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.

✓ 8 results · all verified · 0 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full by a delegated reviewing agent on the owner's instruction; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 8 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Sequences and Series of Functions; Uniform Convergence: Examples and Counterexamples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-08-10 (gpt-5.6-terra-codex-subscription)Open item page →

fk(x)=xk+1 converges pointwise but not uniformly on [0,1]

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: pointwise convergence of real-valued functions on a closed bounded interval implies uniform convergence.

For k∈N define fk:[0,1]→R by

fk(x):=xk+1.

Then (fk) converges pointwise to the endpoint indicator

χ(x):={0,0≤x<1,1,x=1,

but the convergence is not uniform.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The functions fk(x)=xk+1 and the endpoint indicator χ on [0,1].

[L2]

Bernoulli's inequality says (1+t)n≥1+ι(n)t for t≥−1 and n∈N (Bernoulli's inequality (1+x)n≥1+nx, The canonical natural ι(n)=n⋅1F of a field).

[L3]

The canonical naturals satisfy ι(k+1)>0, and positive reciprocals reverse nonstrict inequalities (Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing, Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order).

[L4]

Uniform convergence requires one index after which the error is below every prescribed positive real at every point of the domain (Pointwise convergence, uniform convergence, and the uniformly Cauchy condition for sequences of real-valued functions).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

If 0≤x<1, then ∣x∣<1, so [L1] gives xk+1→0=χ(x); at x=1, one has fk(1)=1=χ(1) for every k. Thus fk→χ pointwise.

L1
1.2

For each k, put ak:=ι(k+1)>0 and yk:=1−1/(2ak). Then 0≤yk<1, so χ(yk)=0.

L3algebra
2.1

Apply [L2] with n=k+1 and t=−1/(2ak): fk(yk)=(1−1/(2ak))k+1≥1−ak/(2ak)=1/2.

step 1.2L2L3algebra
3.1

Hence ∣fk(yk)−χ(yk)∣≥1/2 for every k, so no index makes the error smaller than 1/2 at every point; the convergence is not uniform.

step 1.2step 2.1L4
4.1

The functions therefore satisfy the refuted claim's hypothesis and violate its conclusion.

step 1.1step 3.1∎
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-08-10 (gpt-5.6-terra-codex-subscription)Open item page →

Shrinking rectangles converge pointwise to zero while every integral equals one

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: if Riemann-integrable functions on [0,1] converge pointwise to 0, then their integrals converge to 0.

For k∈N put ak:=ι(k+1), the positive canonical natural in R, and define

rk(x):={ak,0<x≤1/ak,0,x=0 or 1/ak<x≤1.

Then rk→0 pointwise while ∫01rk=1 for every k.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The functions rk in the Statement, with ak=ι(k+1)>0.

[L3]

Changing an integrable function at finitely many points preserves its integrability and integral (Changing an integrable function at finitely many points changes neither its integrability nor its integral).

[L5]

Pointwise convergence of (fk) to f means that for every x and every ε>0 there is an N such that k≥N implies ∣fk(x)−f(x)∣<ε; uniform convergence requires one such N for every x simultaneously (Pointwise convergence, uniform convergence, and the uniformly Cauchy condition for sequences of real-valued functions).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

Each rk is bounded and is continuous except possibly at 0 and 1/ak, so it is integrable by [L2].

L2
1.2

Let qk equal ak on [0,1/ak] and 0 on (1/ak,1]. The functions qk and rk differ only at 0, so they have the same integral by [L3].

L3construct
1.3

At x=0 one has rk(0)=0 for all k. If x>0, choose N with 1/ι(N)<x; for k≥N, monotonicity of the canonical naturals gives 1/ak<x, hence rk(x)=0. Thus rk→0 pointwise.

