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.
Independent generalized reflected-ray and GCC convention
Statement
Let , , have smooth boundary. A cotangent vector is a linear functional on the tangent space; cotangent vectors over all points form the cotangent bundle. On spacetime , use the wave symbol and its nonzero characteristic covectors, meaning and . In local boundary normal coordinates , where is the domain side and includes time, write and . The compression map is , with the natural compressed-bundle topology. At the boundary it identifies covectors having the same tangential components, including the incoming and outgoing characteristic covectors. Boundary characteristic points are hyperbolic when and glancing when .
A complete generalized bicharacteristic is a differentiable characteristic curve , with consisting of isolated reflection parameters, obeying the rules in the External input below. Its compressed image has a continuous extension to all of . The spatial projection, parametrized by physical time, is a complete generalized ray and travels at unit speed. Curves obeying the same local rules on shorter intervals are ray segments; they are not independently quantified over in GCC or non-trapping. The complete-curve convention does not assert that every locally admissible segment has a complete extension.
For a time-independent open observation region and , satisfies the geometric control condition (GCC) when every complete generalized ray has for some . GCC means that such a common exists. All complete admissible rays are quantified over; uniqueness at infinite-order contact is not asserted.
For a smooth compact obstacle , its exterior is non-trapping when every complete generalized ray leaves every compact set in finite forward time, starting at . This is a pointwise condition on complete rays, with no common escape time asserted here.
External input
In the above boundary coordinates put and, for a function of canonical coordinates, . On boundary tangential variables, uses the same formula with only tangential coordinates and momenta. Put , the glancing set. For , consists of glancing points where for , and . For each integer , the diffractive part of is the subset where ; let be the union of these subsets.
The parameter domain is , where every is isolated in ; no reflection parameter is an endpoint of the complete curve. For , is either an interior nonzero characteristic covector or a glancing characteristic covector, and is differentiable there. It follows in the interior and at , and at . For each there is such that is interior for . The limits exist at the boundary, have the same base point and tangential covector, and have opposite nonzero normal covectors. Set for and for ; the compressed curve is continuous on .
The physical-time and spatial coordinates are thus defined also at reflections. The cited construction parametrizes the projected ray by physical time on all of , at unit speed. These rules include infinite-order glancing points; they do not assert that a point there determines a unique global curve. The boundaryless convention likewise uses complete unit-speed projected geodesics, without reflection.
The non-trapping convention in the Statement is the independent compact-obstacle convention of Burq, Gérard and Tzvetkov. The ray and GCC conventions are the local Euclidean specialization of the definitions of Le Rousseau, Lebeau, Terpolilli and Trélat. No observability theorem, global exterior existence or continuation theorem, or exterior propagation theorem is asserted by these definitions.
Facts & Assumptions
The boundary-chart supplier fixes the smooth one-sided local graph convention; normal coordinates and compressed rays are supplied by the cited external construction. The bounded-domain supplier is used for that local chart convention, not to assert that an exterior domain is bounded.
The cotangent-bundle supplier identifies each cotangent space as the dual of its tangent space and the bundle as their disjoint union. The compressed bundle and its topology are additional imported structures.
Depends on
- Bounded Cᵏ domains and boundary charts
- Cotangent space and cotangent bundle as a disjoint union
- Geometric control condition for the wave equation with a time-dependent observation domain · Section 1.3.1, Definitions 1.3–1.4 and Proposition 1.5, PDF pp. 6–9; Section 1.3.2, Definition 1.6, PDF p. 9
- On nonlinear Schrödinger equations in exterior domains · Introduction, printed pp. 295–296, opening paragraph
Used by · 10
- Exterior and truncated obstacle domains
- Non-trapping obstacle
- Prior compact-manifold control under GCC and unique continuation
- Non-trapping and geometric control from infinity
- A ray trapped between two convex obstacles
- Compact normalized compressed phase sets over bounded regions
- Unit-speed confinement before an artificial outer boundary
- Diagonal gluing without a single-valued reflected flow
- An outward Euclidean exit cannot return
- Closed compactness of arbitrary exterior generalized-ray segments
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.
External dependencies
Definition 1.3 uses a differentiable characteristic map on $\mathbb R\setminus B$, with isolated reflection parameters in $B$, Hamilton evolution in the interior and at diffractive points, tangential Hamilton evolution at other glancing points, and the specified two-sided hyperbolic reflection limits. Definition 1.4 extends its compressed image continuously to all real parameters; its spatial projection uses physical time and unit speed. Definition 1.6 quantifies over complete compressed bicharacteristics and requires a meeting with the observation set at a physical time in $(0,T)$.
Hypotheses: Smooth boundary and the stationary wave symbol in normal coordinates. The source works on a compact Riemannian manifold with boundary. Its local rules and complete-curve/GCC conventions are specialized here to Euclidean boundary charts; no global exterior existence, continuation, uniqueness or propagation theorem, observability theorem, or no-infinite-order-contact hypothesis is imported.
Reading limits: Read Section 1.3.1 through Definition 1.6 in the arXiv v2 HTML and the PDF text served at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1607.01527 (whose front page identifies v2), including Definitions 1.3–1.4 and the qualification in Proposition 1.5. The versioned PDF endpoint was unavailable. The original Melrose–Sjöstrand papers and any global exterior existence, continuation, uniqueness or propagation theorem were not read.
For a smooth compact obstacle in Euclidean dimension at least two, non-trapping means that every reflected geometric-optics ray, equivalently every generalized bicharacteristic in the boundary cotangent setting, leaves every compact set in finite time.
Hypotheses: A smooth compact obstacle in Euclidean space of dimension at least two, with its exterior. This is a geometric convention; the cited passage does not supply a common escape time or a global uniqueness theorem.
Reading limits: Read the opening paragraph in the online published PDF text on printed pp. 295–296. The Melrose–Sjöstrand references cited there were not read.
Sources
- Geometric control condition for the wave equation with a time-dependent observation domain · Section 1.3.1, Definitions 1.3–1.4 and Proposition 1.5, PDF pp. 6–9; Section 1.3.2, Definition 1.6, PDF p. 9
- On nonlinear Schrödinger equations in exterior domains · Introduction, printed pp. 295–296, opening paragraph