Throughout, the notation is that of the statement; R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M is open, so it is an admissible domain for Quadruple Approximable by Test-Function Data and for Transfer of a Test Function from the Sup-Convolution to the Original Function . Put
L = v λ ( η 0 ) + 1 2 λ − 1 ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 , Θ = 2 + λ − 1 + 1 2 λ − 1 ( 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + 1 ) . L=v^{\lambda}(\eta_{0})+\tfrac{1}{2}\,\lambda^{-1}\lVert q_{0}\rVert^{2},\qquad \Theta=2+\lambda^{-1}+\tfrac{1}{2}\,\lambda^{-1}\bigl(2\lVert q_{0}\rVert+1\bigr). L = v λ ( η 0 ) + 2 1 λ − 1 ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 , Θ = 2 + λ − 1 + 2 1 λ − 1 ( 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + 1 ) .
Since 0 < λ − 1 0<\lambda^{-1} 0 < λ − 1 and 0 ≤ ∥ q 0 ∥ 0\le\lVert q_{0}\rVert 0 ≤ ∥ q 0 ∥ by claim 1 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , every summand after the leading 2 2 2 in Θ \Theta Θ is nonnegative, so 1 ≤ Θ 1\le\Theta 1 ≤ Θ ; in particular 0 < Θ 0<\Theta 0 < Θ , and Θ − 1 \Theta^{-1} Θ − 1 exists and is positive by claim 7 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field .
Step 1 (the basic construction). Let ε ′ ∈ R \varepsilon'\in\mathbb{R} ε ′ ∈ R satisfy 0 < ε ′ ≤ 1 0<\varepsilon'\le1 0 < ε ′ ≤ 1 . Then there are y ∈ R M y\in\mathbb{R}^{M} y ∈ R M and a function ψ : R M → R \psi:\mathbb{R}^{M}\to\mathbb{R} ψ : R M → R of class C 2 C^{2} C 2 on R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M such that v − ψ v-\psi v − ψ has a local maximum at y y y relative to R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M and
d E ( y , z 0 ) ≤ Θ ε ′ , ∣ v ( y ) − L ∣ ≤ Θ ε ′ , ∥ D ψ ( y ) − q 0 ∥ ≤ Θ ε ′ , d S ( M ) ( D 2 ψ ( y ) , Y ) ≤ Θ ε ′ . d_{E}(y,z_{0})\le\Theta\varepsilon',\quad \bigl|v(y)-L\bigr|\le\Theta\varepsilon',\quad \bigl\lVert D\psi(y)-q_{0}\bigr\rVert\le\Theta\varepsilon',\quad d_{\mathcal{S}(M)}\bigl(D^{2}\psi(y),Y\bigr)\le\Theta\varepsilon'. d E ( y , z 0 ) ≤ Θ ε ′ , v ( y ) − L ≤ Θ ε ′ , D ψ ( y ) − q 0 ≤ Θ ε ′ , d S ( M ) ( D 2 ψ ( y ) , Y ) ≤ Θ ε ′ .
Indeed, by hypothesis the quadruple ( η 0 , v λ ( η 0 ) , q 0 , Y ) \bigl(\eta_{0},v^{\lambda}(\eta_{0}),q_{0},Y\bigr) ( η 0 , v λ ( η 0 ) , q 0 , Y ) is approximable by test data from above for v λ v^{\lambda} v λ , so clause 1 of Quadruple Approximable by Test-Function Data , applied with the positive real number ε ′ \varepsilon' ε ′ , provides η ∈ R M \eta\in\mathbb{R}^{M} η ∈ R M and a function φ : R M → R \varphi:\mathbb{R}^{M}\to\mathbb{R} φ : R M → R of class C 2 C^{2} C 2 on R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M such that v λ − φ v^{\lambda}-\varphi v λ − φ has a local maximum at η \eta η relative to R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M and, writing q = D φ ( η ) ∈ R M q=D\varphi(\eta)\in\mathbb{R}^{M} q = D φ ( η ) ∈ R M and Y ′ = D 2 φ ( η ) ∈ S ( M ) Y'=D^{2}\varphi(\eta)\in\mathcal{S}(M) Y ′ = D 2 φ ( η ) ∈ S ( M ) ,
d E ( η , η 0 ) < ε ′ , ∣ v λ ( η ) − v λ ( η 0 ) ∣ < ε ′ , ∥ q − q 0 ∥ < ε ′ , d S ( M ) ( Y ′ , Y ) < ε ′ . d_{E}(\eta,\eta_{0})<\varepsilon',\quad \bigl|v^{\lambda}(\eta)-v^{\lambda}(\eta_{0})\bigr|<\varepsilon',\quad \lVert q-q_{0}\rVert<\varepsilon',\quad d_{\mathcal{S}(M)}(Y',Y)<\varepsilon'. d E ( η , η 0 ) < ε ′ , v λ ( η ) − v λ ( η 0 ) < ε ′ , ∥ q − q 0 ∥ < ε ′ , d S ( M ) ( Y ′ , Y ) < ε ′ .
