Proof Architecture¶
This formalization takes an unusual approach: rather than following a single proof strategy from hypothesis to conclusion, it develops two independent proof routes that cover different aspects of delay embedding theory using incompatible definitions.
Why two routes?¶
Takens' 1981 theorem lives at the intersection of two mathematical worlds. The discrete side concerns finite dynamical systems, orbit combinatorics, and ordinal pattern extraction. The smooth side concerns compact manifolds, continuous maps, and topological embeddings. These require fundamentally different type signatures in Lean 4.
-
Route B (Discrete) defines
delayEmbeddingas a map \(\mathrm{Fin}\,k \to \mathbb{R}\) via iterated function application on a finite type. It proves the core injectivity characterization and extends it with a novel coincidence length result that Takens did not prove. -
Route A (Smooth) defines
smoothDelayMapas a continuous map from a topological space to \(\mathbb{R}^k\). It proves the embedding chain: compact + injective implies closed embedding and homeomorphism onto image.
These are not redundant --- they formalize different theorems with different
hypotheses and conclusions. Route A never imports Route B files. Route B never
imports SardInfra. The root aggregator (TakensFormal.lean) imports both, but
no definitions cross the boundary.
Dependency diagram¶
The diagram shows the import structure across all 8 Lean source files.
TakensDiscrete.lean (dashed) is a skeleton with zero definitions --- future
finite-horizon corollaries will land here. Verify.lean (dotted) is a diagnostic
target that prints axiom dependencies for all 42 declarations; it is not part of
the library.
A key structural feature: SmoothTakens.lean does not import SardInfra.lean.
The entire embedding chain --- continuity, closed embedding, homeomorphism onto
image --- is proved without invoking Sard's theorem. This means Route A's results
are fully axiom-free, depending only on Lean's foundational axioms (propext,
Classical.choice, Quot.sound). The Sard infrastructure exists to support the
future genericity theorem, not the embedding chain itself.
What is new, what is formalized, what is infrastructure¶
This formalization contains three categories of results:
Novel mathematics¶
The coincidence length and the iff characterization
exists_separatingWindow_iff are new results that extend Takens' 1981 theorem.
Takens proved that delay embedding is generically injective for smooth dynamical
systems on compact manifolds. The coincidence length answers a different question:
for finite dynamical systems with a possibly non-injective observation, when
does the observation still separate orbits? The answer --- iff every coincidence
between distinct orbits has bounded length --- is not in the literature.
See Beyond Takens: Coincidence Length for the full treatment.
Formalized results¶
The delay embedding injectivity characterization
(delayEmbedding_injective_iff_separatesOrbits), the ordinal pattern theory
(Bandt and Pompe 2002), and the smooth embedding chain (Takens 1981) are
machine-checked formalizations of known results. The value is not novelty but
certainty: every hypothesis is explicit, every step is verified, and the axiom
boundary is transparent.
Infrastructure¶
Sard's theorem infrastructure (SardInfra.lean) provides the critical set and
critical values definitions, proves the equidimensional case via the Jacobian area
formula, and proves the low-dimensional case via Hausdorff dimension bounds. The
high-dimensional case (Morse--Sard induction) is deferred to gate 3. This
infrastructure will eventually support the genericity theorem connecting Sard to
delay embedding.
See Sard Infrastructure for the mathematical details.
References¶
- Takens, F. (1981). "Detecting strange attractors in turbulence." In Dynamical Systems and Turbulence, Warwick 1980, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 898, pp. 366--381. Springer.
- Sauer, T., Yorke, J. A., and Casdagli, M. (1991). "Embedology." Journal of Statistical Physics 65(3--4), pp. 579--616.