{
  "index": "1952-B-5",
  "type": "ANA",
  "tag": [
    "ANA"
  ],
  "difficulty": "",
  "question": "5. If the terms of a sequence, \\( a_{n} \\), are monotonic, and if \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} a_{n} \\) converges, show that \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} n\\left(a_{n}-a_{n+1}\\right) \\) converges.",
  "solution": "First Solution. Since \\( \\Sigma a_{n} \\) converges, \\( \\lim _{n-\\infty} a_{n}=0 \\). Since the sequence is monotonic we have either\n\\[\na_{1} \\geq a_{2} \\geq a_{3} \\geq \\cdots \\geq a_{n} \\geq \\cdots \\geq 0,\n\\]\nor\n\\[\na_{1} \\leq a_{2} \\leq a_{3} \\leq \\cdots \\leq a_{n} \\leq \\cdots \\leq 0\n\\]\n\nIn the second case we can change the sign of each term and thus without loss of generality we need only consider the case where the \\( a \\) 's are nonnegative and decrease to zero.\n\nLet\n\\[\nS_{k}=\\sum_{n=1}^{k} n\\left(a_{n}-a_{n+1}\\right)\n\\]\n\nThen\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\nS_{k} & =a_{1}+a_{2}(2-1)+\\cdots+a_{k}(k-(k-1))-k a_{k+1} \\\\\n& =\\sum_{n=1}^{k} a_{n}-k a_{k+1} .\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nNow since \\( \\Sigma_{1}^{\\infty} a_{n} \\) converges, the Cauchy criterion implies \\( \\lim _{n-\\infty}\\left(a_{n}+\\right. \\) \\( \\left.a_{n+1}+\\cdots+a_{2 n}\\right)=0 \\). But \\( a_{n}+a_{n+1}+\\cdots+a_{2 n} \\geq n a_{2 n} \\), and hence \\( \\lim _{n-\\infty} 2 n a_{2 n}=0 \\); from this it follows that \\( \\lim _{n-\\infty} n a_{n+1}=0 \\).\n\nIn the expression\n\\[\nS_{k}=\\sum_{n=1}^{k} a_{n}-k a_{k+1}\n\\]\nboth \\( \\lim _{k-\\infty} \\sum_{n=1}^{k} a_{n} \\) and \\( \\lim \\left(k a_{k+1}\\right) \\) exist, so\n\\[\n\\lim _{k \\rightarrow \\infty} S_{k}=\\lim _{k \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{k} a_{n}-\\lim _{k \\rightarrow \\infty}\\left(k a_{k+1}\\right)=\\lim _{k \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{k} a_{n}\n\\]\n\nThis establishes the desired convergence.\nRemark. Our proof shows that if \\( \\Sigma a_{n} \\) converges, where \\( \\left\\{a_{n}\\right\\} \\) is a monotone sequence, then \\( \\lim _{n-\\infty} n a_{n}=0 \\). This result is known as Abel's theorem (or lemma).\n\nSecond Solution. We may assume, as we have seen above, that the sequence \\( \\left\\{a_{k}\\right\\} \\) decreases to zero. Then for each \\( k \\)\n\\[\na_{k}=\\sum_{n}^{\\infty}\\left(a_{n}-a_{n+1}\\right) .\n\\]\n\nSo\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\n\\sum_{k=1}^{\\infty} a_{k} & =\\sum_{k=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{n=k}^{\\infty}\\left(a_{n}-a_{n+1}\\right)=\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{k=1}^{n}\\left(a_{n}-a_{n+1}\\right) \\\\\n& =\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty} n\\left(a_{n}-a_{n+1}\\right)\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nReversing the order of summation is justified because all terms are nonnegative.",
  "vars": [
    "n",
    "k",
    "a_n",
    "a_n+1",
    "a_2n",
    "a_k",
    "a_k+1",
    "a_1",
    "a_2",
    "a_3",
    "S_k"
  ],
  "params": [],
  "sci_consts": [],
  "variants": {
    "descriptive_long": {
      "map": {
        "n": "indexn",
        "k": "indexk",
        "a_n": "sequencen",
        "a_n+1": "sequencenplusone",
        "a_2n": "sequence2n",
        "a_k": "sequencek",
        "a_k+1": "sequencekplusone",
        "a_1": "sequenceone",
        "a_2": "sequencetwo",
        "a_3": "sequencethree",
        "S_k": "partialsummationk"
      },
      "question": "5. If the terms of a sequence, \\( sequencen \\), are monotonic, and if \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} sequencen \\) converges, show that \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} indexn\\left(sequencen-sequencenplusone\\right) \\) converges.",
      "solution": "First Solution. Since \\( \\Sigma sequencen \\) converges, \\( \\lim _{indexn-\\infty} sequencen=0 \\). Since the sequence is monotonic we have either\n\\[\nsequenceone \\geq sequencetwo \\geq sequencethree \\geq \\cdots \\geq sequencen \\geq \\cdots \\geq 0,\n\\]\nor\n\\[\nsequenceone \\leq sequencetwo \\leq sequencethree \\leq \\cdots \\leq sequencen \\leq \\cdots \\leq 0\n\\]\n\nIn the second case we can change the sign of each term and thus without loss of generality we need only consider the case where the a 's are nonnegative and decrease to zero.\n\nLet\n\\[\npartialsummationk=\\sum_{indexn=1}^{indexk} indexn\\left(sequencen-sequencenplusone\\right)\n\\]\n\nThen\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\npartialsummationk & =sequenceone+sequencetwo(2-1)+\\cdots+sequencek(indexk-(indexk-1))-indexk sequencekplusone \\\\\n& =\\sum_{indexn=1}^{indexk} sequencen-indexk sequencekplusone .