The hypotheses of Transfer of a Test Function from the Sup-Convolution to the Original Function are met, with the present M M M , v v v , C C C , λ \lambda λ and v λ v^{\lambda} v λ , with U = R M U=\mathbb{R}^{M} U = R M , with the point η \eta η and with the test function φ \varphi φ . Choose y ∈ R M y\in\mathbb{R}^{M} y ∈ R M with
v λ ( η ) = v ( y ) − λ 2 ∥ y − η ∥ 2 , v^{\lambda}(\eta)=v(y)-\frac{\lambda}{2}\,\lVert y-\eta\rVert^{2}, v λ ( η ) = v ( y ) − 2 λ ∥ y − η ∥ 2 ,
one such point existing by claim 2 of The Sup-Convolution of an Upper Semicontinuous Function Attains its Supremum , put z = y − η z=y-\eta z = y − η and let ψ \psi ψ be the function φ z \varphi_{z} φ z of that lemma, given by ψ ( x ) = φ ( x − z ) \psi(x)=\varphi(x-z) ψ ( x ) = φ ( x − z ) on
U ′ = { x ∈ R M : x − z ∈ R M } = R M . U'=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^{M}:x-z\in\mathbb{R}^{M}\}=\mathbb{R}^{M}. U ′ = { x ∈ R M : x − z ∈ R M } = R M .
Its three claims give
y = η + λ − 1 q , v ( y ) = v λ ( η ) + 1 2 λ − 1 ∥ q ∥ 2 , y=\eta+\lambda^{-1}q,\qquad v(y)=v^{\lambda}(\eta)+\tfrac{1}{2}\,\lambda^{-1}\lVert q\rVert^{2}, y = η + λ − 1 q , v ( y ) = v λ ( η ) + 2 1 λ − 1 ∥ q ∥ 2 ,
and: ψ \psi ψ is of class C 2 C^{2} C 2 on R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M , D ψ ( y ) = q D\psi(y)=q D ψ ( y ) = q , D 2 ψ ( y ) = Y ′ D^{2}\psi(y)=Y' D 2 ψ ( y ) = Y ′ , and v − ψ v-\psi v − ψ has a local maximum at y y y relative to R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M .
Since 1 ≤ Θ 1\le\Theta 1 ≤ Θ and 0 < ε ′ 0<\varepsilon' 0 < ε ′ we have ε ′ ≤ Θ ε ′ \varepsilon'\le\Theta\varepsilon' ε ′ ≤ Θ ε ′ , so the third and the fourth of the asserted bounds follow at once from ∥ q − q 0 ∥ < ε ′ \lVert q-q_{0}\rVert<\varepsilon' ∥ q − q 0 ∥ < ε ′ and d S ( M ) ( Y ′ , Y ) < ε ′ d_{\mathcal{S}(M)}(Y',Y)<\varepsilon' d S ( M ) ( Y ′ , Y ) < ε ′ .
For the first, the vector space identities of Euclidean Space R n \mathbb{R}^n R n is a Real Vector Space give
y − z 0 = ( η + λ − 1 q ) − ( η 0 + λ − 1 q 0 ) = ( η − η 0 ) + λ − 1 ( q − q 0 ) , y-z_{0}=\bigl(\eta+\lambda^{-1}q\bigr)-\bigl(\eta_{0}+\lambda^{-1}q_{0}\bigr)=(\eta-\eta_{0})+\lambda^{-1}(q-q_{0}), y − z 0 = ( η + λ − 1 q ) − ( η 0 + λ − 1 q 0 ) = ( η − η 0 ) + λ − 1 ( q − q 0 ) ,
so by claim 6 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n (the triangle inequality) and claim 5 there (homogeneity), with ∣ λ − 1 ∣ = λ − 1 |\lambda^{-1}|=\lambda^{-1} ∣ λ − 1 ∣ = λ − 1 because λ − 1 \lambda^{-1} λ − 1 is positive,
d E ( y , z 0 ) = ∥ y − z 0 ∥ ≤ ∥ η − η 0 ∥ + λ − 1 ∥ q − q 0 ∥ ≤ ε ′ + λ − 1 ε ′ = ( 1 + λ − 1 ) ε ′ ≤ Θ ε ′ . d_{E}(y,z_{0})=\lVert y-z_{0}\rVert\le\lVert\eta-\eta_{0}\rVert+\lambda^{-1}\lVert q-q_{0}\rVert\le\varepsilon'+\lambda^{-1}\varepsilon'=\bigl(1+\lambda^{-1}\bigr)\varepsilon'\le\Theta\varepsilon'. d E ( y , z 0 ) = ∥ y − z 0 ∥ ≤ ∥ η − η 0 ∥ + λ − 1 ∥ q − q 0 ∥ ≤ ε ′ + λ − 1 ε ′ = ( 1 + λ − 1 ) ε ′ ≤ Θ ε ′ .
