Skip to content

Document sources and false priority interfaces - #322

Merged
PerAlexandersson merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
codex/hurwitz-schur-typo
Aug 4, 2026
Merged

Document sources and false priority interfaces#322
PerAlexandersson merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
codex/hurwitz-schur-typo

Conversation

@PerAlexandersson

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • cite the exact Borcea--Branden, Hoster--Stump, Braun--Jal, and Garloff--Wagner source results beside the corresponding Lean interfaces
  • document how each Lean statement specializes, abstracts, or extends the paper statement
  • mark the homogeneous finite-symbol implication and unrestricted infinite Hurwitz Schur-product implication as false, with their checked counterexamples/routes
  • point Jensen-pencil work to the genuine affine symbol and degree-box issues

Issue map

Validation

Documentation-only change. No local Lake build was run.

@PerAlexandersson

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Source audit found two corrections needed before merge:

  1. Challenges/BorceaBranden.lean should cite Borcea--Branden Theorem 1.2(b) for the real operator statement. Theorem 1.1 is the complex classification; its positive-symbol branch can also imply the result after complexification, but it is not the source theorem matching T : ℝ[X] →ₗ[ℝ] ℝ[X]. The nearby issue Retire the false homogeneous finiteSymbolBBStatement interface #314 audit already records Theorem 1.2(b).
  2. Tactic/FiniteSymbolPF.lean says “See issue Prove the finite-symbol and homogenization stability backends #239”; the false homogeneous interface is tracked by Retire the false homogeneous finiteSymbolBBStatement interface #314.

The mathematical diagnosis and affine symbol formula in this PR are otherwise consistent with equations (1.1)--(1.2): G_T(z,w) = T((z+w)^κ).

@PerAlexandersson

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

A third citation correction is required. The finite Hurwitz-matrix Schur closure result is Garloff--Wagner Theorem 13 (pp. 807--808), not Theorem 1. Theorem 13 states that the Hadamard product of two nonsingular totally nonnegative finite n × n Hurwitz matrices is again a nonsingular totally nonnegative Hurwitz matrix. Please change both new “Theorem 1” references in Hadamard.lean and HurwitzMatrix.lean to Theorem 13. The primary PDF is now cached locally under DOI 10.1006/j.jmaa.1996.0348.

@PerAlexandersson

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

The Hoster--Stump source audit found a substantive blocker in the new comments. IsInterlacingSeq0Nonneg is not the paper's zero-aware interlacing-sequence predicate: Prec0 f g := f = 0 ∨ g = 0 ∨ Prec f g, so a zero entry can mask a non-real-rooted neighbor, and the predicate adds coefficient nonnegativity but not elementwise Splits. Consequently all four current interfaces are false. Explicit counterexamples already recorded on #316--#319 are [b,0], [0,b], [0,b,0], and [b], with b = 1+X+X^2.

Please do not say these declarations “deliberately ask for the corresponding zero-aware extension.” They currently ask for a weaker, invalid hypothesis. The source-faithful correction is to use the elementwise-real-rooted bundle introduced by PR #329 (IsInterlacingSeq0NonnegRealRooted) or add the equivalent explicit hypothesis. Lemma 2.3 itself uses the paper's zero-aware convention, but still requires every sequence member to be real-rooted.

Also note the printed indexing typo in Lemma 2.3(4): the displayed definition has 1 ≤ k ≤ n-ell, matching Lean's n-ell valid windows; the tuple label ending at r_{n-ell+1} is inconsistent.

For Proposition 2.5, the current gamma statement also needs nonnegative coefficients for gamma and delta (and a nonzero/exact-degree guard for the d=0 zero edge). PR #325 appears to own that correction; the source comment should describe the corrected hypotheses, not claim the old statement already encodes all of them.

@PerAlexandersson

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

The Jensen comment needs one further source correction. BidiagonalJensenPencilCertificate controls only J_{alpha,d}(t) + lambda * t * J_{beta,d}(t) for real lambda >= 0. Borcea--Branden Theorem 1.1 instead requires upper-half-plane stability of the genuine affine symbol

sum_{k=0}^d choose(d,k) * (alpha_k X^k + beta_k X^(k+1)) * Y^(d-k)

for independent complex X,Y in the upper half-plane. The one-sided pencil certificate does not currently imply that hypothesis. Garloff--Wagner Theorem 12 also assumes an oriented proper-position relation; it does not derive the needed orientation from the one-sided family.

Therefore the docstring should say this is an open PF-specific project conjecture/interface not stated in the cited papers. It should not say a source-faithful proof “must first identify the certificate” with affine-symbol stability, because no such identification is known and issue #240 contains a nested-root obstruction to the proposed orientation inference. The source-backed replacement is the affine-symbol wrapper with coefficient nonnegativity only for k <= d.

@PerAlexandersson

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Pushed c21e11d8 as the scheduled cleanup pass. It incorporates the source-audit corrections without changing any declaration: Borcea--Branden Theorem 1.2(b) for the real interface, Garloff--Wagner Theorem 13 for finite Hurwitz matrices, issue #314 for the false homogeneous symbol, explicit legacy/false labels for the weak Hoster--Stump interfaces, the concrete Braun--Jal model requirement, and the Jensen pencil as an open project conjecture rather than a cited theorem. Seven files changed only in doc comments.

@PerAlexandersson

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Coordination note: PR #325 now proves prec_gammaTransform_succ_iff in GammaRealRoots.lean, the reusable Hoster--Stump Proposition 2.5 backend needed for GammaAdjacentInterlacingTransferStatement. Please use that theorem when replacing the placeholder endpoint in Challenges/HosterStump.lean; PR #325 is deliberately not editing your owned challenge file.

@PerAlexandersson
PerAlexandersson merged commit 19f3d3e into main Aug 4, 2026
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant