Alphabeta Math
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.

✓ 12 results · all verified · 0 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 12 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Improper Integrals: Examples and Counterexamples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

1/x on [−1,1] has principal value 0 but no improper integral

Example

The function f(x)=1/x on [−1,1]∖{0} has PV⁡ ⁣∫−11dxx=0, but its two one-sided improper integrals do not converge.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The reciprocal function away from zero.

[L1]

Principal value uses equal truncations on the two sides (Cauchy principal values at a finite singularity and on the real line).

[L2]

The rational p-test at p=1 says ∫01x−1dx diverges (The improper p-test for rational exponents).

Verification

technique · computation
1.1

Substitution x=−t gives [L1] ∫−1−εdxx=−∫ε1dtt. Thus the symmetric sum is exactly zero for every ε>0, and [L1] gives principal value zero.

2.1

By [L2], the right-hand integral diverges to +∞; the identity in step 1.1 makes the left-hand one diverge to −∞. Hence separate improper convergence fails, showing that the converse of the principal-value theorem is false.

L2step 1.1∎
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

A step function whose improper integral is the alternating harmonic series

Example

For each nonnegative integer k, define f(x)=(−1)kk+1(k≤x<k+1). Then ∫0∞f converges conditionally, and its value is the sum of the alternating harmonic series.

Facts & Assumptions

Verification

technique · computation
1.1

Every compact interval meets only finitely many jumps, so [L3] makes f properly integrable there. At a positive integer N, [L1, L3] ∫0Nf=∑k=0N−1(−1)kk+1, which converges as N→∞ by [L1].

1.2

If N≤R<N+1, the remaining integral from N to R has absolute value at most 1/(N+1). Hence arbitrary real truncations have the same limit as the integer truncations.

given
2.1

At integer truncations, ∫0N∣f∣=∑k=0N−11/(k+1), unbounded by [L2]. Thus the integral converges but not absolutely.

L2∎
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

A positive continuous integrand can have finite integral while unbounded on every tail

Example

There is a positive continuous f:[0,∞)→R for which ∫0∞f converges although f is unbounded on every tail.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: For each positive integer k, put hk=2−k−2/k and let sk be the symmetric triangular function supported on [k−hk,k+hk], zero at the endpoints, and of height k at its center. Define f(x)=1(1+x)2+∑k=1∞sk(x).

[L1]

The supports of the sk are pairwise disjoint, and every compact interval meets only finitely many of them.

[L2]

A triangle of height k and half-width hk has integral khk=2−k−2.

Verification

technique · construction
1.1

By [L1], local finiteness and matching zero endpoint values make the spike sum continuous; adding the positive continuous baseline preserves positivity and continuity. Direct differentiation gives primitive 1−1/(1+x) for the baseline, whose improper integral is one.

L1
2.1

By [L2], additivity, and [L3], the total integral of all spikes is ∑k=1∞2−k−2<∞. Given ε>0, choose K so that both the geometric spike tail from K and the baseline tail 1/(1+K) are below ε/2. For K≤u<v, nonnegativity bounds the integral over every partial spike by the full spike area, so ∫uvf<ε. The Cauchy criterion therefore gives convergence of ∫0∞f.

step 1.1L2L3
3.1

At every positive integer k, f(k)≥sk(k)=k. Integers occur arbitrarily far out, so f is unbounded on every tail.

given∎
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

∫01x−1/2 dx=2

Example

The endpoint-singular integral satisfies ∫01dxx=2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The integrand x−1/2 on (0,1].

[L1]

The rational p-test gives convergence at zero when p<1 (The improper p-test for rational exponents).

[L2]

The truncated power formula evaluates proper integrals (Truncated integrals of rational powers).

Verification

technique · computation
1.1

Since 1/2<1, convergence follows from [L1]. For 0<c<1, [L2] gives [L1, L2] ∫c1x−1/2dx=2(1−c). As c↓0, c→0, so the limit is two.