\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nNow since \\( \\Sigma_{1}^{\\infty} sequencen \\) converges, the Cauchy criterion implies \\( \\lim _{indexn-\\infty}\\left(sequencen+\\right. \\left.sequencenplusone+\\cdots+sequence2n\\right)=0 \\). But \\( sequencen+sequencenplusone+\\cdots+sequence2n \\geq indexn sequence2n \\), and hence \\( \\lim _{indexn-\\infty} 2 indexn sequence2n=0 \\); from this it follows that \\( \\lim _{indexn-\\infty} indexn sequencenplusone=0 \\).\n\nIn the expression\n\\[\npartialsummationk=\\sum_{indexn=1}^{indexk} sequencen-indexk sequencekplusone\n\\]\nboth \\( \\lim _{indexk-\\infty} \\sum_{indexn=1}^{indexk} sequencen \\) and \\( \\lim \\left(indexk sequencekplusone\\right) \\) exist, so\n\\[\n\\lim _{indexk \\rightarrow \\infty} partialsummationk=\\lim _{indexk \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{indexk} sequencen-\\lim _{indexk \\rightarrow \\infty}\\left(indexk sequencekplusone\\right)=\\lim _{indexk \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{indexk} sequencen\n\\]\n\nThis establishes the desired convergence.\nRemark. Our proof shows that if \\( \\Sigma sequencen \\) converges, where \\( \\{sequencen\\} \\) is a monotone sequence, then \\( \\lim _{indexn-\\infty} indexn sequencen=0 \\). This result is known as Abel's theorem (or lemma).\n\nSecond Solution. We may assume, as we have seen above, that the sequence \\( \\{sequencek\\} \\) decreases to zero. Then for each \\( indexk \\)\n\\[\nsequencek=\\sum_{indexn}^{\\infty}\\left(sequencen-sequencenplusone\\right) .\n\\]\n\nSo\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\n\\sum_{indexk=1}^{\\infty} sequencek & =\\sum_{indexk=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{indexn=indexk}^{\\infty}\\left(sequencen-sequencenplusone\\right)=\\sum_{indexn=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{indexk=1}^{indexn}\\left(sequencen-sequencenplusone\\right) \\\\\n& =\\sum_{indexn=1}^{\\infty} indexn\\left(sequencen-sequencenplusone\\right)\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nReversing the order of summation is justified because all terms are nonnegative."
    },
    "descriptive_long_confusing": {
      "map": {
        "n": "sunflower",
        "k": "labyrinth",
        "a_n": "comettrail",
        "a_n+1": "comettrailplus",
        "a_2n": "comettraildouble",
        "a_k": "comettraillab",
        "a_k+1": "comettraillabplus",
        "a_1": "comettrailfirst",
        "a_2": "comettrailsecond",
        "a_3": "comettrailthird",
        "S_k": "sumcontainer"
      },
      "question": "5. If the terms of a sequence, \\( comettrail \\), are monotonic, and if \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} comettrail \\) converges, show that \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} sunflower\\left(comettrail-comettrailplus\\right) \\) converges.",
      "solution": "First Solution. Since \\( \\Sigma comettrail \\) converges, \\( \\lim _{sunflower-\\infty} comettrail=0 \\). Since the sequence is monotonic we have either\n\\[\ncomettrailfirst \\geq comettrailsecond \\geq comettrailthird \\geq \\cdots \\geq comettrail \\geq \\cdots \\geq 0,\n\\]\nor\n\\[\ncomettrailfirst \\leq comettrailsecond \\leq comettrailthird \\leq \\cdots \\leq comettrail \\leq \\cdots \\leq 0\n\\]\n\nIn the second case we can change the sign of each term and thus without loss of generality we need only consider the case where the comettrail 's are nonnegative and decrease to zero.\n\nLet\n\\[\nsumcontainer=\\sum_{sunflower=1}^{labyrinth} sunflower\\left(comettrail-comettrailplus\\right)\n\\]\n\nThen\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\nsumcontainer & =comettrailfirst+comettrailsecond(2-1)+\\cdots+comettraillab(labyrinth-(labyrinth-1))-labyrinth comettraillabplus \\\\\n& =\\sum_{sunflower=1}^{labyrinth} comettrail-labyrinth comettraillabplus .\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nNow since \\( \\Sigma_{1}^{\\infty} comettrail \\) converges, the Cauchy criterion implies \\( \\lim _{sunflower-\\infty}\\left(comettrail+\\right. \\left.comettrailplus+\\cdots+comettraildouble\\right)=0 \\). But \\( comettrail+comettrailplus+\\cdots+comettraildouble \\geq sunflower comettraildouble \\), and hence \\( \\lim _{sunflower-\\infty} 2 sunflower comettraildouble=0 \\); from this it follows that \\( \\lim _{sunflower-\\infty} sunflower comettrailplus=0 \\).\n\nIn the expression\n\\[\nsumcontainer=\\sum_{sunflower=1}^{labyrinth} comettrail-labyrinth comettraillabplus\n\\]\nboth \\( \\lim _{labyrinth-\\infty} \\sum_{sunflower=1}^{labyrinth} comettrail \\) and \\( \\lim \\left(labyrinth comettraillabplus\\right) \\) exist, so\n\\[\n\\lim _{labyrinth \\rightarrow \\infty} sumcontainer=\\lim _{labyrinth \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{labyrinth} comettrail-\\lim _{labyrinth \\rightarrow \\infty}\\left(labyrinth comettraillabplus\\right)=\\lim _{labyrinth \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{labyrinth} comettrail\n\\]\n\nThis establishes the desired convergence.