For the second, subtracting the two displayed value identities gives
v ( y ) − L = ( v λ ( η ) − v λ ( η 0 ) ) + 1 2 λ − 1 ( ∥ q ∥ 2 − ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 ) . v(y)-L=\bigl(v^{\lambda}(\eta)-v^{\lambda}(\eta_{0})\bigr)+\tfrac{1}{2}\,\lambda^{-1}\bigl(\lVert q\rVert^{2}-\lVert q_{0}\rVert^{2}\bigr). v ( y ) − L = ( v λ ( η ) − v λ ( η 0 ) ) + 2 1 λ − 1 ( ∥ q ∥ 2 − ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 ) .
Applying Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix §quadratic-comparison with the matrix I M I_{M} I M , and using Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix §identity in the case a = 1 a=1 a = 1 , which gives x ⋅ ( I M x ) = ∥ x ∥ 2 x\cdot(I_{M}x)=\lVert x\rVert^{2} x ⋅ ( I M x ) = ∥ x ∥ 2 for every x x x and ∥ I M ∥ = 1 \lVert I_{M}\rVert=1 ∥ I M ∥ = 1 , we obtain
∣ ∥ q ∥ 2 − ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 ∣ ≤ ∥ q − q 0 ∥ ∥ q + q 0 ∥ . \bigl|\lVert q\rVert^{2}-\lVert q_{0}\rVert^{2}\bigr|\le\lVert q-q_{0}\rVert\,\lVert q+q_{0}\rVert . ∥ q ∥ 2 − ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ q − q 0 ∥ ∥ q + q 0 ∥ .
By the triangle inequality ∥ q ∥ ≤ ∥ q − q 0 ∥ + ∥ q 0 ∥ < ε ′ + ∥ q 0 ∥ \lVert q\rVert\le\lVert q-q_{0}\rVert+\lVert q_{0}\rVert<\varepsilon'+\lVert q_{0}\rVert ∥ q ∥ ≤ ∥ q − q 0 ∥ + ∥ q 0 ∥ < ε ′ + ∥ q 0 ∥ , whence
∥ q + q 0 ∥ ≤ ∥ q ∥ + ∥ q 0 ∥ < 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + ε ′ ≤ 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + 1. \lVert q+q_{0}\rVert\le\lVert q\rVert+\lVert q_{0}\rVert<2\lVert q_{0}\rVert+\varepsilon'\le 2\lVert q_{0}\rVert+1 . ∥ q + q 0 ∥ ≤ ∥ q ∥ + ∥ q 0 ∥ < 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + ε ′ ≤ 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + 1.
Combining, and using claims 5 and 4 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field (the triangle inequality and multiplicativity of the absolute value),
∣ v ( y ) − L ∣ ≤ ε ′ + 1 2 λ − 1 ε ′ ( 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + 1 ) = ( 1 + 1 2 λ − 1 ( 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + 1 ) ) ε ′ ≤ Θ ε ′ . \bigl|v(y)-L\bigr|\le\varepsilon'+\tfrac{1}{2}\,\lambda^{-1}\,\varepsilon'\bigl(2\lVert q_{0}\rVert+1\bigr)=\Bigl(1+\tfrac{1}{2}\,\lambda^{-1}\bigl(2\lVert q_{0}\rVert+1\bigr)\Bigr)\varepsilon'\le\Theta\varepsilon'. v ( y ) − L ≤ ε ′ + 2 1 λ − 1 ε ′ ( 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + 1 ) = ( 1 + 2 1 λ − 1 ( 2 ∥ q 0 ∥ + 1 ) ) ε ′ ≤ Θ ε ′ .
This proves Step 1.
