Each result cited below is universally quantified over the data appearing in its own statement, and is applied here to the data named at the point of use. Write p = D φ ( x ^ ) ∈ H p=D\varphi(\hat{x})\in H p = D φ ( x ^ ) ∈ H and b = D 2 φ ( x ^ ) ∈ S y m ( H ) b=D^{2}\varphi(\hat{x})\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) b = D 2 φ ( x ^ ) ∈ Sym ( H ) , and let T b ∈ L ( H ) T_{b}\in\mathcal{L}(H) T b ∈ L ( H ) be the operator representing b b b , so that b ( z , y ) = ⟨ T b z , y ⟩ b(z,y)=\langle T_{b}z,y\rangle b ( z , y ) = ⟨ T b z , y ⟩ for all z , y ∈ H z,y\in H z , y ∈ H , by claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space . The set H H H is open in ( H , d ) (H,d) ( H , d ) , since every open ball of ( H , d ) (H,d) ( H , d ) is a subset of H H H , so Open Subset of a Metric Space is satisfied. Recall that d ( x , y ) = ∣ x − y ∣ d(x,y)=|x-y| d ( x , y ) = ∣ x − y ∣ for x , y ∈ H x,y\in H x , y ∈ H , by Real Inner Product Spaces (iii) .
Claim 1. Let x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H and put z = x − x ^ z=x-\hat{x} z = x − x ^ . By bilinearity and symmetry of b b b (Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction (i) ),
b ( z , z ) = b ( x , x ) − b ( x , x ^ ) − b ( x ^ , x ) + b ( x ^ , x ^ ) = b ( x , x ) − 2 b ( x ^ , x ) + b ( x ^ , x ^ ) , b(z,z)=b(x,x)-b(x,\hat{x})-b(\hat{x},x)+b(\hat{x},\hat{x})=b(x,x)-2\,b(\hat{x},x)+b(\hat{x},\hat{x}), b ( z , z ) = b ( x , x ) − b ( x , x ^ ) − b ( x ^ , x ) + b ( x ^ , x ^ ) = b ( x , x ) − 2 b ( x ^ , x ) + b ( x ^ , x ^ ) ,
and b ( x ^ , x ) = ⟨ T b x ^ , x ⟩ b(\hat{x},x)=\langle T_{b}\hat{x},x\rangle b ( x ^ , x ) = ⟨ T b x ^ , x ⟩ . Likewise ⟨ p , z ⟩ = ⟨ p , x ⟩ − ⟨ p , x ^ ⟩ \langle p,z\rangle=\langle p,x\rangle-\langle p,\hat{x}\rangle ⟨ p , z ⟩ = ⟨ p , x ⟩ − ⟨ p , x ^ ⟩ by bilinearity of the inner product (Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space (i) ). Hence, with
c 0 = φ ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , x ^ ⟩ + 1 2 b ( x ^ , x ^ ) ∈ R , c_{0}=\varphi(\hat{x})-\langle p,\hat{x}\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}b(\hat{x},\hat{x})\in\mathbb{R}, c 0 = φ ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , x ^ ⟩ + 2 1 b ( x ^ , x ^ ) ∈ R ,
we have T = Q + a + q T=Q+a+q T = Q + a + q , where Q , a , q : H → R Q,a,q:H\to\mathbb{R} Q , a , q : H → R are given by
Q ( x ) = 1 2 b ( x , x ) , a ( x ) = ⟨ p − T b x ^ , x ⟩ + c 0 , q ( x ) = 2 η 2 ∣ x − x ^ ∣ 2 . Q(x)=\tfrac{1}{2}b(x,x),\qquad a(x)=\langle p-T_{b}\hat{x},x\rangle+c_{0},\qquad q(x)=\tfrac{2\eta}{2}\,|x-\hat{x}|^{2}. Q ( x ) = 2 1 b ( x , x ) , a ( x ) = ⟨ p − T b x ^ , x ⟩ + c 0 , q ( x ) = 2 2 η ∣ x − x ^ ∣ 2 .
