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.
Non-trapping obstacle
PDF p. 2: footnote 1; PDF p. 3: Remark 1
Definition
Let , and let be a nonempty compact obstacle with smooth boundary and connected exterior . A complete generalized ray is the spatial projection , parametrized by physical time at unit speed, of a complete admissible generalized bicharacteristic in the exterior, including reflected and glancing boundary behavior.
The obstacle is non-trapping if every such complete ray leaves every compact subset of in finite forward time: for each ray and each compact set , there is a finite with . The time may depend on both the ray and . This is the non-trapping part of the article's standing hypothesis (H).
Definition references
Justification
The geometry and the meanings of compactness, smooth boundary and connected exterior are fixed by Exterior and truncated obstacle domains. The generalized-ray convention is fixed independently by Independent generalized reflected-ray and GCC convention: it includes complete compressed reflected and glancing curves and identifies their spatial projections. The quantified curves have time domain ; the escape test uses their forward restrictions. A curve defined only on a finite interval or on is not automatically a complete ray in this predicate: applying the predicate to that curve requires a complete extension. The condition above is therefore a definite predicate on the obstacle and those admissible rays. It asks for a finite escape time separately for each ray and compact set; this definition does not assert a common escape time, uniqueness at infinite-order contact, or a geometric control theorem.
Source notes
The article's footnote on page 2 describes reflected geometric-optics rays leaving compact sets in finite time, and Remark 1 uses generalized bicharacteristics. The article is cited for attribution; the ray convention used here is supplied by the independent prerequisite.
Depends on
Used by · 45
- Question B prime: outer boundary control
- Prior exterior-domain dispersive and Cauchy results
- Prior damped exterior Schrödinger results
- Non-trapping and geometric control from infinity
- A ray trapped between two convex obstacles
- Theorem 1.1: exact outer boundary controllability
- Theorem 1.2: linear control on the full stated scale
- Linear damping decay and observability comparison
- Proposition 2.1: cut-off resolvent estimate
- Resolvent frequencies, cutoff signs and higher compatibility
- Proposition 2.2: retarded local smoothing
- Homogeneous half-derivative local smoothing
- Strichartz estimate away from the obstacle
- Global Strichartz estimate with derivative loss
- Three-dimensional L4 time Linfinity space estimate
- Localized free-flow bounds and compactness mechanism
- Lemma 3.2: compactness of the remainder
- Lemma 3.3: observability modulo a compact remainder
- Local observation has a lower initial regularity cost
- Finite dimensionality of invisible spaces
- Locally constant invisible spaces are Laplacian invariant
- Lemma 3.4: free unique continuation on the scale
- Proposition 3.5: full-scale free observability
- Localization and analytic scope of the free control construction
- Lemma 3.8: energy-data time-integrable supremum bound
- Two-dimensional exponents removing the Strichartz loss
- Free and retarded bounds in the energy control space
- Lemma 4.1: retarded smoothing down to negative order two
- Lemma 4.2: smoothing of the regularized adjoint
- Lemma 4.3: perturbed observability modulo a remainder
- Lemma 4.4: compactness for regularized perturbed trajectories
- Proposition 4.6: conditional adjoint observability
- Linearized propagator bounds in the nonlinear control spaces
- Unique continuation for general non-trapping obstacles and trajectories
- Nonlinear exact control below energy regularity
- Three-dimensional intermediate Sobolev control
- Quintic control around nonzero trajectories
- Large-data control for energy-critical NLS
- Outer Neumann boundary controllability
- Global defocusing controllability in large time
- Nontrapping cutoff resolvent estimates
- Imported homogeneous and retarded exterior smoothing
- Exterior Strichartz estimates with precise loss
- Three-dimensional Dirichlet energy-to-mixed-norm estimate
- Resolvent adjoint transport to order minus two
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.