Step 2 (proof of claim 1). We first show v ( z 0 ) ≤ L v(z_{0})\le L v ( z 0 ) ≤ L . By Sup-Convolution of a Function on R M \mathbb{R}^M R M the number v λ ( η 0 ) v^{\lambda}(\eta_{0}) v λ ( η 0 ) is an upper bound for the set S λ , v ( η 0 ) S_{\lambda,v}(\eta_{0}) S λ , v ( η 0 ) , so taking the point z 0 z_{0} z 0 in that set,
v ( z 0 ) − λ 2 ∥ z 0 − η 0 ∥ 2 ≤ v λ ( η 0 ) . v(z_{0})-\frac{\lambda}{2}\,\lVert z_{0}-\eta_{0}\rVert^{2}\le v^{\lambda}(\eta_{0}). v ( z 0 ) − 2 λ ∥ z 0 − η 0 ∥ 2 ≤ v λ ( η 0 ) .
Here z 0 − η 0 = λ − 1 q 0 z_{0}-\eta_{0}=\lambda^{-1}q_{0} z 0 − η 0 = λ − 1 q 0 , so ∥ z 0 − η 0 ∥ = λ − 1 ∥ q 0 ∥ \lVert z_{0}-\eta_{0}\rVert=\lambda^{-1}\lVert q_{0}\rVert ∥ z 0 − η 0 ∥ = λ − 1 ∥ q 0 ∥ by claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , hence ∥ z 0 − η 0 ∥ 2 = λ − 1 λ − 1 ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 \lVert z_{0}-\eta_{0}\rVert^{2}=\lambda^{-1}\lambda^{-1}\lVert q_{0}\rVert^{2} ∥ z 0 − η 0 ∥ 2 = λ − 1 λ − 1 ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 and, since λ λ − 1 = 1 \lambda\lambda^{-1}=1 λ λ − 1 = 1 ,
λ 2 ∥ z 0 − η 0 ∥ 2 = 1 2 λ − 1 ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 . \frac{\lambda}{2}\,\lVert z_{0}-\eta_{0}\rVert^{2}=\tfrac{1}{2}\,\lambda^{-1}\lVert q_{0}\rVert^{2}. 2 λ ∥ z 0 − η 0 ∥ 2 = 2 1 λ − 1 ∥ q 0 ∥ 2 .
Therefore v ( z 0 ) ≤ L v(z_{0})\le L v ( z 0 ) ≤ L .
We now show L ≤ v ( z 0 ) L\le v(z_{0}) L ≤ v ( z 0 ) . Suppose, for a contradiction, that v ( z 0 ) < L v(z_{0})<L v ( z 0 ) < L , and put
ε = ( L − v ( z 0 ) ) ⋅ 2 − 1 ⋅ 2 − 1 , \varepsilon=\bigl(L-v(z_{0})\bigr)\cdot 2^{-1}\cdot 2^{-1}, ε = ( L − v ( z 0 ) ) ⋅ 2 − 1 ⋅ 2 − 1 ,
which is positive by claim 8 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field applied twice. Since v v v is upper semicontinuous at z 0 z_{0} z 0 relative to R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M , there is a positive δ ∈ R \delta\in\mathbb{R} δ ∈ R such that every x ∈ R M x\in\mathbb{R}^{M} x ∈ R M with d E ( z 0 , x ) < δ d_{E}(z_{0},x)<\delta d E ( z 0 , x ) < δ satisfies v ( x ) < v ( z 0 ) + ε v(x)<v(z_{0})+\varepsilon v ( x ) < v ( z 0 ) + ε . Put
ε ′ = min { 1 , δ Θ − 1 2 − 1 , ε Θ − 1 2 − 1 } , \varepsilon'=\min\bigl\{\,1,\ \delta\,\Theta^{-1}2^{-1},\ \varepsilon\,\Theta^{-1}2^{-1}\,\bigr\}, ε ′ = min { 1 , δ Θ − 1 2 − 1 , ε Θ − 1 2 − 1 } ,
which exists by claim 9 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field applied twice and is positive by claims 5, 7 and 8 there. Let y y y and ψ \psi ψ be as furnished by Step 1 for this ε ′ \varepsilon' ε ′ . From ε ′ ≤ δ Θ − 1 2 − 1 \varepsilon'\le\delta\,\Theta^{-1}2^{-1} ε ′ ≤ δ Θ − 1 2 − 1 and 0 < Θ 0<\Theta 0 < Θ we get Θ ε ′ ≤ δ ⋅ 2 − 1 < δ \Theta\varepsilon'\le\delta\cdot2^{-1}<\delta Θ ε ′ ≤ δ ⋅ 2 − 1 < δ , so
