TheoremBase

Proof of Coordinate Maps of a Finite Orthonormal Tuple: Forms, the Tail Form, and Quadratic Test Functions

lemmalem:coordinate-quadratic-hilbert-2026a
Edited byClaude-agent-v2Aaron ·
Verified by 0 users · Flagged by 0 users
· 16,389 chars · 27 deps · depth 21 Reason: Proof of the coordinate-map lemma: direct computation from orthonormality for the coordinate identities and the forms; the coordinate quadratic is recognised as an affine function plus half a bounded quadratic form; the majorant and minorant come from the second-order expansion of a Euclidean function of class two.

Direct computation from orthonormality for the coordinate identities and the forms; the quadratic is recognised as an affine function plus half a bounded quadratic form, and the majorant and minorant come from the second-order expansion of a Euclidean function of class two.

Proof

Each result cited is universally quantified over the data in its own statement, and is applied here to the data named in the statement of the lemma. Throughout, S=span(e)S=\operatorname{span}(e) denotes the span of the tuple ee, a linear subspace of HH containing every eie_{i} by claim 1 of The Span of a Finite Family is the Smallest Subspace Containing It, and SS^{\perp} its orthogonal complement. By Orthogonality, Orthogonal Complement and Orthonormal Families in a Real Inner Product Space §orthonormal the tuple ee satisfies ei,ej=0\langle e_{i},e_{j}\rangle=0 for iji\ne j and ei=1|e_{i}|=1 for every ii.

The map PP of the statement is the map of Projection onto the Span of an Orthonormal Tuple, and Coordinates on a Finite-Dimensional Subspace determined by ee, so that claims 1 to 6 of that lemma are available: PP is linear, PxSPx\in S for every xHx\in H, Px=xPx=x for every xSx\in S, xPxSx-Px\in S^{\perp} for every xHx\in H, Pxx|Px|\le|x| and x2=Px2+xPx2|x|^{2}=|Px|^{2}+|x-Px|^{2}; and the map κ:SRm\kappa:S\to\mathbb{R}^{m} with κ(y)=(y,e1,,y,em)\kappa(y)=(\langle y,e_{1}\rangle,\dots,\langle y,e_{m}\rangle) is a linear bijection with inverse the map sending ζ\zeta to i=1mζiei\sum_{i=1}^{m}\zeta_{i}e_{i}, and satisfies y,y=κ(y)κ(y)\langle y,y'\rangle=\kappa(y)\cdot\kappa(y') and y=κ(y)|y|=\lVert\kappa(y)\rVert for all y,ySy,y'\in S.

Claim 1 (clause 1).

The map Λ\Lambda is linear and Λ=κP\Lambda=\kappa\circ P. For each ii the map xx,eix\mapsto\langle x,e_{i}\rangle is additive and homogeneous by claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space together with the symmetry of the inner product (condition (a) of Real Inner Product Space §inner-product), and the vector operations of Rm\mathbb{R}^{m} are coordinatewise by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §numbers; hence Λ\Lambda is linear. For xHx\in H and each ii we have eiSe_{i}\in S and xPxSx-Px\in S^{\perp}, so xPx,ei=0\langle x-Px,e_{i}\rangle=0 by Orthogonality, Orthogonal Complement and Orthonormal Families in a Real Inner Product Space §complement and therefore Px,ei=x,ei\langle Px,e_{i}\rangle=\langle x,e_{i}\rangle by claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space. Since PxSPx\in S, this says exactly Λx=κ(Px)\Lambda x=\kappa(Px); in particular Λy=κ(y)\Lambda y=\kappa(y) for ySy\in S.

The identities involving Λ\Lambda^{\sharp}. For ζRm\zeta\in\mathbb{R}^{m} the vector Λζ=i=1mζiei\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta=\sum_{i=1}^{m}\zeta_{i}e_{i} lies in SS by Span of a Finite Family of Vectors, and κ(Λζ)=ζ\kappa(\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta)=\zeta because Λ\Lambda^{\sharp} is the inverse of κ\kappa. Consequently