By claim 2 of Affine and Quadratic Functions on a Real Hilbert Space are of Class C 2 C^2 C 2 , Q ∈ C 2 ( H ) Q\in C^{2}(H) Q ∈ C 2 ( H ) with D Q ( x ) = T b x DQ(x)=T_{b}x D Q ( x ) = T b x and D 2 Q ( x ) = b D^{2}Q(x)=b D 2 Q ( x ) = b ; by claim 1 of that lemma, a ∈ C 2 ( H ) a\in C^{2}(H) a ∈ C 2 ( H ) with D a ( x ) = p − T b x ^ Da(x)=p-T_{b}\hat{x} D a ( x ) = p − T b x ^ and D 2 a ( x ) = 0 S y m D^{2}a(x)=0_{\mathrm{Sym}} D 2 a ( x ) = 0 Sym ; and by claim 3 of that lemma, applied with α = 2 η \alpha=2\eta α = 2 η and y 0 = x ^ y_{0}=\hat{x} y 0 = x ^ , q ∈ C 2 ( H ) q\in C^{2}(H) q ∈ C 2 ( H ) with D q ( x ) = 2 η ( x − x ^ ) Dq(x)=2\eta\,(x-\hat{x}) D q ( x ) = 2 η ( x − x ^ ) and D 2 q ( x ) = 2 η I D^{2}q(x)=2\eta I D 2 q ( x ) = 2 η I . Applying claim 2 of Constants, Sums, Scalar Multiples and Differences of Differentiable Functions on an Open Subset of a Real Inner Product Space twice, T ∈ C 2 ( H ) T\in C^{2}(H) T ∈ C 2 ( H ) and, for every x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H ,
D T ( x ) = T b x + ( p − T b x ^ ) + 2 η ( x − x ^ ) , D 2 T ( x ) = b + 0 S y m + 2 η I = b + 2 η I , DT(x)=T_{b}x+(p-T_{b}\hat{x})+2\eta\,(x-\hat{x}),\qquad D^{2}T(x)=b+0_{\mathrm{Sym}}+2\eta I=b+2\eta I, D T ( x ) = T b x + ( p − T b x ^ ) + 2 η ( x − x ^ ) , D 2 T ( x ) = b + 0 Sym + 2 η I = b + 2 η I ,
the last equality because 0 S y m 0_{\mathrm{Sym}} 0 Sym is the zero vector of the vector space S y m ( H ) \mathrm{Sym}(H) Sym ( H ) , by claim 1 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity .
Taking x = x ^ x=\hat{x} x = x ^ gives D T ( x ^ ) = T b x ^ + p − T b x ^ + 2 η 0 H = p = D φ ( x ^ ) DT(\hat{x})=T_{b}\hat{x}+p-T_{b}\hat{x}+2\eta\,0_{H}=p=D\varphi(\hat{x}) D T ( x ^ ) = T b x ^ + p − T b x ^ + 2 η 0 H = p = D φ ( x ^ ) . Evaluating the defining formula for T T T at x ^ \hat{x} x ^ , the last three terms vanish: x ^ − x ^ = 0 H \hat{x}-\hat{x}=0_{H} x ^ − x ^ = 0 H , ⟨ p , 0 H ⟩ = 0 \langle p,0_{H}\rangle=0 ⟨ p , 0 H ⟩ = 0 by Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space (ii) , ∣ b ( 0 H , 0 H ) ∣ ≤ ∥ b ∥ ∣ 0 H ∣ ∣ 0 H ∣ = 0 |b(0_{H},0_{H})|\le\lVert b\rVert\,|0_{H}|\,|0_{H}|=0 ∣ b ( 0 H , 0 H ) ∣ ≤ ∥ b ∥ ∣ 0 H ∣ ∣ 0 H ∣ = 0 by claim 2 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity so that b ( 0 H , 0 H ) = 0 b(0_{H},0_{H})=0 b ( 0 H , 0 H ) = 0 by claim 1 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field , and ∣ 0 H ∣ 2 = 0 |0_{H}|^{2}=0 ∣ 0 H ∣ 2 = 0 . Hence T ( x ^ ) = φ ( x ^ ) T(\hat{x})=\varphi(\hat{x}) T ( x ^ ) = φ ( x ^ ) .