L1L5choose
1.4

To see explicitly that the convergence is not uniform, take ε:=1/2. For every proposed N∈N, choose k:=N and xN:=1/aN; then ∣rN(xN)−0∣=aN≥1>ε. Thus the uniform quantifier condition in [L5] fails.

givenL1L5
2.1

By [L3] and [L4], endpoint values do not affect either piece, and splitting at 1/ak when it lies in the interior, with the coincident-endpoint convention otherwise, gives ∫01qk=ak(1/ak)+0=1.

step 1.2L3L4algebra
3.1

Steps 1.2 and 2.1 give ∫01rk=1 for every k, whereas the integral of the zero function is 0.

step 1.2step 2.1L3L4
4.1

The sequence therefore converges pointwise to 0 but its integrals do not converge to the integral of the limit, refuting the claim.

step 1.3step 3.1∎
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-08-10 (gpt-5.6-terra-codex-subscription)Open item page →

Dini's theorem fails on [0,∞): x/(ι(k+1)+x) decreases pointwise to zero but not uniformly

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: the compact-domain hypothesis in Dini's theorem can be dropped.

On [0,∞) define

fk(x):=xι(k+1)+x.

The functions fk and their pointwise limit 0 are continuous, and fk+1(x)≤fk(x) for every x≥0, but fk→0 is not uniform.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The functions fk in the Statement, with ak:=ι(k+1)>0.

[L3]

A subset of R is compact exactly when it is closed and bounded; [0,∞) is unbounded (A subset of R is compact if and only if it is closed and bounded, Lower bound, bounded below, bounded set).

[L4]

Dini's theorem on a closed interval concludes uniform convergence from continuity, pointwise monotonicity, and a continuous pointwise limit (Dini's theorem on a closed interval: monotone pointwise convergence of continuous functions to a continuous limit is uniform).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

For every k, the denominator ak+x is positive on [0,∞), so fk is continuous by [L1]; the zero function is continuous as well.

givenL1
1.2

Since ak+1>ak>0, one has ak+1+x>ak+x>0, hence fk+1(x)≤fk(x) for every x≥0.

L2algebra
1.3

Fix x≥0. If x=0 then fk(x)=0; if x>0, then 0≤fk(x)≤x/ak, and [L2] gives x/ak→0. Thus fk(x)→0 for every x.

L2algebra
1.4

At xk:=ak one has fk(xk)=ak/(ak+ak)=1/2, so the convergence is not uniform.

givenalgebra
1.5

The domain [0,∞) is not compact by [L3].

L3
2.1

Hence all the listed Dini hypotheses except compactness hold, while the uniform conclusion fails; compactness cannot be dropped.

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4step 1.5L4∎
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Dini's theorem fails for discontinuous approximants: shrinking interval indicators decrease pointwise to zero but not uniformly

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: continuity of the approximating functions in Dini's theorem can be dropped.

For k∈N define hk:[0,1]→R to be the indicator of

(0,1/ι(k+1)).

Thus hk has value 0 at both endpoints of that open interval. The sequence decreases pointwise to the continuous zero function but does not converge uniformly.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The indicator functions hk in the Statement, with ak:=ι(k+1)>0.

[L2]

Continuity at c requires that every positive output error admit a positive input radius on which all function values remain close to the value at c (Continuity of f:A→R at a point of A and on A: the ε-δ condition, its agreement with lim⁡x→cf(x)=f(c) at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point).

[L3]

Dini's theorem on a closed interval assumes that every approximating function and the pointwise limit are continuous (Dini's theorem on a closed interval: monotone pointwise convergence of continuous functions to a continuous limit is uniform).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

The intervals (0,1/ak+1) are contained in (0,1/ak), so hk+1(x)≤hk(x) for every x∈[0,1].

L1
1.2

At x=0, every hk(x) is 0. If x>0, choose N with 1/ι(N)<x; then hk(x)=0 for all k≥N. Thus hk→0 pointwise.

L1choose
1.3

Each hk is discontinuous at 0: for any δ>0, the point y:=min⁡{δ/2,1/(2ak)} satisfies 0<y<δ, lies in (0,1/ak), and has ∣hk(y)−hk(0)∣=1.