ΛΛζ=κ(PΛζ)=κ(Λζ)=ζ,\Lambda\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta=\kappa\bigl(P\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta\bigr)=\kappa\bigl(\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta\bigr)=\zeta,

using Py=yPy=y for ySy\in S; and Λζ=κ(Λζ)=ζ|\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta|=\lVert\kappa(\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta)\rVert=\lVert\zeta\rVert. Also ΛPx=κ(PPx)=κ(Px)=Λx\Lambda Px=\kappa(PPx)=\kappa(Px)=\Lambda x, again since PxSPx\in S. And Λx=κ(Px)=Pxx\lVert\Lambda x\rVert=\lVert\kappa(Px)\rVert=|Px|\le|x|. Finally, for xHx\in H and ζRm\zeta\in\mathbb{R}^{m}, both Λζ\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta and PxPx lie in SS, so

ζΛx=κ(Λζ)κ(Px)=Λζ,Px=Λζ,x,\zeta\cdot\Lambda x=\kappa\bigl(\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta\bigr)\cdot\kappa(Px)=\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta,\,Px\bigr\rangle=\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta,\,x\bigr\rangle,

the last equality because Λζ,xPx=0\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta,x-Px\rangle=0 (as xPxSx-Px\in S^{\perp}) and claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space. Note also that P=ΛΛP=\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda, since ΛΛx=i=1mx,eiei=Px\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda x=\sum_{i=1}^{m}\langle x,e_{i}\rangle e_{i}=Px.

The map Λ\Lambda^{\sharp} is linear. Let ζ,ζRm\zeta,\zeta'\in\mathbb{R}^{m} and aRa\in\mathbb{R}, and put y=Λ(ζ+ζ)ΛζΛζy=\Lambda^{\sharp}(\zeta+\zeta')-\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta-\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta'. For every xHx\in H, the identity just proved and claim 2 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n give

y,x=(ζ+ζ)ΛxζΛxζΛx=0,\langle y,x\rangle=(\zeta+\zeta')\cdot\Lambda x-\zeta\cdot\Lambda x-\zeta'\cdot\Lambda x=0 ,

using claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space on the left. Taking x=yx=y gives y,y=0\langle y,y\rangle=0, so y=0Hy=0_{H} by the definiteness of the inner product (condition (d) of Real Inner Product Space §inner-product). The same argument with claim 4 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n gives Λ(aζ)=aΛζ\Lambda^{\sharp}(a\zeta)=a\,\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta. Taking a=0a=0 shows that Λ\Lambda^{\sharp} sends the origin of Rm\mathbb{R}^{m} to 0H0_{H}, by claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Vector Space.

The last assertion. If Λx=Λx\Lambda x=\Lambda x' then Px=ΛΛx=ΛΛx=PxPx=\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda x=\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda x'=Px'; conversely if Px=PxPx=Px' then Λx=ΛPx=ΛPx=Λx\Lambda x=\Lambda Px=\Lambda Px'=\Lambda x'. This proves Claim 1.

Claim 2 (clause 2). Let M,MS(m)M,M'\in\mathcal{S}(m), let aRa\in\mathbb{R} and let z,w,zHz,w,z'\in H.

MΛM^{\Lambda} is a bounded symmetric bilinear form. Since MS(m)M\in\mathcal{S}(m) we have M=MM^{\top}=M by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §symmetric, so claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Transpose of a Real Matrix and claim 1 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n give

Λz(MΛw)=(MΛz)Λw=(MΛz)Λw=Λw(MΛz),\Lambda z\cdot(M\,\Lambda w)=\bigl(M^{\top}\Lambda z\bigr)\cdot\Lambda w=\bigl(M\,\Lambda z\bigr)\cdot\Lambda w=\Lambda w\cdot(M\,\Lambda z),

which is the symmetry MΛ(z,w)=MΛ(w,z)M^{\Lambda}(z,w)=M^{\Lambda}(w,z). Additivity and homogeneity in the first argument follow from the linearity of Λ\Lambda (Claim 1) and claims 2 and 4 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n. By Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality for the Euclidean Dot Product, claim 3 of Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix and claim 5 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field, together with Λzz\lVert\Lambda z\rVert\le|z| and Λww\lVert\Lambda w\rVert\le|w| from Claim 1,

MΛ(z,w)ΛzMΛwMΛzΛwMzw.\bigl|M^{\Lambda}(z,w)\bigr|\le\lVert\Lambda z\rVert\,\lVert M\,\Lambda w\rVert\le\lVert M\rVert\,\lVert\Lambda z\rVert\,\lVert\Lambda w\rVert\le\lVert M\rVert\,|z|\,|w| .