For the norm bound, D 2 T ( x ) − D 2 φ ( x ^ ) = ( b + 2 η I ) − b = 2 η I D^{2}T(x)-D^{2}\varphi(\hat{x})=(b+2\eta I)-b=2\eta I D 2 T ( x ) − D 2 φ ( x ^ ) = ( b + 2 η I ) − b = 2 η I in the vector space S y m ( H ) \mathrm{Sym}(H) Sym ( H ) . For all x ′ , y ′ ∈ H x',y'\in H x ′ , y ′ ∈ H ,
∣ ( 2 η I ) ( x ′ , y ′ ) ∣ = ∣ 2 η ⟨ x ′ , y ′ ⟩ ∣ = ∣ 2 η ∣ ∣ ⟨ x ′ , y ′ ⟩ ∣ ≤ ∣ 2 η ∣ ∣ x ′ ∣ ∣ y ′ ∣ |(2\eta I)(x',y')|=|2\eta\,\langle x',y'\rangle|=|2\eta|\,|\langle x',y'\rangle|\le|2\eta|\,|x'|\,|y'| ∣ ( 2 η I ) ( x ′ , y ′ ) ∣ = ∣2 η ⟨ x ′ , y ′ ⟩ ∣ = ∣2 η ∣ ∣ ⟨ x ′ , y ′ ⟩ ∣ ≤ ∣2 η ∣ ∣ x ′ ∣ ∣ y ′ ∣
by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction (iv) , claim 4 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field and The Cauchy–Schwarz Inequality in a Real Inner Product Space ; moreover ∣ 2 η ∣ = 2 ∣ η ∣ |2\eta|=2\,|\eta| ∣2 η ∣ = 2 ∣ η ∣ by claim 4 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field , and 0 ≤ 2 ∣ η ∣ 0\le 2|\eta| 0 ≤ 2∣ η ∣ by claim 1 of that lemma and claim 2 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field . Claim 2 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity therefore gives ∥ 2 η I ∥ ≤ 2 ∣ η ∣ \lVert 2\eta I\rVert\le 2|\eta| ∥ 2 η I ∥ ≤ 2∣ η ∣ , which is the asserted bound.
Finally, let U ′ ⊆ H U'\subseteq H U ′ ⊆ H be open in ( H , d ) (H,d) ( H , d ) . By claim 4 of Basic Properties of Differentiability on an Open Subset of a Real Inner Product Space , applied with the open sets U ′ ⊆ H U'\subseteq H U ′ ⊆ H , the restriction of T T T to U ′ U' U ′ belongs to C 2 ( U ′ ) C^{2}(U') C 2 ( U ′ ) and has the gradients and Hessians of T T T at the points of U ′ U' U ′ .
Claim 2. Suppose 0 < η 0<\eta 0 < η . By claim 2 of Segment Derivatives, the Second-Order Taylor Expansion, and the Second-Order Condition at a Local Extremum , applied to φ ∈ C 2 ( U ) \varphi\in C^{2}(U) φ ∈ C 2 ( U ) at the point x ^ \hat{x} x ^ with the positive number η \eta η in the role of its ε \varepsilon ε , there is a positive ρ ∈ R \rho\in\mathbb{R} ρ ∈ R such that every z ∈ H z\in H z ∈ H with ∣ z ∣ < ρ |z|<\rho ∣ z ∣ < ρ satisfies x ^ + z ∈ U \hat{x}+z\in U x ^ + z ∈ U and
∣ φ ( x ^ + z ) − φ ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , z ⟩ − 1 2 b ( z , z ) ∣ ≤ η ∣ z ∣ 2 . \Bigl|\varphi(\hat{x}+z)-\varphi(\hat{x})-\langle p,z\rangle-\tfrac{1}{2}b(z,z)\Bigr|\le\eta\,|z|^{2}. φ ( x ^ + z ) − φ ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , z ⟩ − 2 1 b ( z , z ) ≤ η ∣ z ∣ 2 .
