74
Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof Strengths, Weaknesses and Practical Strategies (i) The role of CAS in analysis (ii) Four practical mechanisms (iii) Applications Kent Pearce Texas Tech University Presentation: Fresno, California, 24 September 2010

Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

  • Upload
    ruby

  • View
    34

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof. Strengths, Weaknesses and Practical Strategies (i) The role of CAS in analysis (ii) Four practical mechanisms (iii) Applications Kent Pearce Texas Tech University Presentation: Fresno, California, 24 September 2010. Question. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Strengths, Weaknesses and Practical Strategies(i) The role of CAS in analysis(ii) Four practical mechanisms(iii) Applications

Kent Pearce

Texas Tech University

Presentation: Fresno, California, 24 September 2010

Page 2: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Question

Consider

2

(

)

)

(

cosxg

f

x

x

e

x

Page 3: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Question

Consider

2

(

)

)

(

cosxg

f

x

x

e

x

Page 4: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Question

Consider

2 cos( )xh e x

Page 5: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Question

Consider

2 cos( )xh e x

Page 6: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Question

Given a function f on an interval [a, b], what does it take to show that f is non-negative on [a, b]?

Page 7: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Transcendental Functions

Consider

( ) cos( )g x x

Page 8: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Transcendental Functions

Consider

( ) cos( )g x x

Page 9: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

cos(0)1

cos(0.95)

0.5816830895

cos(0.95 + 2000000000*π)

0.5816830895

cos(0.95 + 2000000000.*π)

cos(0.95 + 2000000000.*π)

Transcendental Functions

Page 10: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Blackbox Approximations

Transcendental / Special Functions

Page 11: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Polynomials/Rational Functions

CAS Calculations Integer Arithmetic

Rational Values vs Irrational Values

Floating Point Calculation

Page 12: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Question

Given a function f on an interval [a, b], what does it take to show that f is non-negative on [a, b]?

Page 13: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

(P)Lots of Dots

Page 14: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

(P)Lots of Dots

Page 15: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

(P)Lots of Dots

Page 16: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

(P)Lots of Dots

1( )

2 1y f x

x

Page 17: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

(P)Lots of Dots

1( )

2 1y f x

x

Page 18: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Question

Given a function f on an interval [a, b], what does it take to show that f is non-negative on [a, b]?

Proof by Picture Maple, Mathematica, Matlab, Mathcad,

Excel, Graphing Calculators, Java Applets

Page 19: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Practical Methods

A. Sturm Sequence Arguments B. Linearity / Monotonicity Arguments C. Special Function Estimates D. Grid Estimates

Page 20: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Applications

"On a Coefficient Conjecture of Brannan," Complex Variables. Theory and Application. An International Journal 33 (1997) 51_61, with Roger W. Barnard and William Wheeler.

"A Sharp Bound on the Schwarzian Derivatives of Hyperbolically Convex Functions," Proceeding of the London Mathematical Society 93 (2006), 395_417, with Roger W. Barnard, Leah Cole and G. Brock Williams.

"The Verification of an Inequality," Proceedings of the International Conference on Geometric Function Theory, Special Functions and Applications (ICGFT) (accepted) with Roger W. Barnard.

"Iceberg-Type Problems in Two Dimensions," with Roger.W. Barnard and Alex.Yu. Solynin

Page 21: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Practical Methods

A. Sturm Sequence Arguments B. Linearity / Monotonicity Arguments C. Special Function Estimates D. Grid Estimates

Page 22: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

Page 23: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

Dual Problem for Class Let and let

For let

and For 0 < h < 4, let

Find

0

( ) max area( )f hf

A h E H

{ | Re( ) }.hH z z h

0

0 1

1{ ( ) : is analytic,f z a a z f

z

univalent on }.D f \ ( )fE f D

0 { | 0 }.ff E

{ : 0 | | 1}z z D=

Page 24: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

Extremal Configuration Symmetrization Polarization Variational Methods Boundary Conditions

Page 25: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

Page 26: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

We obtained explicit formulas for A = A(r)

and h = h(r). To show that we could write

A = A(h), we needed to show that h = h(r) was monotone.