L2algebra
1.4

For each k, the point xk:=1/(2ak) lies in (0,1/ak) and satisfies hk(xk)=1, so the convergence to 0 is not uniform.

givenL1
2.1

The compact domain, monotone pointwise convergence, and continuous limit remain, but the approximants are discontinuous and uniform convergence fails; their continuity is indispensable in [L3].

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4L3∎
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-07-31Open item page →

Dini's theorem fails for a discontinuous limit: powers on [0,1] decrease pointwise to a discontinuous endpoint indicator but not uniformly

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: continuity of the pointwise limit in Dini's theorem can be dropped.

On [0,1] let fk(x)=xk+1. These continuous functions decrease pointwise to the discontinuous endpoint indicator

χ(x)={0,0≤x<1,1,x=1,

and the convergence is not uniform.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The functions fk(x)=xk+1 and the endpoint indicator χ on [0,1].

[L1]

The powers xk+1 converge pointwise to χ on [0,1] and do not converge uniformly there (fk(x)=xk+1 converges pointwise but not uniformly on [0,1]).

[L3]

Dini's theorem on a closed interval requires the approximating functions and their pointwise limit to be continuous (Dini's theorem on a closed interval: monotone pointwise convergence of continuous functions to a continuous limit is uniform).

[L4]

Continuity at c requires that every positive output error admit a positive input radius on which all nearby function values remain close to the value at c (Continuity of f:A→R at a point of A and on A: the ε-δ condition, its agreement with lim⁡x→cf(x)=f(c) at a limit point, and continuity at an isolated point).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

Each fk is continuous by [L2].

L2
1.2

For x∈[0,1], fk+1(x)=xk+2=x xk+1≤xk+1=fk(x), so the sequence is pointwise nonincreasing.

givenalgebra
1.3

The pointwise convergence to χ and the failure of uniform convergence are [L1].

L1
1.4

The function χ is discontinuous at 1: for every δ>0, the point y:=1−min⁡{δ/2,1/2} lies in [0,1) with ∣y−1∣<δ and ∣χ(y)−χ(1)∣=1.

L4algebra
2.1

Thus compactness, continuity of all approximants, and monotonicity hold, but the limit is discontinuous and the uniform conclusion fails; continuity of the limit in [L3] is indispensable.

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4L3∎
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-08-10 (gpt-5.6-terra-codex-subscription)Open item page →

Continuous triangular spikes on [0,1] converge pointwise to zero but not uniformly when monotonicity is absent

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: the monotonicity hypothesis in Dini's theorem can be dropped.

For k∈N put ak:=ι(k+1) and define the triangular spike

hk(x):=max⁡{0, 1−∣2akx−1∣}(0≤x≤1).

Each hk is continuous and hk→0 pointwise, but the convergence is not uniform.

Facts & Assumptions

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

Every hk is continuous by [L1], and the zero function is continuous.

L1
1.2

If x=0, then hk(x)=0. If x>0, choose N with 1/ι(N)<x; for all sufficiently large k, akx≥1, so ∣2akx−1∣≥1 and hk(x)=0. Thus hk→0 pointwise.

L2L3choosealgebra
1.3

At xk:=1/(2ak) one has hk(xk)=1, so the convergence is not uniform.

givenalgebra
1.4

At x=1/4, the values at k=0,1,2 are respectively 1/2,1,1/2, so the sequence is neither pointwise nondecreasing nor pointwise nonincreasing.

givenalgebra
2.1

All Dini hypotheses except monotonicity hold while uniform convergence fails, so monotonicity cannot be dropped.

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 1.4L4∎
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-08-10 (gpt-5.6-terra-codex-subscription)Open item page →

The double sequence (m+1)/(m+n+2) has unequal iterated limits

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: whenever both iterated limits of a double real sequence exist, they are equal.

