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.
Mass-angle lower bound — Lemma 4.1
PDF p. 23: Lemma 4.1
Statement
Assume countable choice. Let be a finite connected undirected graph with nonempty vertex set, possibly with self-loops, and let be a nonsynchronized stable state whose first order parameter is real and nonnegative. A stable state is a local minimum on the phase torus of the graph energy ; nonsynchronized means that the phases are not all equal modulo . The first order parameter is . Use the representatives .
Let and be an amplification sequence: is an integer, , , and for , where and . For , let if , and if . Then
Facts & Assumptions
The graph, phase torus, stable state, first order parameter and amplification sequence have the meanings stated above. In particular, and (Adjacency, degrees, graph Laplacian, and spectral notation, Finite phase tori, local lifts and the flat metric, Equilibria, stable states, synchronized states, and spurious minima, Daido order parameters, Angle and mass sequences in the amplification argument, The Axiom of Countable Choice (AC_ω)).
Each principal representative lies in , and exactly when for (Phase tail sets for amplification).
The displayed branches define ; it is nonnegative and nondecreasing on (Truncated sine-square function, Elementary properties of the function H).
Proof
Given: The graph, state and amplification sequence in the statement.
Goal: Prove the stated lower bound for the sum of .
For each , [F2] gives . By the two branches defining , . Monotonicity in [F3] therefore gives , where the last equality uses .
All terms outside are nonnegative by [F3]. Summing step 1.1 over the finite tail set gives . Since the squared sine is nonnegative and by [F1], the desired inequality follows.
Source notes
The statement is attributed to Lemma 4.1 of the article cited in the frontmatter. The proof above uses monotonicity of directly: the article's intermediate comparison of with need not hold for vertices whose absolute angle exceeds .
Depends on
- Truncated sine-square function
- Elementary properties of the function H
- Angle and mass sequences in the amplification argument
- Phase tail sets for amplification
- Adjacency, degrees, graph Laplacian, and spectral notation
- Equilibria, stable states, synchronized states, and spurious minima
- Daido order parameters
- Finite phase tori, local lifts and the flat metric
- The Axiom of Countable Choice (AC_ω)
Used by · 1
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.
Sources
- Expander graphs are globally synchronizing — Abdalla, Bandeira, Kassabov, Souza, Strogatz, Townsend (2026) · PDF pp. 22–23, Section 4 and Lemma 4.1