2.1

This is not a proper Riemann integral on [0,1]: the displayed integrand is unbounded at zero, whereas every properly Riemann-integrable function is bounded.

given∎
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

The rational p-threshold reverses between zero and infinity

Example

The exponents 2 and 1/2 display the opposite convergence thresholds: ∫1∞x−2dx=1,∫01x−2dx diverges, while ∫01x−1/2dx=2,∫1∞x−1/2dx diverges.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The two rational exponents 2 and 1/2.

[L1]

At infinity the p-integral converges exactly for p>1, while at zero it converges exactly for p<1 (The improper p-test for rational exponents).

[L2]

Convergent values follow from the truncated rational-power formula (Truncated integrals of rational powers).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Applying [L1] at p=2 proves convergence only at infinity, and [L2] gives the value 1/(2−1)=1 there.

L1L2
2.1

Applying [L1] at p=1/2 proves convergence only at zero, and [L2] gives 1/(1−1/2)=2. These are precisely the four assertions displayed above.

L1L2∎
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

A rational-kernel Frullani integral

Example

For a,b>0, ∫0∞(1+ax)−1−(1+bx)−1x dx=∫abdtt.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Positive a,b and f(t)=1/(1+t).

[L1]

Frullani's formula gives (f(0)−L)∫abdt/t when f(t)→L (Frullani's formula with its proper integral factor).

[L2]

The p-test gives convergence of ∫1∞x−2dx (The improper p-test for rational exponents).

Verification

technique · computation
1.1

Here f is continuous and f(0)=1. Also 0<f(t)=1/(1+t)<ε whenever t>1/ε, so f(t)→0 directly from the definition of the limit at infinity. Thus [L1] gives exactly the displayed identity.

L1
1.2

For x>0, the integrand simplifies to [L2] b−a(1+ax)(1+bx). It has finite limit b−a at zero and is bounded in absolute value by a constant multiple of x−2 for x≥1. This independently confirms local convergence at zero and tail convergence by [L2], without replacing the proper factor by a logarithm. ∎

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

∫−∞∞(1+x2)−1 dx converges absolutely

Example

The whole-line integral ∫−∞∞dx1+x2 converges absolutely. No evaluation of its value is needed.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: f(x)=(1+x2)−1 on R.

[L2]

For ∣x∣≥1, 0<f(x)≤x−2.

[L3]

The p=2 tail integral converges, and comparison transfers convergence (The improper p-test for rational exponents, Comparison tests for improper integrals).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

By [L1], the integral over [−1,1] is proper. On [1,∞), [L2] and [L3] prove convergence. Substitution t=−x gives the identical conclusion on (−∞,−1].

L1L2L3
2.1

Since f≥0, ∣f∣=f. Both tails converge separately and the middle piece is proper, so the mixed integral is absolutely convergent by definition.

given∎
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

The substitution x=1/t exchanges the two rational p-tests

Example

For rational p, the decreasing substitution x=1/t gives ∫1∞x−p dx=∫01tp−2 dt whenever either improper integral converges, and convergence occurs exactly when p>1.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The map ϕ(t)=1/t from (0,1] onto [1,∞).

[L2]

Rational exponent laws give (1/t)−pt−2=tp−2 (Laws of rational exponents).

[L3]

Improper substitution preserves convergence and value (Change of variable in an improper integral).

Verification

technique · computation
1.1

The map ϕ is decreasing, so [L3] uses ∣ϕ′∣=t−2. By [L1] and [L2], the transformed integrand is tp−2, proving the identity.

L3L1L2
2.1

Write tp−2=t−(2−p). The finite-endpoint p-test says this converges exactly when 2−p<1, namely p>1, which is also precisely the infinite-endpoint threshold for the original integral.

given∎
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

A bounded truncation function need not have an improper limit

Example

Define f(x)=(−1)k on [k,k+1) for every nonnegative integer k. Its truncation primitive is bounded, but ∫0∞f diverges.

