Lax Lean Archive

While this submission is a draft, it cannot be used by other submissions.

Whole-unit conditioned pin avoidance

Lax342547.UnitSpanAvoidance · concepts/Lax342547/UnitSpanAvoidance.lean · lax-342547

proven

Loading review…

Community review

Flags

Each flag is tied to a public ORCID identity and explains why this concept may be incorrect.

No flags have been submitted.

    Community review

    Flag this concept

    State precisely what appears incorrect. This explanation will be public under your ORCID name.

    No source line selected.

    Natural Language Statement

    Lemma

    Pins inside actual primal images inherit raw span avoidance, including the exact conditioning cost for any retained accepted set.

    Concept map
    78 concepts; 6 descendants hidden
    100%
    Actual projected span deficitSampling after exposed coordinatesAdaptive sampling on disjoint coordinatesetsUnion over adaptive component coversExact-image bounds for independent affinecolumnsExact uniform bilinear character meanWalsh operator bounds with explicit bilinearrankRank of a lifted tensor sumIndependent binary channel charactersActual raw frame channel phase tailsJoint channel law and itsindependent-column densityActual channel moments and phase tailsCombined column and row mode exposureRows of diagonal tensor mapsMoment estimates for actual componenttensor phasesComponentwise mode spaces and diagonaltensorsExact conditioning costs and recovery offinite probability massesEntropy progress for residual pair lawsIndependence of distinct sample positionsJoin-stable classes of mode coversCount tensors killed by exposureActual exposure cover projectionRank of a diagonal familyDyadic span deficit estimatesA small dyadic tail scaleActual dyadic deficit recurrenceEntropy along feasible mixture lines,including new supportFull feasible support and finite informationprojectionProjection removes the exposed termsCount tested index occurrencesFinite linear images and their uniform-lawdensity boundsFinite even moment expansionFinite independent sampling and vertexexception tailsAmbient symmetries and frame marginalsGram-conditioned columns and theirrank-failure probabilityTwo-sided Gram normalization forindividually injective framesGreedy mode space exposureSmall actual greedy exposure tailsNo-cover rank growth on arbitrary finiteindicesUniform injective-matrix densityUniform injective frames and channeltranspose failureActual deficits indexed by a distinct listFinite list tail statisticsFactorization and counting of low-rankbinary matricesDimension deficits after an arbitrary modemapExposed mode dimension budgetBoolean point moments with restricted basecoordinatesFinite moment probability and rank splitA low rank sum supplies an actual adaptivecoverNo-cover phase momentsRank growth without an adaptive modecoverSquared restriction cost for independent uniteventsFinite exposure partitionsActual phase averages from small exceptionaltailsUniform primal-span avoidanceProjected nonzero terms in the actualremaining sumDimensions of projected mode spacesWalsh bounds for independent image lawsand separated phasesRank of a tensor killed in two quotientspacesRank loss under two restrictionsRaw matrix frames and their tensorrealizationThe finite uniform raw-vertex lawActual raw primal-span avoidanceOriginal retained-cell laws from finite PMFsFinite relative entropy and support costsRank loss under restriction of a bilinear formImage caps inside original retained cellsOne exposure controls both modesMonotonicity of span deficitsMode space span deficitsNonzero tensor count from span deficitsRank of an actual linear map sumCharacters of all independent tensor channelsCounting component tensors with boundedtotal rankUniform raw channel phase tails overbounded-rank targetsAdmissible pair lawsWhole-unit conditioned pin avoidanceOrthogonality and finite Walsh correlationbounds
    Proven claimDefinitionThis conceptRelated conceptA → B: B builds on A
    Evidence

    This concept declares 3 statements. Each proof establishes one of them relative to its assumptions.