\nRemark. Our proof shows that if \\( \\Sigma comettrail \\) converges, where \\( \\left\\{comettrail\\right\\} \\) is a monotone sequence, then \\( \\lim _{sunflower-\\infty} sunflower comettrail=0 \\). This result is known as Abel's theorem (or lemma).\n\nSecond Solution. We may assume, as we have seen above, that the sequence \\( \\left\\{comettraillab\\right\\} \\) decreases to zero. Then for each \\( labyrinth \\)\n\\[\ncomettraillab=\\sum_{sunflower}^{\\infty}\\left(comettrail-comettrailplus\\right) .\n\\]\n\nSo\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\n\\sum_{labyrinth=1}^{\\infty} comettraillab & =\\sum_{labyrinth=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{sunflower=labyrinth}^{\\infty}\\left(comettrail-comettrailplus\\right)=\\sum_{sunflower=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{labyrinth=1}^{sunflower}\\left(comettrail-comettrailplus\\right) \\\\\n& =\\sum_{sunflower=1}^{\\infty} sunflower\\left(comettrail-comettrailplus\\right)\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nReversing the order of summation is justified because all terms are nonnegative."
    },
    "descriptive_long_misleading": {
      "map": {
        "n": "limitless",
        "k": "boundless",
        "a_n": "constantval",
        "a_n+1": "unchangedval",
        "a_2n": "steadyvalue",
        "a_k": "fixedvalue",
        "a_k+1": "unchangingval",
        "a_1": "variedone",
        "a_2": "variedtwo",
        "a_3": "variedthree",
        "S_k": "difference"
      },
      "question": "5. If the terms of a sequence, \\( constantval \\), are monotonic, and if \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} constantval \\) converges, show that \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} limitless\\left(constantval-unchangedval\\right) \\) converges.",
      "solution": "First Solution. Since \\( \\Sigma constantval \\) converges, \\( \\lim _{limitless-\\infty} constantval=0 \\). Since the sequence is monotonic we have either\n\\[\nvariedone \\geq variedtwo \\geq variedthree \\geq \\cdots \\geq constantval \\geq \\cdots \\geq 0,\n\\]\nor\n\\[\nvariedone \\leq variedtwo \\leq variedthree \\leq \\cdots \\leq constantval \\leq \\cdots \\leq 0\n\\]\n\nIn the second case we can change the sign of each term and thus without loss of generality we need only consider the case where the \\( a \\) 's are nonnegative and decrease to zero.\n\nLet\n\\[\ndifference=\\sum_{limitless=1}^{boundless} limitless\\left(constantval-unchangedval\\right)\n\\]\n\nThen\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\ndifference & =variedone+variedtwo(2-1)+\\cdots+fixedvalue(boundless-(boundless-1))-boundless unchangingval \\\\\n& =\\sum_{limitless=1}^{boundless} constantval-boundless unchangingval .\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nNow since \\( \\Sigma_{1}^{\\infty} constantval \\) converges, the Cauchy criterion implies \\( \\lim _{limitless-\\infty}\\left(constantval+\\right. \\) \\( \\left.unchangedval+\\cdots+steadyvalue\\right)=0 \\). But \\( constantval+unchangedval+\\cdots+steadyvalue \\geq limitless steadyvalue \\), and hence \\( \\lim _{limitless-\\infty} 2 limitless steadyvalue=0 \\); from this it follows that \\( \\lim _{limitless-\\infty} limitless unchangedval=0 \\).\n\nIn the expression\n\\[\ndifference=\\sum_{limitless=1}^{boundless} constantval-boundless unchangingval\n\\]\nboth \\( \\lim _{boundless-\\infty} \\sum_{limitless=1}^{boundless} constantval \\) and \\( \\lim \\left(boundless unchangingval\\right) \\) exist, so\n\\[\n\\lim _{boundless \\rightarrow \\infty} difference=\\lim _{boundless \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{boundless} constantval-\\lim _{boundless \\rightarrow \\infty}\\left(boundless unchangingval\\right)=\\lim _{boundless \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{boundless} constantval\n\\]\n\nThis establishes the desired convergence.\nRemark. Our proof shows that if \\( \\Sigma constantval \\) converges, where \\( \\left\\{constantval\\right\\} \\) is a monotone sequence, then \\( \\lim _{limitless-\\infty} limitless constantval=0 \\). This result is known as Abel's theorem (or lemma).\n\nSecond Solution. We may assume, as we have seen above, that the sequence \\( \\left\\{fixedvalue\\right\\} \\) decreases to zero. Then for each \\( boundless \\)\n\\[\nfixedvalue=\\sum_{limitless}^{\\infty}\\left(constantval-unchangedval\\right) .\n\\]\n\nSo\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\n\\sum_{boundless=1}^{\\infty} fixedvalue & =\\sum_{boundless=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{limitless=boundless}^{\\infty}\\left(constantval-unchangedval\\right)=\\sum_{limitless=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{boundless=1}^{limitless}\\left(constantval-unchangedval\\right) \\\\\n& =\\sum_{limitless=1}^{\\infty} limitless\\left(constantval-unchangedval\\right)\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nReversing the order of summation is justified because all terms are nonnegative."