For m,n∈N define

sm,n:=ι(m+1)ι(m+n+2)=ι(m+1)ι(m+1)+ι(n+1).

Then

lim⁡mlim⁡nsm,n=0,lim⁡nlim⁡msm,n=1.

The shifts make the expression defined at the first index (m,n)=(0,0).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The double sequence sm,n in the Statement.

[L1]

The canonical-natural map satisfies ι(0)=0 and ι(r+1)=ι(r)+1; positive canonical naturals increase, and their reciprocals decrease (The canonical natural ι(n)=n⋅1F of a field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing, Inverses of positives are positive, and reciprocation reverses order).

[L2]

For every real ε>0 there is N≥1 with 1/ι(N)<ε (For every ε>0 in a complete ordered field there is a natural n≥1 with 1/n<ε).

[L3]

A real sequence converges when its terms are eventually within every positive error of the proposed limit (Limits and Cauchy sequences of reals).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

The denominator ι(m+1)+ι(n+1) is positive for all m,n, so every sm,n is defined and lies between 0 and 1.

L1algebra
1.2

Fix m and put a:=ι(m+1)>0. Then 0≤sm,n≤a/ι(n+1); given ε>0, [L2] makes the latter smaller than ε for all sufficiently large n. Hence lim⁡nsm,n=0.

L1L2L3choosealgebra
1.3

Fix n and put b:=ι(n+1)>0. Since ∣1−sm,n∣=b/(ι(m+1)+b)≤b/ι(m+1), [L2] makes this smaller than any prescribed ε>0 for all sufficiently large m. Hence lim⁡msm,n=1.

L1L2L3choosealgebra
2.1

By step 1.2 the first inner-limit sequence is constantly 0, so its limit in m is 0; by step 1.3 the other inner-limit sequence is constantly 1, so its limit in n is 1.

step 1.2step 1.3L3
3.1

Thus both iterated limits exist and are unequal, refuting the claim.

step 2.1∎
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-08-10 (gpt-5.6-terra-codex-subscription)Open item page →

x/(1+(k+1)2x2) converges uniformly to zero on R while every derivative at zero equals one

Statement refuted

Refuted claim: if differentiable functions converge uniformly, their derivatives must converge to the derivative of the limit.

For k∈N put ak:=ι(k+1) and define

fk(x):=x1+ak2x2(x∈R).

Then fk→0 uniformly on R, but fk′(0)=1 for every k, whereas the derivative of the zero function is 0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The functions fk in the Statement, with ak=ι(k+1)>0.

[L1]

Every square in an ordered field is nonnegative, with a nonzero square positive; absolute value is multiplicative (Squares of nonzero elements are positive, Basic properties of the absolute value).

[L4]

Uniform convergence requires one index controlling the error at every point (Pointwise convergence, uniform convergence, and the uniformly Cauchy condition for sequences of real-valued functions).

Counterexample

technique · direct
1.1

The denominator 1+ak2x2 is positive for every x, so fk is differentiable on R by [L2].

L1L2
1.2

From (ak∣x∣−1)2≥0 one obtains 2ak∣x∣≤1+ak2x2, hence ∣fk(x)∣≤1/(2ak) for every x∈R.

L1algebra
1.3

At x=0, the numerator x has derivative 1, the denominator 1+ak2x2 has value 1 and derivative 0, so the quotient rule gives fk′(0)=1.

L2algebra
1.4

The zero function has derivative 0 by the constant case of the power rule.

L2
2.1

Given ε>0, [L3] gives N such that 1/(2ak)<ε for every k≥N; step 1.2 then gives ∣fk(x)∣<ε for every x∈R.

step 1.2L3choose
3.1

Step 2.1 proves fk→0 uniformly, while steps 1.3 and 1.4 show that the derivatives at 0 do not converge to the derivative of the limit.

step 2.1step 1.3step 1.4L4
4.1

The uniformly convergent differentiable sequence therefore refutes the claim.

step 3.1∎

Sources