    1 capped_unit_span_avoidance proven

    2 conditioned_unit_span_avoidance proven

    3 pin_intersection_is_primal_hit proven

    Lean source view on GitHub

    1import Lax342547.RawPrimalAvoidance
    2import Lax342547.RetainedImages
    3import Lax342547.FiniteSampling
    4import Lax342547.PhaseAverages
    5import Lax342547.ChannelColumns
    6
    7/-!
    8---
    9title: Whole-unit conditioned pin avoidance
    10type: lemma
    11---
    12Pins inside actual primal images inherit raw span avoidance, including the exact conditioning cost for any retained accepted set.
    13-/
    14
    15namespace Lax342547.UnitSpanAvoidance
    16
    17open Lax342547.MomentSpace Lax342547.RelativeEntropy Lax342547.RetainedImages
    18open Lax342547.RawFrames Lax342547.FrameSymmetry Lax342547.RealCellLaws Lax342547.PushforwardWalsh
    19open scoped BigOperators
    20
    21axiom pin_intersection_is_primal_hit {B H N : Type} [Fintype B] [Fintype H] [Fintype N]
    22 {E : Matrix B B Binary} (F : Frame B H N E) (V W : Submodule Binary (N → Binary))
    23 (hV : V ≤ LinearMap.range F.P.mulVecLin) (hbad : ¬ Disjoint V W) :
    24 ∃ c : B → Binary,c ≠ 0 ∧ F.P.mulVec c ∈ W
    25
    26axiom capped_unit_span_avoidance {A B H N : Type}
    27 [Fintype A] [Fintype B] [Fintype H] [Fintype N] [DecidableEq B] [DecidableEq H] [DecidableEq N]
    28 (E : Matrix B B Binary) [Nonempty (Frame B H N E)]
    29 (α : A → ℝ) (image : A → Frame B H N E) (V : A → Submodule Binary (N → Binary))
    30 (W : Submodule Binary (N → Binary)) (M : ℝ) (hα : ∀ a,0 ≤ α a) (hM : 0 ≤ M)
    31 (hN : Fintype.card B+Fintype.card H+1 ≤ Fintype.card N)
    32 (hV : ∀ a,V a ≤ LinearMap.range (image a).P.mulVecLin)
    33 (hcap : ∀ F,push α image F ≤ M*weights (PMF.uniformOfFintype (Frame B H N E)) F) :
    34 cellMass α (fun a => ¬ Disjoint (V a) W) ≤
    35 M*(2*((2 : ℝ)^(Fintype.card B+Fintype.card H+Module.finrank Binary W)/(2 : ℝ)^Fintype.card N))
    36
    37axiom conditioned_unit_span_avoidance {A B H N : Type}
    38 [Fintype A] [Fintype B] [Fintype H] [Fintype N] [DecidableEq B] [DecidableEq H] [DecidableEq N]
    39 (E : Matrix B B Binary) [Nonempty (Frame B H N E)]
    40 (α : A → ℝ) (image : A → Frame B H N E) (V : A → Submodule Binary (N → Binary))
    41 (W : Submodule Binary (N → Binary)) (C : A → Prop) (M τ : ℝ)
    42 (hα : ∀ a,0 ≤ α a) (hM : 0 ≤ M) (hτ : 0 < τ) (hC : τ ≤ cellMass α C)
    43 (hN : Fintype.card B+Fintype.card H+1 ≤ Fintype.card N)
    44 (hV : ∀ a,V a ≤ LinearMap.range (image a).P.mulVecLin)
    45 (hcap : ∀ F,push α image F ≤ M*weights (PMF.uniformOfFintype (Frame B H N E)) F) :
    46 cellMass (conditionalLaw α C) (fun a => ¬ Disjoint (V a) W) ≤
    47 (M/τ)*(2*((2 : ℝ)^(Fintype.card B+Fintype.card H+Module.finrank Binary W)/(2 : ℝ)^Fintype.card N))
    48
    49end Lax342547.UnitSpanAvoidance
    50
    Show ProofShow ProofShow Proof
    Builds on
    Used by
    From Mathlib

    none

    Discussion

    Ask a question or add context. Endorsements and structured flags are kept in the review panel above.

    Loading discussion…