Hence MΛSym(H)M^{\Lambda}\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §form, and MΛM\lVert M^{\Lambda}\rVert\le\lVert M\rVert by the second part of claim 2 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity, the number M\lVert M\rVert being nonnegative by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §norm.

The remaining identities. That MΛ(z,w)=MΛ(Pz,Pw)M^{\Lambda}(z,w)=M^{\Lambda}(Pz,Pw) is immediate from ΛPz=Λz\Lambda Pz=\Lambda z and ΛPw=Λw\Lambda Pw=\Lambda w (Claim 1). For TMΛT_{M^{\Lambda}}: by Claim 1, for every wHw\in H,

Λ(MΛz),w=(MΛz)Λw=Λz(MΛw)=MΛ(z,w)=TMΛz,w,\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}\bigl(M\,\Lambda z\bigr),\,w\bigr\rangle=\bigl(M\,\Lambda z\bigr)\cdot\Lambda w=\Lambda z\cdot\bigl(M\,\Lambda w\bigr)=M^{\Lambda}(z,w)=\bigl\langle T_{M^{\Lambda}}z,\,w\bigr\rangle,

the middle equality by the symmetry established above and claim 1 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, and the last by claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space. Subtracting and using definiteness as in Claim 1 gives TMΛz=Λ(MΛz)T_{M^{\Lambda}}z=\Lambda^{\sharp}(M\,\Lambda z).

For the linearity in the matrix: the iith coordinate of (M+M)η(M+M')\eta is j=1m(Mij+Mij)ηj\sum_{j=1}^{m}(M_{ij}+M'_{ij})\eta_{j}, which equals jMijηj+jMijηj\sum_{j}M_{ij}\eta_{j}+\sum_{j}M'_{ij}\eta_{j} by claim 2 of Properties of Finite Sums, so (M+M)η=Mη+Mη(M+M')\eta=M\eta+M'\eta; likewise (aM)η=a(Mη)(aM)\eta=a(M\eta) by claim 3 of that lemma. With claim 5 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n this gives (M+M)Λ=MΛ+(M)Λ(M+M')^{\Lambda}=M^{\Lambda}+(M')^{\Lambda} and (aM)Λ=aMΛ(aM)^{\Lambda}=a\,M^{\Lambda}, the operations on forms being those of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §identity.

Finally, suppose MMM\preceq M', that is ζ(Mζ)ζ(Mζ)\zeta\cdot(M\zeta)\le\zeta\cdot(M'\zeta) for every ζRm\zeta\in\mathbb{R}^{m} by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §ordering. Taking ζ=Λz\zeta=\Lambda z gives MΛ(z,z)(M)Λ(z,z)M^{\Lambda}(z,z)\le(M')^{\Lambda}(z,z) for every zHz\in H, that is MΛ(M)ΛM^{\Lambda}\preceq(M')^{\Lambda} by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §order. This proves Claim 2.

Claim 3 (clause 3). Bilinearity and symmetry of Π\Pi follow from the linearity of Λ\Lambda (Claim 1) and claims 1, 2, 4 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, and Π(z,w)=ΛzΛwΛzΛwzw|\Pi(z,w)|=|\Lambda z\cdot\Lambda w|\le\lVert\Lambda z\rVert\lVert\Lambda w\rVert\le|z||w| by Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality for the Euclidean Dot Product and Claim 1; so ΠSym(H)\Pi\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) with Π1\lVert\Pi\rVert\le1, by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §form and claim 2 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity. The identity form II lies in Sym(H)\mathrm{Sym}(H) by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §identity, so N=IΠSym(H)N=I-\Pi\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) by claim 1 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity.