    },
    "garbled_string": {
      "map": {
        "n": "qzxwvtnp",
        "k": "hjgrksla",
        "a_n": "plsnrjcf",
        "a_n+1": "xzmbgtha",
        "a_2n": "kmldqfsa",
        "a_k": "rcbnwtvu",
        "a_k+1": "pthglrma",
        "a_1": "mndxlqre",
        "a_2": "jsvwplth",
        "a_3": "tgnsmdoc",
        "S_k": "vlfqbzoi"
      },
      "question": "5. If the terms of a sequence, \\( plsnrjcf \\), are monotonic, and if \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} plsnrjcf \\) converges, show that \\( \\sum_{1}^{\\infty} qzxwvtnp\\left(plsnrjcf-xzmbgtha\\right) \\) converges.",
      "solution": "First Solution. Since \\( \\Sigma plsnrjcf \\) converges, \\( \\lim _{qzxwvtnp-\\infty} plsnrjcf=0 \\). Since the sequence is monotonic we have either\n\\[\nmndxlqre \\geq jsvwplth \\geq tgnsmdoc \\geq \\cdots \\geq plsnrjcf \\geq \\cdots \\geq 0,\n\\]\nor\n\\[\nmndxlqre \\leq jsvwplth \\leq tgnsmdoc \\leq \\cdots \\leq plsnrjcf \\leq \\cdots \\leq 0\n\\]\n\nIn the second case we can change the sign of each term and thus without loss of generality we need only consider the case where the \\( a \\)'s are nonnegative and decrease to zero.\n\nLet\n\\[\nvlfqbzoi=\\sum_{qzxwvtnp=1}^{hjgrksla} qzxwvtnp\\left(plsnrjcf-xzmbgtha\\right)\n\\]\n\nThen\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\nvlfqbzoi & = mndxlqre + jsvwplth(2-1)+\\cdots+ rcbnwtvu(hjgrksla-(hjgrksla-1)) - hjgrksla\\, pthglrma \\\\\n& = \\sum_{qzxwvtnp=1}^{hjgrksla} plsnrjcf - hjgrksla\\, pthglrma .\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nNow since \\( \\Sigma_{1}^{\\infty} plsnrjcf \\) converges, the Cauchy criterion implies \\( \\lim _{qzxwvtnp-\\infty}\\left(plsnrjcf+\\right. \\) \\( \\left.xzmbgtha+\\cdots+kmldqfsa\\right)=0 \\). But \\( plsnrjcf + xzmbgtha + \\cdots + kmldqfsa \\geq qzxwvtnp\\, kmldqfsa \\), and hence \\( \\lim _{qzxwvtnp-\\infty} 2 qzxwvtnp\\, kmldqfsa = 0 \\); from this it follows that \\( \\lim _{qzxwvtnp-\\infty} qzxwvtnp\\, xzmbgtha = 0 \\).\n\nIn the expression\n\\[\nvlfqbzoi = \\sum_{qzxwvtnp=1}^{hjgrksla} plsnrjcf - hjgrksla\\, pthglrma\n\\]\nboth \\( \\lim _{hjgrksla-\\infty} \\sum_{qzxwvtnp=1}^{hjgrksla} plsnrjcf \\) and \\( \\lim \\left(hjgrksla\\, pthglrma\\right) \\) exist, so\n\\[\n\\lim _{hjgrksla \\rightarrow \\infty} vlfqbzoi = \\lim _{hjgrksla \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{hjgrksla} plsnrjcf - \\lim _{hjgrksla \\rightarrow \\infty}\\left(hjgrksla\\, pthglrma\\right)=\\lim _{hjgrksla \\rightarrow \\infty} \\sum_{1}^{hjgrksla} plsnrjcf\n\\]\n\nThis establishes the desired convergence.\nRemark. Our proof shows that if \\( \\Sigma plsnrjcf \\) converges, where \\( \\left\\{plsnrjcf\\right\\} \\) is a monotone sequence, then \\( \\lim _{qzxwvtnp-\\infty} qzxwvtnp\\, plsnrjcf = 0 \\). This result is known as Abel's theorem (or lemma).\n\nSecond Solution. We may assume, as we have seen above, that the sequence \\( \\left\\{rcbnwtvu\\right\\} \\) decreases to zero. Then for each \\( hjgrksla \\)\n\\[\nrcbnwtvu = \\sum_{qzxwvtnp=hjgrksla}^{\\infty}\\left(plsnrjcf - xzmbgtha\\right) .\n\\]\n\nSo\n\\[\n\\begin{aligned}\n\\sum_{hjgrksla=1}^{\\infty} rcbnwtvu & = \\sum_{hjgrksla=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{qzxwvtnp=hjgrksla}^{\\infty}\\left(plsnrjcf - xzmbgtha\\right)=\\sum_{qzxwvtnp=1}^{\\infty} \\sum_{hjgrksla=1}^{qzxwvtnp}\\left(plsnrjcf - xzmbgtha\\right) \\\\\n& = \\sum_{qzxwvtnp=1}^{\\infty} qzxwvtnp\\left(plsnrjcf - xzmbgtha\\right)\n\\end{aligned}\n\\]\n\nReversing the order of summation is justified because all terms are nonnegative."
