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.
Uniform spectral control transfers past connectivity
Statement
Assume countable choice. Use the independent-label process, its exponential-clock form , and , , . Let be any predicate on connected graphs with the deterministic property that implies . Suppose a constant , independent of , and events of probability tending to one satisfy: for every for which is connected, . Then with probability tending to one, holds simultaneously for every .
Facts & Assumptions
Normalized Laplacians and the quantities and are defined in Normalized graph Laplacian and its nontrivial spectrum; a spectral window of width less than implies by A spectral window giving condition number below two.
The exponential-clock process has the uniform edge ordering, and a pathwise assertion after its connectivity time transfers to every later edge index (Exponential clocks and the uniform edge-order process).
With probability tending to one the graph at has an isolated vertex, so the connectivity time is later than (An isolated vertex before three quarters of the connectivity scale).
A probability measure is a nonnegative countably additive measure of total mass one, and high probability means convergence of event probabilities to one (Probability measures and probability spaces, Asymptotic quantifiers and uniform parameter ranges).
Countable choice is assumed in the sense of The Axiom of Countable Choice (AC_ω); it supplies the hypothesis required to invoke the process-transfer and isolated-vertex results in [F2] and [F3].
Proof
Given: The objects and hypotheses in the statement.
Goal: Establish all stated claims.
Under [A1], intersect with the event in [F3] and the probability-one coupling event in [F2]. The complement of this intersection has probability at most the sum of the first two failure probabilities: decompose the union into the first event and the portion of the second outside it, use additivity on these disjoint sets, and then monotonicity. Thus the intersection still has probability tending to one.
On this intersection, the connectivity time exceeds . For every , connectedness persists and the assumed bound applies. Since is increasing, . Therefore, for all sufficiently large , the common upper bound is less than , simultaneously for all such .
By [F1], every graph on this whole time interval has , so the assumed deterministic implication gives . Applying [F2] at every edge arrival proves the single simultaneous assertion for all indices from to . The intersection already has probability tending to one, which proves the claim.
Depends on
- Normalized graph Laplacian and its nontrivial spectrum
- A spectral window giving condition number below two
- Exponential clocks and the uniform edge-order process
- An isolated vertex before three quarters of the connectivity scale
- Asymptotic quantifiers and uniform parameter ranges
- Probability measures and probability spaces
- The Axiom of Countable Choice (AC_ω)
Dependency tree · 2 levels
Each result is drawn at its shortest distance from this item. Arrows run from prerequisites to the items that use them; this item has a heavier outline. External source nodes link directly to the cited text. The view shows up to two dependency steps; open a prerequisite to continue.