Facts & Assumptions

Verification

technique · counterexample
1.1

For a positive integer N, additivity gives the displayed sum, whose parity values follow from the alternating sequence. [L1, L2] ∫0Nf=∑k=0N−1(−1)k, which equals one for odd N and zero for even N by [L2]. Thus the integer truncations are bounded but have no limit. [L1, L2] If N≤R<N+1, the remaining integral has absolute value at most one, so the full truncation primitive is bounded as asserted.

2.1

An improper limit would restrict to the same limit along all integer truncations, contradicting step 1.1. The example changes sign, so it does not satisfy the nonnegativity hypothesis in [L3] and shows that hypothesis cannot be deleted.

L3step 1.1∎
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

∣x−c∣−1/2 has a convergent improper integral across an interior singularity

Example

If a<c<b, then ∫ab∣x−c∣−1/2dx=2c−a+2b−c, where the integral is improper at the interior point c.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Reals a<c<b.

[L1]

A mixed integral at c requires separate convergence on [a,c) and (c,b] (Improper integrals with several singular ends).

[L2]

The exponent 1/2<1 gives convergence at a finite endpoint (The improper p-test for rational exponents).

[L3]

The truncated power formula gives ∫0At−1/2dt=2A (Truncated integrals of rational powers).

Verification

technique · computation
1.1

On the left use t=c−x; on the right use t=x−c. The two one-sided integrals become respectively ∫0c−at−1/2dt and ∫0b−ct−1/2dt.

given
2.1

Both converge separately by [L2], as [L1] requires. Evaluating them with [L3] and adding gives the displayed value.

L2L1L3∎
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

1/x2 has no finite Cauchy principal value at zero

Example

Symmetry does not rescue the nonnegative singularity 1/x2: PV⁡ ⁣∫−11dxx2 does not exist as a finite real number.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The function x−2 away from zero.

[L1]

Principal value uses the sum of the two symmetric truncations (Cauchy principal values at a finite singularity and on the real line).

[L2]

The rational-power formula evaluates each proper truncation (Truncated integrals of rational powers).

Verification

technique · computation
1.1

For 0<ε<1, symmetry and [L2] give [L2] ∫−1−εdxx2+∫ε1dxx2=2(1ε−1).

2.1

This tends to +∞ as ε↓0, not to a finite real. Therefore the principal value in [L1] diverges.

L1∎
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-11Open item page →

Convergence range of x−p(1+x)−q on (0,∞) for rational exponents

Example

For rational p,q, the positive integral ∫0∞x−p(1+x)−qdx converges exactly when p<1andp+q>1.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Rational exponents p,q and the positive-domain kernel.

[L1]

Positive rational powers obey the product, quotient, and monotonicity laws (Rational powers ar of a positive base, Laws of rational exponents, Monotonicity of r↦ar and of a↦ar).

[L2]

Two-sided eventual comparison by positive constant multiples gives equivalent improper convergence, using comparison in each direction and linearity for the constant multiples (Comparison tests for improper integrals, Linearity of convergent improper integrals).

[L3]

The rational p-test gives the exact thresholds at zero and infinity (The improper p-test for rational exponents).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

For 0<x≤1, one has 1≤1+x≤2. If q≥0, [L1] gives 2−q≤(1+x)−q≤1; if q<0, it gives 1≤(1+x)−q≤2−q. Thus the kernel is bounded above and below by positive constant multiples of x−p, so [L2] and [L3] give convergence at zero exactly when p<1.

L1L2L3
1.2

For x≥1, 1/2≤x/(1+x)<1. By [L1], the quotient of the kernel by x−(p+q) is (x/(1+x))q and lies between 2−q and 1 when q≥0, and between 1 and 2−q when q<0. Hence [L2] and [L3] give convergence at infinity exactly when p+q>1.

L1L2L3
2.1

The mixed definition requires both ends separately, so the full integral converges exactly under the two simultaneous inequalities. Positive bases ensure every rational power used above is defined, regardless of the signs of p and q.

given∎

Sources