Let x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H satisfy ∣ x − x ^ ∣ < ρ |x-\hat{x}|<\rho ∣ x − x ^ ∣ < ρ and put z = x − x ^ z=x-\hat{x} z = x − x ^ , so that x = x ^ + z x=\hat{x}+z x = x ^ + z and ∣ z ∣ < ρ |z|<\rho ∣ z ∣ < ρ ; then x ∈ U x\in U x ∈ U , and by claim 3 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field together with claim 6 of that lemma,
φ ( x ) − φ ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , z ⟩ − 1 2 b ( z , z ) ≤ η ∣ z ∣ 2 , \varphi(x)-\varphi(\hat{x})-\langle p,z\rangle-\tfrac{1}{2}b(z,z)\le\eta\,|z|^{2}, φ ( x ) − φ ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , z ⟩ − 2 1 b ( z , z ) ≤ η ∣ z ∣ 2 ,
which, rearranged by claim 3 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field , is exactly φ ( x ) ≤ T ( x ) \varphi(x)\le T(x) φ ( x ) ≤ T ( x ) .
Claim 3. Suppose η < 0 \eta<0 η < 0 , so that − η -\eta − η is positive by claim 4 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field . Applying claim 2 of Segment Derivatives, the Second-Order Taylor Expansion, and the Second-Order Condition at a Local Extremum as in claim 2 above, but with − η -\eta − η in the role of its ε \varepsilon ε , we obtain a positive ρ \rho ρ such that every x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H with ∣ x − x ^ ∣ < ρ |x-\hat{x}|<\rho ∣ x − x ^ ∣ < ρ lies in U U U and satisfies, with z = x − x ^ z=x-\hat{x} z = x − x ^ ,
− ( − η ) ∣ z ∣ 2 ≤ φ ( x ) − φ ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , z ⟩ − 1 2 b ( z , z ) , -(-\eta)\,|z|^{2}\le\varphi(x)-\varphi(\hat{x})-\langle p,z\rangle-\tfrac{1}{2}b(z,z), − ( − η ) ∣ z ∣ 2 ≤ φ ( x ) − φ ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , z ⟩ − 2 1 b ( z , z ) ,
again by claim 3 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field and claim 6 of that lemma. Since − ( − η ) = η -(-\eta)=\eta − ( − η ) = η , rearranging by claim 3 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field gives T ( x ) ≤ φ ( x ) T(x)\le\varphi(x) T ( x ) ≤ φ ( x ) .
Claim 4. Suppose 0 < η 0<\eta 0 < η and let ρ \rho ρ be as furnished by claim 2. Let δ 0 \delta_{0} δ 0 be a positive real number witnessing, as in Local Maximum of a Function Relative to a Subset of a Metric Space , that the function with value g ( x ) − φ ( x ) g(x)-\varphi(x) g ( x ) − φ ( x ) at x x x has a local maximum at x ^ \hat{x} x ^ relative to A A A . Put δ 1 = min { δ 0 , ρ } \delta_{1}=\min\{\delta_{0},\rho\} δ 1 = min { δ 0 , ρ } , which is positive and satisfies δ 1 ≤ δ 0 \delta_{1}\le\delta_{0} δ 1 ≤ δ 0 and δ 1 ≤ ρ \delta_{1}\le\rho δ 1 ≤ ρ by claims 1 and 2 of Elementary Properties of the Minimum of Two Elements .