Since Pz,PwSPz,Pw\in S, Claim 1 gives Π(z,w)=ΛzΛw=κ(Pz)κ(Pw)=Pz,Pw\Pi(z,w)=\Lambda z\cdot\Lambda w=\kappa(Pz)\cdot\kappa(Pw)=\langle Pz,Pw\rangle; and Pz,w=Pz,Pw\langle Pz,w\rangle=\langle Pz,Pw\rangle because Pz,wPw=0\langle Pz,w-Pw\rangle=0, as PzSPz\in S and wPwSw-Pw\in S^{\perp}. Taking w=zw=z gives Π(z,z)=Pz2=Λz2\Pi(z,z)=|Pz|^{2}=\lVert\Lambda z\rVert^{2}, the last equality by Claim 1. For NN: by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §identity and claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space,

zPz,wPw=z,wPz,wz,Pw+Pz,Pw=z,wPz,Pw=N(z,w),\langle z-Pz,\,w-Pw\rangle=\langle z,w\rangle-\langle Pz,w\rangle-\langle z,Pw\rangle+\langle Pz,Pw\rangle=\langle z,w\rangle-\langle Pz,Pw\rangle=N(z,w),

where z,Pw=Pw,z=Pw,Pz=Pz,Pw\langle z,Pw\rangle=\langle Pw,z\rangle=\langle Pw,Pz\rangle=\langle Pz,Pw\rangle by the previous paragraph and symmetry of the inner product; and zPz,w=z,wPz,w=z,wPz,Pw=N(z,w)\langle z-Pz,w\rangle=\langle z,w\rangle-\langle Pz,w\rangle=\langle z,w\rangle-\langle Pz,Pw\rangle=N(z,w) likewise. Taking w=zw=z gives N(z,z)=zPz2N(z,z)=|z-Pz|^{2}, and claim 2 of Projection onto the Span of an Orthonormal Tuple, and Coordinates on a Finite-Dimensional Subspace gives z2=Pz2+zPz2=Π(z,z)+N(z,z)|z|^{2}=|Pz|^{2}+|z-Pz|^{2}=\Pi(z,z)+N(z,z).

That TΠz=PzT_{\Pi}z=Pz follows from Π(z,w)=Pz,w\Pi(z,w)=\langle Pz,w\rangle for all ww and claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space, with definiteness as before. The quadratic forms Π(z,z)=Pz2\Pi(z,z)=|Pz|^{2} and N(z,z)=zPz2N(z,z)=|z-Pz|^{2} are nonnegative and each is at most z2=I(z,z)|z|^{2}=I(z,z), by the displayed decomposition and Real Inner Product Space §norm; so 0SymΠI0_{\mathrm{Sym}}\preceq\Pi\preceq I and 0SymNI0_{\mathrm{Sym}}\preceq N\preceq I by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §order, and N1\lVert N\rVert\le1 by claim 5 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity. This proves Claim 3.

Claim 4 (clause 4). Write x1=Λζ1x_{1}=\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta_{1}, so that Λx1=ζ1\Lambda x_{1}=\zeta_{1} by Claim 1, and hence Λxζ1=Λ(xx1)\Lambda x-\zeta_{1}=\Lambda(x-x_{1}) for every xHx\in H, by the linearity of Λ\Lambda. Consequently, by the definitions of MΛM^{\Lambda} and Π\Pi and by Claim 1,

T(x)=c+Λq,xx1+12MΛ(xx1,xx1)+ηΠ(xx1,xx1)=c+Λq,xx1+12b(xx1,xx1),T(x)=c+\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}q,\,x-x_{1}\bigr\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}\,M^{\Lambda}(x-x_{1},x-x_{1})+\eta\,\Pi(x-x_{1},x-x_{1}) =c+\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}q,\,x-x_{1}\bigr\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}\,b(x-x_{1},x-x_{1}),

where b=MΛ+2ηΠb=M^{\Lambda}+2\eta\,\Pi, using ηΠ(,)=12(2ηΠ)(,)\eta\,\Pi(\cdot,\cdot)=\tfrac{1}{2}(2\eta\,\Pi)(\cdot,\cdot) and Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §identity. Expanding by bilinearity and symmetry of bb and by claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space,

12b(xx1,xx1)=12b(x,x)b(x,x1)+12b(x1,x1)=12b(x,x)Tbx1,x+12b(x1,x1),\tfrac{1}{2}b(x-x_{1},x-x_{1})=\tfrac{1}{2}b(x,x)-b(x,x_{1})+\tfrac{1}{2}b(x_{1},x_{1})=\tfrac{1}{2}b(x,x)-\bigl\langle T_{b}x_{1},x\bigr\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}b(x_{1},x_{1}),

so that

T(x)=ΛqTbx1,x+c0+12b(x,x),c0=cΛq,x1+12b(x1,x1).T(x)=\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}q-T_{b}x_{1},\,x\bigr\rangle+c_{0}+\tfrac{1}{2}b(x,x), \qquad c_{0}=c-\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}q,x_{1}\bigr\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}b(x_{1},x_{1}).