    },
    "kernel_variant": {
      "question": "Let $\\bigl(a_{m,n}\\bigr)_{m,n\\ge 1}$ be a doubly–indexed array of real numbers satisfying  \n\n(i)  $a_{m,n}\\ge 0$ for all $m,n$ and   \n\\[\na_{m,n}\\;\\ge\\;a_{m+1,n},\\qquad \na_{m,n}\\;\\ge\\;a_{m,n+1}\\qquad(\\text{monotone decrease in each index});\n\\]\n\n(ii)  the double series  \n\\[\n\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty} a_{m,n}=S<\\infty\n\\]\nconverges.\n\nDefine the bivariate power series  \n\\[\nF(x,y)\\;:=\\;\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty} a_{m,n}\\,x^{m}y^{n},\n\\qquad 0<x\\le 1,\\;0<y\\le 1.\n\\]\n\n(A)  Prove that $F$ is jointly continuous on $(0,1]^{2}$ and that  \n\\[\n(1-x)(1-y)\\,F(x,y)\\;\\longrightarrow\\;0\\qquad\\text{as }(x,y)\\to(1,1)\n\\text{ inside }(0,1]^{2}.\n\\]\n\n(B)  Let $\\Delta_{1},\\Delta_{2}$ be the forward–difference operators  \n\n\\[\n\\Delta_{1}a_{m,n}=a_{m,n}-a_{m+1,n},\\qquad \n\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}=a_{m,n}-a_{m,n+1},\n\\]\nand set the mixed second difference  \n\\[\n\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n   =a_{m,n}-a_{m+1,n}-a_{m,n+1}+a_{m+1,n+1}\\;\\;(\\ge 0).\n\\]\n\nShow that the double series  \n\\[\n\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty} mn\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n\\]\nconverges and equals $S$.\n\n(C)  Deduce the two–variable Abel limit  \n\\[\nF(x,y)\\;\\xrightarrow[(x,y)\\to(1,1)]{}\\;S,\n\\]\nand prove the two–dimensional Abel lemma  \n\\[\nmn\\,a_{m,n}\\;\\xrightarrow[\\min\\{m,n\\}\\to\\infty]{}\\;0 .\n\\]",
      "solution": "Throughout put  \n\\[\nA_{K,L}:=\\sum_{m=1}^{K}\\;\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{m,n},\\qquad \nS=\\lim_{K,L\\to\\infty}A_{K,L}.\n\\]\nBecause of (i)–(ii) every series below is non–negative, hence Tonelli’s\ntheorem applies freely.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n(A)  Continuity of $F$ and the vanishing of $(1-x)(1-y)F$.\n\n1.  Absolute convergence on $(0,1)^{2}$.  \nFor $0<x,y<1$ we have $F(x,y)\\le S$,\nso the series converges uniformly on each compact rectangle\n$[\\varepsilon,1)\\times[\\varepsilon,1)$ ($0<\\varepsilon<1$); hence $F$ is\njointly continuous on $(0,1]^{2}$, except possibly at $(1,1)$.\n\n2.  A useful bound.  For $k\\ge 0$ and $0<z<1$,\n\\[\n(1-z)z^{k}\\le\\frac{1}{k+1},\n\\]\nbecause the maximum of $g(z):=(1-z)z^{k}$ on $(0,1)$ equals\n$k^{k}/(k+1)^{k+1}<1/(k+1)$.  Consequently\n\\[\n(1-x)(1-y)\\,x^{m}y^{n}\\;\\le\\;\\frac{1}{(m+1)(n+1)}.\\tag{$\\ast$}\n\\]\n\n3.  Dominated convergence.  \nFrom $(\\ast)$ we obtain\n\\[\n0\\le(1-x)(1-y)F(x,y)\n      \\le \\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty}\n              \\frac{a_{m,n}}{(m+1)(n+1)}=:M<\\infty ,\n\\]\nwhere $M$ is independent of $(x,y)$.  \nFix $(x,y)$ and let $(x_{k},y_{k})\\to(1,1)$ inside $(0,1]^{2}$.\nTerm–wise\n$(1-x_{k})(1-y_{k})x_{k}^{m}y_{k}^{n}\\to 0$,\nand the majorant $(m+1)^{-1}(n+1)^{-1}a_{m,n}$ is summable.\nBy dominated convergence\n$(1-x_{k})(1-y_{k})F(x_{k},y_{k})\\to 0$,\nso $(1-x)(1-y)F(x,y)\\to 0$ as $(x,y)\\to(1,1)$.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n(B)  Evaluation of $\\sum_{m,n}mn\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}$.\n\nStep 1.  Two–fold summation by parts.  \nFix $K,L$ and define\n\\[\nS_{K,L}:=\\sum_{m=1}^{K}m\n            \\Bigl[\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\\Bigr].\n\\]\nApply the 1–D identity\n$\\sum_{m=1}^{K}m(b_{m}-b_{m+1})\n  =\\sum_{m=1}^{K}b_{m}-K\\,b_{K+1}$\nwith $b_{m}:=\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}$ to obtain\n\\[\nS_{K,L}=\\sum_{m=1}^{K}\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n       -K\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{2}a_{K+1,n}.      \\tag{1}\n\\]\nFor each fixed $m$, apply the same formula in $n$:\n\\[\n\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n   =\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{m,n}-L\\,a_{m,L+1}.              \\tag{2}\n\\]\nSubstituting (2) into (1) yields\n\\[\nS_{K,L}=A_{K,L}\n        -L\\sum_{m=1}^{K}a_{m,L+1}\n        -K\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{K+1,n}\n        +KL\\,a_{K+1,L+1}.                           \\tag{3}\n\\]\n\nStep 2.  Three boundary terms vanish.\n\nIntroduce the row– and column–sums\n\\[\ns_{m}:=\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty}a_{m,n},\\qquad\nt_{n}:=\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}a_{m,n}.