monotone Functions, Discontinuities, and Continuity Sets
- Monotone Sequences, Bolzano-Weierstrass, and Cauchy Completeness
- Nonsmooth Equilibrium
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Properties of the Integral and the Working FTC
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Rⁿ as a Normed Space; Vector-Valued Functions
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Sequences and Limits
- Suprema and Infima
- The Derivative and the Mean Value Theorems
- The Inverse and Implicit Function Theorems
- The Riemann Integral: Definition and Integrability
- The Total Derivative in ℝᵐ → ℝⁿ
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topology of ℝ
- Vector Spaces, Linear Subspaces, Span and Direct Sums
2 · Summary
These leaf examples check the vertical-separator boundary in biconjugation, a whole flat face of Fenchel minimizers, a singular two-phase equation map where equation counting fails, and a water-formation extent at the boundary of its feasible interval. The reaction example verifies stoichiometric feasibility and atom conservation for the displayed finite model only; its chosen objective is mathematical data and is not an empirical or thermodynamic claim.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs
None yet.
5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples
A vertical separator and biconjugation outside the domain
Example
Let be the indicator of : for and for . At , the epigraph is separated by a vertical hyperplane (one whose coefficient of the epigraph-height coordinate is zero). The conjugate is for and for , so . The affine minorants , , display the unbounded dual values at .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The indicator function just defined and the Euclidean coordinates on its epigraph.
Proper, convex, and lower-semicontinuous extended-real functions on Euclidean space: properness, convexity, lower semicontinuity, and the epigraph use the stated extended-real conventions.
Fenchel conjugate, biconjugate, and subdifferential: and is the supremum over with finite .
Extended-real convexity and lower semicontinuity are characterized by the epigraph: convexity and lower semicontinuity are equivalent to convexity and closedness of the epigraph.
Strictly separate a point from a nonempty closed convex Euclidean set: a point outside a nonempty closed convex Euclidean set has a strict linear separator.
Finite-dimensional Fenchel-Moreau biconjugation: a proper closed convex extended-real function on finite-dimensional Euclidean space equals its biconjugate.
Verification
The domain is , so it is nonempty and is proper. Its epigraph is , a nonempty closed convex set; [F3] therefore makes closed and convex. The point lies outside . With and , every satisfies , so this is the strict vertical separator; its height coefficient is zero.
For and , , with equality at , so . For , given any real choose ; then , so the defining supremum is . Therefore .
At , the biconjugate is : for every real bound , the admissible choice gives . Thus .
For each and , , so is an affine minorant. Its value at is , and the conjugate choice has , so the same family realizes arbitrarily large dual values at the point outside the domain. The conclusion is consistent with the full equality in [L2].
A flat exposed face with many Fenchel minimizers
Example
Let be the indicator of . The zero tilt has every point of the interval as a minimizer, and is attained at every such point. Equivalently, for every . Thus the supporting face at slope zero is the whole interval, and coercive Fenchel attainment need not be unique.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The indicator for and otherwise.
Proper, convex, and lower-semicontinuous extended-real functions on Euclidean space: the indicator of a nonempty closed convex set is proper, closed, and convex in the given conventions.
Fenchel conjugate, biconjugate, and subdifferential: is the supremum of over , and means for all .
Extended-real convexity and lower semicontinuity are characterized by the epigraph: a proper indicator with a closed convex epigraph is closed and convex in the local extended-real conventions.
Fenchel inequality and its equality condition: equality in Fenchel's inequality at a finite point is equivalent to the subgradient condition and attainment of the conjugate supremum.
A coercive Fenchel tilt attains its minimum and conjugate supremum: if the closed proper convex tilt is coercive, it has a finite global minimum and the conjugate supremum is attained, without a uniqueness conclusion.
Verification
The epigraph is , a nonempty closed convex rectangle, and the domain is nonempty; hence the indicator is proper, closed, and convex by [F1, F3]. At slope , every contributes to the conjugate supremum, and no other is in the effective domain, so and every point of the interval attains this supremum.
Fix any . For every , : equality holds on the interval and the left side is outside it. Hence ; [L1] also gives at each such .
The zero tilt is . It is coercive as an extended-real function: for any , choosing ensures implies . Its minimum is , attained at every , so this example satisfies [L2] while exhibiting nonuniqueness and a whole flat supporting face.
A singular two-phase equation map with a four-dimensional solution set
Example
Take components and phases on the open coordinate domain . Set all four chemical-potential coordinate functions identically equal to zero. The two coexistence equations then vanish identically, so the solution set is all of and has local dimension four. The regular formula would give , but its nonsingular-minor hypothesis fails because the equation Jacobian is zero.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The stated component and phase counts, open domain, and constant coordinate functions.
Regular rank form of the finite-component phase dimension count: the dimension is conditional on an invertible square derivative minor for the coexistence equation map.
Verification
For , there are coordinates and equations. Since each is identically zero, both differences equal zero at every point of . Thus the zero set is exactly the open set , which is locally parameterized by its four original coordinates.
The derivative of each identically zero equation is the zero covector, so the equation Jacobian has rank zero and no minor is invertible. Therefore [L1] does not apply; the example does not contradict its regular dimension count, and it shows why equation count alone does not determine local dimension.
Water formation at a boundary of the feasible extent interval
Example
For the reaction , let extent and species amounts use moles. The dimensionless stoichiometric column is in the species order , and take . Then the feasible extent interval is , and at the tangent cone permits only forward directions . The matrix of hydrogen and oxygen atom counts annihilates . For the explicitly mathematical objective , the induced extent function is and has a boundary minimum at zero. This is a stoichiometric calculation, not a claim about chemical equilibrium or a measured system.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The reaction vector, initial amounts, extent convention, and linear objective in the Example.
The feasible tangent cone for nonnegative stoichiometric amounts: the feasible tangent cone is determined by nonnegative changes in species whose amounts are zero at the point; the extent derivative is for a differentiable potential.
Verification
The species-amount vector is . Nonnegativity of its third component requires , and nonnegativity of its first two components requires ; hence the feasible set is exactly .
The elemental count matrix is , with first row counting hydrogen atoms and second row oxygen atoms per molecule. Direct multiplication gives , so every change preserves both atom totals.
At , only the water component is zero. Its directional change is , so [L1] gives . A negative direction is infeasible because it would make the water amount negative.
For , the induced function is . Its derivative at is for every feasible tangent , and for every . This verifies the boundary first-order condition and minimum directly for this chosen mathematical objective.