Page 27: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Practical Methods

A. Sturm Sequence Arguments B. Linearity / Monotonicity Arguments C. Special Function Estimates D. Grid Estimates

Page 28: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Sturm Sequence Arguments

General theorem for counting the number of distinct roots of a polynomial f on an interval (a, b)

N. Jacobson, Basic Algebra. Vol. I., pp. 311-315,W. H. Freeman and Co., New York, 1974.

H. Weber, Lehrbuch der Algebra, Vol. I., pp. 301-313, Friedrich Vieweg und Sohn, Braunschweig, 1898

Page 29: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Sturm Sequence Arguments

Sturm’s Theorem. Let f be a non-constant polynomial with rational coefficients and let a < b be rational numbers. Let

be the standard sequence for f . Suppose that

Then, the number of distinct roots of f on (a, b) is where denotes the number of sign changes of

0 1{ , , , }f sS f f f

( ) 0, ( ) 0.f a f b a bV V cV

0 1( ) { ( ), ( ), , ( )}f sS c f c f c f c

Page 30: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Sturm Sequence Arguments

Sturm’s Theorem (Generalization). Let f be a non-constant polynomial with rational coefficients and let a < b be rational numbers. Let

be the standard sequence for f . Then, the number of distinct roots of f on (a, b] is where denotes the number of sign changes of

0 1{ , , , }f sS f f f Suppose that ( ) 0, ( ) 0.f a f b

a bV V

cV

0 1( ) { ( ), ( ), , ( )}f sS c f c f c f c

Page 31: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Sturm Sequence Arguments

For a given f, the standard sequence is constructed as:

fS

0

1

2 0 1 1 2

3 1 2 2 3

:

:

f f

f f

f f f q f

f f f q f

Page 32: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Sturm Sequence Arguments

Polynomial

Page 33: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Sturm Sequence Arguments

Polynomial

Page 34: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Linearity / Monotonicity

Consider

where

Let

Then,

0 1( , ) ( ) ( )f x Z c x c x Z

Z

0 1

0 1

( ) ( , ) ,

( ) ( , )Z

Z

f x f x Z c c

f x f x Z c c

( , ) ( , )min { ( ), ( )} ( , ) max{ ( ), ( )}x a b x a b

f x f x f x Z f x f x

Page 35: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

We obtained explicit formulas for A = A(r)

and h = h(r). To show that we could write

A = A(h), we needed to show that h = h(r) was monotone.

Page 36: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

From the construction we explicitly found

where

Page 37: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

Page 38: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

where

Page 39: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

It remained to show

was non-negative. In a separate lemma, we showed 0 < Q < 1. Hence, using the linearity ofQ in g, we needed to show

were non-negative

0 1 0 1( ) ( ) ( )g g r c c P d d P Q

0 0 1 0 1

1 0 1 0 1

( ) ( ) 0

( ) ( ) 1

g c c P d d P

g c c P d d P

Page 40: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Iceberg-Type Problems

In a second lemma, we showed s < P < t where

Let

Each is a polynomial with rational coefficients for which a Sturm sequence argument show that it is non-negative.

0, 0 0, 0 1, 1 1, 1, , , .s t s tP s P t P s P tg g g g g g g g

0, 0, 1, 1,, , ,s t s tg g g g

Page 41: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Practical Methods

A. Sturm Sequence Arguments B. Linearity / Monotonicity Arguments C. Special Function Estimates D. Grid Estimates

Page 42: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Notation & Definitions

{ : | | 1}z z D

Page 43: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Notation & Definitions

{ : | | 1}z z D

2

2 | |( ) | |

1 | |

dzz dz

z

hyperbolic metric

Page 44: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Notation & Definitions

Hyberbolic Geodesics

{ : | | 1}z z D

Page 45: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Notation & Definitions

Hyberbolic Geodesics

Hyberbolically Convex Set

{ : | | 1}z z D

Page 46: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Notation & Definitions

Hyberbolic Geodesics

Hyberbolically Convex Set

Hyberbolically Convex Function

{ : | | 1}z z D

Page 47: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Notation & Definitions

Hyberbolic Geodesics

Hyberbolically Convex Set

Hyberbolically Convex Function

Hyberbolic Polygono Proper Sides

{ : | | 1}z z D

Page 48: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Examples

2 2

2( )

(1 ) (1 ) 4

zk z

z z z

k

Page 49: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Examples

12 4 2

0

( ) tan (1 2 cos2 )