Let y ∈ A y\in A y ∈ A satisfy d ( x ^ , y ) < δ 1 d(\hat{x},y)<\delta_{1} d ( x ^ , y ) < δ 1 . Then d ( x ^ , y ) < ρ d(\hat{x},y)<\rho d ( x ^ , y ) < ρ and d ( x ^ , y ) < δ 0 d(\hat{x},y)<\delta_{0} d ( x ^ , y ) < δ 0 by claim 2 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field . Now ∣ y − x ^ ∣ = d ( y , x ^ ) = d ( x ^ , y ) < ρ |y-\hat{x}|=d(y,\hat{x})=d(\hat{x},y)<\rho ∣ y − x ^ ∣ = d ( y , x ^ ) = d ( x ^ , y ) < ρ by the symmetry axiom , so φ ( y ) ≤ T ( y ) \varphi(y)\le T(y) φ ( y ) ≤ T ( y ) by claim 2; hence 0 ≤ T ( y ) − φ ( y ) 0\le T(y)-\varphi(y) 0 ≤ T ( y ) − φ ( y ) by claim 3 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field , and since
( g ( y ) − φ ( y ) ) − ( g ( y ) − T ( y ) ) = T ( y ) − φ ( y ) , \bigl(g(y)-\varphi(y)\bigr)-\bigl(g(y)-T(y)\bigr)=T(y)-\varphi(y), ( g ( y ) − φ ( y ) ) − ( g ( y ) − T ( y ) ) = T ( y ) − φ ( y ) ,
the same claim gives g ( y ) − T ( y ) ≤ g ( y ) − φ ( y ) g(y)-T(y)\le g(y)-\varphi(y) g ( y ) − T ( y ) ≤ g ( y ) − φ ( y ) . From d ( x ^ , y ) < δ 0 d(\hat{x},y)<\delta_{0} d ( x ^ , y ) < δ 0 we get g ( y ) − φ ( y ) ≤ g ( x ^ ) − φ ( x ^ ) g(y)-\varphi(y)\le g(\hat{x})-\varphi(\hat{x}) g ( y ) − φ ( y ) ≤ g ( x ^ ) − φ ( x ^ ) , and g ( x ^ ) − φ ( x ^ ) = g ( x ^ ) − T ( x ^ ) g(\hat{x})-\varphi(\hat{x})=g(\hat{x})-T(\hat{x}) g ( x ^ ) − φ ( x ^ ) = g ( x ^ ) − T ( x ^ ) because T ( x ^ ) = φ ( x ^ ) T(\hat{x})=\varphi(\hat{x}) T ( x ^ ) = φ ( x ^ ) by claim 1. Combining these by transitivity of the order gives g ( y ) − T ( y ) ≤ g ( x ^ ) − T ( x ^ ) g(y)-T(y)\le g(\hat{x})-T(\hat{x}) g ( y ) − T ( y ) ≤ g ( x ^ ) − T ( x ^ ) . Thus δ 1 \delta_{1} δ 1 witnesses that the function with value g ( x ) − T ( x ) g(x)-T(x) g ( x ) − T ( x ) at x x x has a local maximum at x ^ \hat{x} x ^ relative to A A A .
Claim 5. Suppose η < 0 \eta<0 η < 0 and let ρ \rho ρ be as furnished by claim 3. The argument of claim 4 applies verbatim with Local Minimum of a Function Relative to a Subset of a Metric Space in place of Local Maximum of a Function Relative to a Subset of a Metric Space , using T ( y ) ≤ φ ( y ) T(y)\le\varphi(y) T ( y ) ≤ φ ( y ) from claim 3 in place of φ ( y ) ≤ T ( y ) \varphi(y)\le T(y) φ ( y ) ≤ T ( y ) , which gives g ( y ) − φ ( y ) ≤ g ( y ) − T ( y ) g(y)-\varphi(y)\le g(y)-T(y) g ( y ) − φ ( y ) ≤ g ( y ) − T ( y ) , and the inequality g ( x ^ ) − φ ( x ^ ) ≤ g ( y ) − φ ( y ) g(\hat{x})-\varphi(\hat{x})\le g(y)-\varphi(y) g ( x ^ ) − φ ( x ^ ) ≤ g ( y ) − φ ( y ) in place of its reverse.