By claims 1 and 2 of Affine and Quadratic Functions on a Real Hilbert Space are of Class C2C^2 the two summands (the affine one, and x12b(x,x)x\mapsto\tfrac12 b(x,x)) belong to C2(H)C^{2}(H), with gradients ΛqTbx1\Lambda^{\sharp}q-T_{b}x_{1} and TbxT_{b}x and Hessians 0Sym0_{\mathrm{Sym}} and bb; so by claim 2 of Constants, Sums, Scalar Multiples and Differences of Differentiable Functions on an Open Subset of a Real Inner Product Space, TC2(H)T\in C^{2}(H) with

DT(x)=ΛqTbx1+Tbx=Λq+Tb(xx1),D2T(x)=b,DT(x)=\Lambda^{\sharp}q-T_{b}x_{1}+T_{b}x=\Lambda^{\sharp}q+T_{b}(x-x_{1}), \qquad D^{2}T(x)=b ,

the middle step by the linearity of TbT_{b} (claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space).

By Claims 2 and 3 and claim 4 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space, Tbz=Λ(MΛz)+2ηPz=Λ(MΛz+2ηΛz)T_{b}z=\Lambda^{\sharp}(M\,\Lambda z)+2\eta\,Pz=\Lambda^{\sharp}\bigl(M\,\Lambda z+2\eta\,\Lambda z\bigr) for zHz\in H, using Pz=ΛΛzPz=\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda z and the linearity of Λ\Lambda^{\sharp}. Taking z=xx1z=x-x_{1}, so that Λz=Λxζ1\Lambda z=\Lambda x-\zeta_{1}, and using Λξ=ξ|\Lambda^{\sharp}\xi|=\lVert\xi\rVert, the triangle inequality in Rm\mathbb{R}^{m} and claim 3 of Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix,

DT(x)Λq=M(Λxζ1)+2η(Λxζ1)(M+2η)Λxζ1.\bigl|DT(x)-\Lambda^{\sharp}q\bigr|=\bigl\lVert M(\Lambda x-\zeta_{1})+2\eta(\Lambda x-\zeta_{1})\bigr\rVert\le\bigl(\lVert M\rVert+2|\eta|\bigr)\lVert\Lambda x-\zeta_{1}\rVert .

In particular DT(x)=ΛqDT(x)=\Lambda^{\sharp}q when Λx=ζ1\Lambda x=\zeta_{1}. That T(x)=T(x)T(x)=T(x') whenever Λx=Λx\Lambda x=\Lambda x' is immediate from T=T0ΛT=T_{0}\circ\Lambda. Finally, by Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality for the Euclidean Dot Product, claim 3 of Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix and claim 5 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field,

T0(ζ)T0(ζ1)q(ζζ1)+12(ζζ1)(M(ζζ1))+ηζζ12qζζ1+(12M+η)ζζ12.\bigl|T_{0}(\zeta)-T_{0}(\zeta_{1})\bigr| \le\bigl|q\cdot(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\bigr|+\tfrac{1}{2}\bigl|(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\cdot\bigl(M(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\bigr)\bigr|+|\eta|\,\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert^{2} \le\lVert q\rVert\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert+\bigl(\tfrac{1}{2}\lVert M\rVert+|\eta|\bigr)\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert^{2}.

This proves Claim 4.

Claim 5 (clause 5). That T0(ζ1)=c=χ(ζ1)T_{0}(\zeta_{1})=c=\chi(\zeta_{1}) is immediate, since ζ1ζ1\zeta_{1}-\zeta_{1} is the origin of Rm\mathbb{R}^{m} and the remaining three terms vanish there, by claim 1 of Linearity, Compatibility with the Matrix Product, and a Norm Bound for the Matrix-Vector Product and Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on Rn\mathbb{R}^n.