\n\\]\nBoth $(s_{m})_{m\\ge 1}$ and $(t_{n})_{n\\ge 1}$ are non–negative,\nmonotonically decreasing, and $\\sum_{m}s_{m}=S=\\sum_{n}t_{n}$.\nAbel’s one–dimensional lemma therefore gives\n\\[\nm\\,s_{m}\\longrightarrow 0,\\qquad\nn\\,t_{n}\\longrightarrow 0\\qquad (m,n\\to\\infty).      \\tag{4}\n\\]\n\n(i)  The term $K\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{K+1,n}$.\nBecause $\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{K+1,n}\\le s_{K+1}$,\n\\[\n0\\le K\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{K+1,n}\\le K\\,s_{K+1}\\xrightarrow[]{K\\to\\infty}0\n\\quad\\text{by (4).}\n\\]\n\n(ii)  The term $L\\sum_{m=1}^{K}a_{m,L+1}$.\nBy symmetry and (4),\n\\[\n0\\le L\\sum_{m=1}^{K}a_{m,L+1}\\le L\\,t_{L+1}\\xrightarrow[]{L\\to\\infty}0.\n\\]\n\n(iii)  The corner term $KL\\,a_{K+1,L+1}$.\nBecause $s_{K+1}\\ge (L+1)a_{K+1,L+1}$ (monotonicity in $n$),\n\\[\n0\\le KL\\,a_{K+1,L+1}\\le K\\,s_{K+1}\\xrightarrow[]{K\\to\\infty}0.\n\\]\n\nStep 3.  Passage to the limit.  \nLetting $K,L\\to\\infty$ in (3) and using the three limits above,\n\\[\n\\lim_{K,L\\to\\infty}S_{K,L}=\\lim_{K,L\\to\\infty}A_{K,L}=S.\n\\]\n\nStep 4.  Monotone convergence.  \nAll terms $mn\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}$ are non–negative, so\n\\[\n\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty}mn\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n  =\\lim_{K,L\\to\\infty}S_{K,L}=S.\n\\]\nHence the announced series converges and equals $S$.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n(C)  Abel limit and the two–dimensional Abel lemma.\n\n1.  The Abel limit.  \nFor fixed $(m,n)$ the map $(x,y)\\mapsto a_{m,n}x^{m}y^{n}$\nis continuous and increases to $a_{m,n}$ as $(x,y)\\to(1,1)$.\nBecause $\\sum_{m,n}a_{m,n}=S<\\infty$, the dominated (or monotone)\nconvergence theorem gives\n\\[\n\\lim_{(x,y)\\to(1,1)}F(x,y)\n  =\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty}a_{m,n}=S .\n\\]\n\n2.  Representation of $a_{m,n}$ via second differences.  \nIterating the identities\n$a_{p,q}= \\Delta_{1}a_{p-1,q}+a_{p,q}$ and\n$a_{p,q}= \\Delta_{2}a_{p,q-1}+a_{p,q}$\none checks the telescoping formula\n\\[\na_{m,n}=\\sum_{p=m}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{q=n}^{\\infty}\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{p,q}.\n\\tag{5}\n\\]\n\n3.  The two–dimensional Abel lemma.  \nMultiply (5) by $mn$ and use $p\\ge m,\\;q\\ge n$:\n\\[\nmn\\,a_{m,n}\n   =\\sum_{p=m}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{q=n}^{\\infty}mn\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{p,q}\n   \\le\\sum_{p=m}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{q=n}^{\\infty}\n          pq\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{p,q}.\n\\]\nThe double series on the right converges (Step 4 of part (B)); its\ntails therefore tend to $0$ as $\\min\\{m,n\\}\\to\\infty$.\nHence $mn\\,a_{m,n}\\to 0$, completing the proof.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------",
      "metadata": {
        "replaced_from": "harder_variant",
        "replacement_date": "2025-07-14T19:09:31.448542",
        "was_fixed": false,
        "difficulty_analysis": "1. Higher dimension: the problem passes from a single sequence to a two-\n   dimensional array, forcing the competitor to handle double series,\n   joint limits and mixed difference operators.\n\n2. Additional constraints: monotonicity must now be understood and used\n   simultaneously in two independent directions, complicating every\n   estimate.\n\n3. Deeper techniques: the solution needs two-fold discrete summation by\n   parts, careful use of Fubini–Tonelli, uniform majorants, and a\n   multivariate dominated-convergence argument.  None of these appear in\n   the original one-dimensional exercise.\n\n4. Interacting concepts: parts (A)–(C) knit together power-series\n   boundary behaviour, discrete calculus, and Tauberian-type reasoning.\n   The final lemma mn a_{m,n}→0 generalises Abel’s classical result and\n   can only be extracted after the heavy machinery of part (B).\n\n5. Increased length and subtlety: every stage (especially the derivation\n   of formula (3) and the vanishing of boundary terms (4)) requires\n   multi-index bookkeeping that has no counterpart in the original\n   problem, making the enhanced variant significantly more intricate and\n   demanding."