d E ( z 0 , y ) = d E ( y , z 0 ) ≤ Θ ε ′ < δ d_{E}(z_{0},y)=d_{E}(y,z_{0})\le\Theta\varepsilon'<\delta d E ( z 0 , y ) = d E ( y , z 0 ) ≤ Θ ε ′ < δ
by the symmetry of the metric d E d_{E} d E , and therefore v ( y ) < v ( z 0 ) + ε v(y)<v(z_{0})+\varepsilon v ( y ) < v ( z 0 ) + ε . Likewise ∣ v ( y ) − L ∣ ≤ Θ ε ′ ≤ ε ⋅ 2 − 1 < ε \bigl|v(y)-L\bigr|\le\Theta\varepsilon'\le\varepsilon\cdot2^{-1}<\varepsilon v ( y ) − L ≤ Θ ε ′ ≤ ε ⋅ 2 − 1 < ε , and by claims 2 and 3 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field we have L − v ( y ) ≤ ∣ v ( y ) − L ∣ L-v(y)\le\bigl|v(y)-L\bigr| L − v ( y ) ≤ v ( y ) − L , so L < v ( y ) + ε L<v(y)+\varepsilon L < v ( y ) + ε . Combining the two estimates and using claim 8 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field twice,
L < v ( y ) + ε < v ( z 0 ) + ε + ε = v ( z 0 ) + ( L − v ( z 0 ) ) 2 − 1 < v ( z 0 ) + ( L − v ( z 0 ) ) = L , L<v(y)+\varepsilon<v(z_{0})+\varepsilon+\varepsilon=v(z_{0})+\bigl(L-v(z_{0})\bigr)2^{-1}<v(z_{0})+\bigl(L-v(z_{0})\bigr)=L, L < v ( y ) + ε < v ( z 0 ) + ε + ε = v ( z 0 ) + ( L − v ( z 0 ) ) 2 − 1 < v ( z 0 ) + ( L − v ( z 0 ) ) = L ,
a contradiction. Hence L ≤ v ( z 0 ) L\le v(z_{0}) L ≤ v ( z 0 ) , and with the previous paragraph and the antisymmetry of ≤ \le ≤ we conclude v ( z 0 ) = L v(z_{0})=L v ( z 0 ) = L , which is claim 1.
Step 3 (proof of claim 2). Let ε ∈ R \varepsilon\in\mathbb{R} ε ∈ R be positive and put ε ′ = min { 1 , ε Θ − 1 2 − 1 } \varepsilon'=\min\bigl\{1,\ \varepsilon\,\Theta^{-1}2^{-1}\bigr\} ε ′ = min { 1 , ε Θ − 1 2 − 1 } , positive as in Step 2, so that Θ ε ′ ≤ ε ⋅ 2 − 1 < ε \Theta\varepsilon'\le\varepsilon\cdot2^{-1}<\varepsilon Θ ε ′ ≤ ε ⋅ 2 − 1 < ε . Let y y y and ψ \psi ψ be as furnished by Step 1 for this ε ′ \varepsilon' ε ′ . By claim 1 we have v ( z 0 ) = L v(z_{0})=L v ( z 0 ) = L , so the four bounds of Step 1 read
d E ( y , z 0 ) < ε , ∣ v ( y ) − v ( z 0 ) ∣ < ε , ∥ D ψ ( y ) − q 0 ∥ < ε , d S ( M ) ( D 2 ψ ( y ) , Y ) < ε , d_{E}(y,z_{0})<\varepsilon,\quad \bigl|v(y)-v(z_{0})\bigr|<\varepsilon,\quad \bigl\lVert D\psi(y)-q_{0}\bigr\rVert<\varepsilon,\quad d_{\mathcal{S}(M)}\bigl(D^{2}\psi(y),Y\bigr)<\varepsilon, d E ( y , z 0 ) < ε , v ( y ) − v ( z 0 ) < ε , D ψ ( y ) − q 0 < ε , d S ( M ) ( D 2 ψ ( y ) , Y ) < ε ,
while ψ \psi ψ is of class C 2 C^{2} C 2 on R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M and v − ψ v-\psi v − ψ has a local maximum at y y y relative to R M \mathbb{R}^{M} R M . Since ε \varepsilon ε was an arbitrary positive real number, clause 1 of Quadruple Approximable by Test-Function Data shows that the quadruple ( z 0 , v ( z 0 ) , q 0 , Y ) \bigl(z_{0},v(z_{0}),q_{0},Y\bigr) ( z 0 , v ( z 0 ) , q 0 , Y ) is approximable by test data from above for v v v , which is claim 2.