Proof of `Infiltration automata and infiltration-finite series` (2nd statement)

groundedproofs/Lax619925Proofs/Infiltration.lean · lax-619925

What this proof establishes

no assumptions

Assuming the claims on the left, the claim on the right holds — checked by the archive's pipeline. Proof code is not displayed here.

Read the Lean proof on GitHub

Description

The infiltration closure theorem (paper §7): the infiltration-finite series are closed under addition, scalar multiplication, the infiltration product, and right derivatives. Addition, scalar multiplication, and the infiltration product follow by concatenating the witnessing tuples (the infiltration algebra is not the pointwise ring, so the evaluation is an infiltration-algebra homomorphism; the tuple is extended and the polynomial embedded at the front or back, and the closure under left derivatives is preserved by the concatenation). The right derivative is handled at the semantic level: the letter endomorphism Sa=id+ΔaS_a = id + Δ_a is Qℚ-linear but not a ring homomorphism, so the right derivative cannot be read off an automaton with the same transitions (unlike the Hadamard case); instead the witnessing tuple is extended to the "augmented" tuple (fs,funi=>fsi+rightDeriva(fsi))(fs, fun i => fs i + rightDeriv a (fs i)), and the right derivative of the evaluation is the evaluation of embedBackp−embedFrontpembedBack p − embedFront p in the extended tuple. The class is stated in terms of the semantic definition IsInfiltrationFiniteIsInfiltrationFinite; the proof proceeds at the semantic level, working directly with the witnessing tuples.