2where , 0 2(cos )

z

f z d

K

f

Page 50: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Schwarz Norm

For let

and

where

( )f A D

21

2f

f fS

f f

2|| || sup{ ( ) | ( ) |: }f fS z S z z D D D

2

1( )

1 | |z

z

D

|| ||fS D

Page 51: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Extremal Problems for

Euclidean Convexity Nehari (1976):

( ) convex || || 2ff S DD

|| ||fS D

Page 52: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Extremal Problems for

Euclidean Convexity Nehari (1976):

Spherical Convexity Mejía, Pommerenke (2000):

( ) convex || || 2ff S DD

( ) convex || || 2ff S DD

|| ||fS D

Page 53: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Extremal Problems for

Euclidean Convexity Nehari (1976):

Spherical Convexity Mejía, Pommerenke (2000):

Hyperbolic Convexity Mejía, Pommerenke Conjecture (2000):

( ) convex || || 2ff S DD

( ) convex || || 2ff S DD

( ) convex || || 2.3836ff S DD

|| ||fS D

Page 54: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification of M/P Conjecture

"A Sharp Bound on the Schwarzian Derivatives of Hyperbolically Convex Functions," Proceeding of the London Mathematical Society 93 (2006), 395_417, with Roger W. Barnard, Leah Cole and G. Brock Williams.

"The Verification of an Inequality," Proceedings of the International Conference on Geometric Function Theory, Special Functions and Applications (ICGFT) (accepted) with Roger W. Barnard.

Page 55: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Special Function Estimates

Parameter / 2

where cos( )

yK y

Page 56: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Special Function Estimates

Upper bound

Page 57: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Special Function Estimates

Upper bound

Partial Sums

Page 58: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Special Function Estimates

Page 59: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification

where/ 2

cos 2 , , 1 1(cos )

c xK

Page 60: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification

Straightforward to show that

In make a change of variable

3 0c

0p

q

22 1c y mq

Page 61: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification

Obtain a lower bound for by estimating via an upper bound

Sturm sequence argument showsis non-negative

3 0c

mq

8

*m m p

q q

Page 62: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Grid Estimates

Page 63: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Grid Estimates

Given A) grid step size h B) global bound M for maximum of

Theorem Let f be defined on [a, b]. Let

Let and suppose that N is choosen so that . Let L be the lattice . Let

If then f is non-negative on [a, b].

| ( ) |f x

[ , ]max | ( ) | .x a b

M f x

0 ( ) /h b a N

{ : 0 }L a jh j N min ( )x L

m f x

,2

m M

Page 64: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Grid Estimates

Maximum descent argument

Page 65: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Grid Estimates

Two-Dimensional Version

Page 66: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Grid Estimates

Maximum descent argument

Page 67: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification

where/ 2

cos 2 , , 1 1(cos )

c xK

Page 68: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification

The problem was that the coefficient was not globally positive, specifically, it was not positive for

We showed that by showing that

where

0 < t < 1/4.

2 ( , )c x

2c

4 ( ) 0p t

( ) 0q t

23 2 1( ) ( , ) ( , ) ( , )q t c x t c x t c t

041 , .5 2x

Page 69: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification

Used Lemma 3.3 to show that the endpoints

and are non-negative. We partition the parameter space into subregions:

2c

*

0 0(0) ( , )q e y w *

01( )4q

Page 70: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification

Application of Lemma 3.3 to

After another change of variable, we needed to show that where

for 0 < w < 1, 0 < m < 1

2c

*

01( )4q

0r

Page 71: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification 2c

Page 72: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Verification

Quarter Square [0,1/2]x[0,1/2]

Grid 50 x 50

2c

max{ , } 35

21, 35w m

w m

M M M

M M

0.350M ( , )

min ( , ) 0.400j k

j kw m L

m r w m

[0,1] [0,1] [0,1/ 2] [0,1/ 2] [0,1/ 2] [1/ 2,1]

[1/ 2,1] [0,1/ 2] [1/ 2,1] [1/ 2,1]

Page 73: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Question

Given a function f on an interval [a, b], what does it take to show that f is non-negative on [a, b]?

Page 74: Use of Computer Technology for Insight and Proof

Conclusions

There are “proof by picture” hazards There is a role for CAS in analysis

CAS numerical computations are rational number calculations

CAS “special function” numerical calculations are inherently finite approximations

There are various useful, practical strategies for rigorously establishing analytic inequalities