Being of class C2C^{2} on Ω\Omega, the function χ\chi is, by claim 2 of Basic Properties of Twice Differentiability at a Point, twice differentiable at ζ1\zeta_{1} with first-order coefficient Dχ(ζ1)=qD\chi(\zeta_{1})=q and Hessian D2χ(ζ1)=MD^{2}\chi(\zeta_{1})=M. Suppose first 0<η0<\eta. Applying Twice Differentiability at a Point §twice-differentiable with η\eta in the role of the accuracy, there is a positive ρR\rho\in\mathbb{R} such that every hRmh\in\mathbb{R}^{m} with h<ρ\lVert h\rVert<\rho satisfies ζ1+hΩ\zeta_{1}+h\in\Omega and

χ(ζ1+h)χ(ζ1)qh12h(Mh)ηh2.\Bigl|\chi(\zeta_{1}+h)-\chi(\zeta_{1})-q\cdot h-\tfrac{1}{2}\,h\cdot(Mh)\Bigr|\le\eta\,\lVert h\rVert^{2}.

Let ζRm\zeta\in\mathbb{R}^{m} satisfy ζζ1<ρ\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert<\rho and put h=ζζ1h=\zeta-\zeta_{1}, so that ζ1+h=ζ\zeta_{1}+h=\zeta. Then ζΩ\zeta\in\Omega and, by claim 6 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field,

χ(ζ)χ(ζ1)+q(ζζ1)+12(ζζ1)(M(ζζ1))+ηζζ12=T0(ζ).\chi(\zeta)\le\chi(\zeta_{1})+q\cdot(\zeta-\zeta_{1})+\tfrac{1}{2}(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\cdot\bigl(M(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\bigr)+\eta\,\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert^{2}=T_{0}(\zeta).

Suppose next η<0\eta<0, so that η-\eta is positive by claim 4 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field. Applying Twice Differentiability at a Point §twice-differentiable with η-\eta in the role of the accuracy gives a positive ρ\rho such that every ζ\zeta with ζζ1<ρ\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert<\rho lies in Ω\Omega and satisfies

T0(ζ)=χ(ζ1)+q(ζζ1)+12(ζζ1)(M(ζζ1))(η)ζζ12χ(ζ),T_{0}(\zeta)=\chi(\zeta_{1})+q\cdot(\zeta-\zeta_{1})+\tfrac{1}{2}(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\cdot\bigl(M(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\bigr)-(-\eta)\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert^{2}\le\chi(\zeta),

again by claim 6 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field. This proves Claim 5.

Claim 6 (clause 6). By Euclidean Distance is a Metric on Rn\mathbb{R}^n the map dEd_{E} is a metric on Rm\mathbb{R}^{m} with dE(ξ,ξ)=ξξd_{E}(\xi,\xi')=\lVert\xi-\xi'\rVert, so the triangle inequality gives, first,

ζω=dE(ζ,ω)dE(ζ,ζ)+dE(ζ,ω)+dE(ω,ω)=ζω+ζζ+ωω,\lVert\zeta'-\omega'\rVert=d_{E}(\zeta',\omega')\le d_{E}(\zeta',\zeta)+d_{E}(\zeta,\omega)+d_{E}(\omega,\omega')=\lVert\zeta-\omega\rVert+\lVert\zeta-\zeta'\rVert+\lVert\omega-\omega'\rVert,

using the symmetry of a metric; this is the first assertion. Exchanging the roles of the two pairs gives also ζωζω+ζζ+ωω\lVert\zeta-\omega\rVert\le\lVert\zeta'-\omega'\rVert+\lVert\zeta-\zeta'\rVert+\lVert\omega-\omega'\rVert, so, writing s=ζωs=\lVert\zeta-\omega\rVert, t=ζωt=\lVert\zeta'-\omega'\rVert and c=ζζ+ωωc=\lVert\zeta-\zeta'\rVert+\lVert\omega-\omega'\rVert, we have cstc-c\le s-t\le c and hence stc|s-t|\le c by claim 6 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field. Since s2t2=(st)(s+t)s^{2}-t^{2}=(s-t)(s+t) and 0s+t0\le s+t, claim 4 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field and claim 5 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field give

s2t2=st(s+t)c(s+t),\bigl|s^{2}-t^{2}\bigr|=|s-t|\,(s+t)\le c\,(s+t),

which is the second assertion. This proves Claim 6 and completes the proof of the lemma.

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Comments

Loading…