      }
    },
    "original_kernel_variant": {
      "question": "Let $\\bigl(a_{m,n}\\bigr)_{m,n\\ge 1}$ be a doubly–indexed array of real numbers satisfying  \n\n(i)  $a_{m,n}\\ge 0$ for all $m,n$ and   \n\\[\na_{m,n}\\;\\ge\\;a_{m+1,n},\\qquad \na_{m,n}\\;\\ge\\;a_{m,n+1}\\qquad(\\text{monotone decrease in each index});\n\\]\n\n(ii)  the double series  \n\\[\n\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty} a_{m,n}=S<\\infty\n\\]\nconverges.\n\nDefine the bivariate power series  \n\\[\nF(x,y)\\;:=\\;\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty} a_{m,n}\\,x^{m}y^{n},\n\\qquad 0<x\\le 1,\\;0<y\\le 1.\n\\]\n\n(A)  Prove that $F$ is jointly continuous on $(0,1]^{2}$ and that  \n\\[\n(1-x)(1-y)\\,F(x,y)\\;\\longrightarrow\\;0\\qquad\\text{as }(x,y)\\to(1,1)\n\\text{ inside }(0,1]^{2}.\n\\]\n\n(B)  Let $\\Delta_{1},\\Delta_{2}$ be the forward–difference operators  \n\n\\[\n\\Delta_{1}a_{m,n}=a_{m,n}-a_{m+1,n},\\qquad \n\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}=a_{m,n}-a_{m,n+1},\n\\]\nand set the mixed second difference  \n\\[\n\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n   =a_{m,n}-a_{m+1,n}-a_{m,n+1}+a_{m+1,n+1}\\;\\;(\\ge 0).\n\\]\n\nShow that the double series  \n\\[\n\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty} mn\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n\\]\nconverges and equals $S$.\n\n(C)  Deduce the two–variable Abel limit  \n\\[\nF(x,y)\\;\\xrightarrow[(x,y)\\to(1,1)]{}\\;S,\n\\]\nand prove the two–dimensional Abel lemma  \n\\[\nmn\\,a_{m,n}\\;\\xrightarrow[\\min\\{m,n\\}\\to\\infty]{}\\;0 .\n\\]",
      "solution": "Throughout put  \n\\[\nA_{K,L}:=\\sum_{m=1}^{K}\\;\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{m,n},\\qquad \nS=\\lim_{K,L\\to\\infty}A_{K,L}.\n\\]\nBecause of (i)–(ii) every series below is non–negative, hence Tonelli’s\ntheorem applies freely.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n(A)  Continuity of $F$ and the vanishing of $(1-x)(1-y)F$.\n\n1.  Absolute convergence on $(0,1)^{2}$.  \nFor $0<x,y<1$ we have $F(x,y)\\le S$,\nso the series converges uniformly on each compact rectangle\n$[\\varepsilon,1)\\times[\\varepsilon,1)$ ($0<\\varepsilon<1$); hence $F$ is\njointly continuous on $(0,1]^{2}$, except possibly at $(1,1)$.\n\n2.  A useful bound.  For $k\\ge 0$ and $0<z<1$,\n\\[\n(1-z)z^{k}\\le\\frac{1}{k+1},\n\\]\nbecause the maximum of $g(z):=(1-z)z^{k}$ on $(0,1)$ equals\n$k^{k}/(k+1)^{k+1}<1/(k+1)$.  Consequently\n\\[\n(1-x)(1-y)\\,x^{m}y^{n}\\;\\le\\;\\frac{1}{(m+1)(n+1)}.\\tag{$\\ast$}\n\\]\n\n3.  Dominated convergence.  \nFrom $(\\ast)$ we obtain\n\\[\n0\\le(1-x)(1-y)F(x,y)\n      \\le \\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty}\n              \\frac{a_{m,n}}{(m+1)(n+1)}=:M<\\infty ,\n\\]\nwhere $M$ is independent of $(x,y)$.  \nFix $(x,y)$ and let $(x_{k},y_{k})\\to(1,1)$ inside $(0,1]^{2}$.\nTerm–wise\n$(1-x_{k})(1-y_{k})x_{k}^{m}y_{k}^{n}\\to 0$,\nand the majorant $(m+1)^{-1}(n+1)^{-1}a_{m,n}$ is summable.\nBy dominated convergence\n$(1-x_{k})(1-y_{k})F(x_{k},y_{k})\\to 0$,\nso $(1-x)(1-y)F(x,y)\\to 0$ as $(x,y)\\to(1,1)$.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n(B)  Evaluation of $\\sum_{m,n}mn\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}$.\n\nStep 1.  Two–fold summation by parts.  \nFix $K,L$ and define\n\\[\nS_{K,L}:=\\sum_{m=1}^{K}m\n            \\Bigl[\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\\Bigr].\n\\]\nApply the 1–D identity\n$\\sum_{m=1}^{K}m(b_{m}-b_{m+1})\n  =\\sum_{m=1}^{K}b_{m}-K\\,b_{K+1}$\nwith $b_{m}:=\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}$ to obtain\n\\[\nS_{K,L}=\\sum_{m=1}^{K}\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n       -K\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{2}a_{K+1,n}.      \\tag{1}\n\\]\nFor each fixed $m$, apply the same formula in $n$:\n\\[\n\\sum_{n=1}^{L}n\\,\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n   =\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{m,n}-L\\,a_{m,L+1}.              \\tag{2}\n\\]\nSubstituting (2) into (1) yields\n\\[\nS_{K,L}=A_{K,L}\n        -L\\sum_{m=1}^{K}a_{m,L+1}\n        -K\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{K+1,n}\n        +KL\\,a_{K+1,L+1}.                           \\tag{3}\n\\]\n\nStep 2.  Three boundary terms vanish.\n\nIntroduce the row– and column–sums\n\\[\ns_{m}:=\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty}a_{m,n},\\qquad\nt_{n}:=\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}a_{m,n}.\n\\]\nBoth $(s_{m})_{m\\ge 1}$ and $(t_{n})_{n\\ge 1}$ are non–negative,\nmonotonically decreasing, and $\\sum_{m}s_{m}=S=\\sum_{n}t_{n}$.\nAbel’s one–dimensional lemma therefore gives\n\\[\nm\\,s_{m}\\longrightarrow 0,\\qquad\nn\\,t_{n}\\longrightarrow 0\\qquad (m,n\\to\\infty).      \\tag{4}\n\\]\n\n(i)  The term $K\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{K+1,n}$.\nBecause $\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{K+1,n}\\le s_{K+1}$,\n\\[\n0\\le K\\sum_{n=1}^{L}a_{K+1,n}\\le K\\,s_{K+1}\\xrightarrow[]{K\\to\\infty}0\n\\quad\\text{by (4).}\n\\]\n\n(ii)  The term $L\\sum_{m=1}^{K}a_{m,L+1}$.\nBy symmetry and (4),\n\\[\n0\\le L\\sum_{m=1}^{K}a_{m,L+1}\\le L\\,t_{L+1}\\xrightarrow[]{L\\to\\infty}0.\n\\]\n\n(iii)  The corner term $KL\\,a_{K+1,L+1}$.\nBecause $s_{K+1}\\ge (L+1)a_{K+1,L+1}$ (monotonicity in $n$),\n\\[\n0\\le KL\\,a_{K+1,L+1}\\le K\\,s_{K+1}\\xrightarrow[]{K\\to\\infty}0.\n\\]\n\nStep 3.  Passage to the limit.  \nLetting $K,L\\to\\infty$ in (3) and using the three limits above,\n\\[\n\\lim_{K,L\\to\\infty}S_{K,L}=\\lim_{K,L\\to\\infty}A_{K,L}=S.\n\\]\n\nStep 4.  Monotone convergence.  \nAll terms $mn\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}$ are non–negative, so\n\\[\n\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty}mn\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{m,n}\n  =\\lim_{K,L\\to\\infty}S_{K,L}=S.\n\\]\nHence the announced series converges and equals $S$.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------\n(C)  Abel limit and the two–dimensional Abel lemma.\n\n1.  The Abel limit.  \nFor fixed $(m,n)$ the map $(x,y)\\mapsto a_{m,n}x^{m}y^{n}$\nis continuous and increases to $a_{m,n}$ as $(x,y)\\to(1,1)$.\nBecause $\\sum_{m,n}a_{m,n}=S<\\infty$, the dominated (or monotone)\nconvergence theorem gives\n\\[\n\\lim_{(x,y)\\to(1,1)}F(x,y)\n  =\\sum_{m=1}^{\\infty}\\sum_{n=1}^{\\infty}a_{m,n}=S .\n\\]\n\n2.  Representation of $a_{m,n}$ via second differences.  \nIterating the identities\n$a_{p,q}= \\Delta_{1}a_{p-1,q}+a_{p,q}$ and\n$a_{p,q}= \\Delta_{2}a_{p,q-1}+a_{p,q}$\none checks the telescoping formula\n\\[\na_{m,n}=\\sum_{p=m}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{q=n}^{\\infty}\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{p,q}.\n\\tag{5}\n\\]\n\n3.  The two–dimensional Abel lemma.  \nMultiply (5) by $mn$ and use $p\\ge m,\\;q\\ge n$:\n\\[\nmn\\,a_{m,n}\n   =\\sum_{p=m}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{q=n}^{\\infty}mn\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{p,q}\n   \\le\\sum_{p=m}^{\\infty}\\;\\sum_{q=n}^{\\infty}\n          pq\\,\\Delta_{1}\\Delta_{2}a_{p,q}.\n\\]\nThe double series on the right converges (Step 4 of part (B)); its\ntails therefore tend to $0$ as $\\min\\{m,n\\}\\to\\infty$.\nHence $mn\\,a_{m,n}\\to 0$, completing the proof.\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------------",
      "metadata": {
        "replaced_from": "harder_variant",
        "replacement_date": "2025-07-14T01:37:45.386468",
        "was_fixed": false,
        "difficulty_analysis": "1. Higher dimension: the problem passes from a single sequence to a two-\n   dimensional array, forcing the competitor to handle double series,\n   joint limits and mixed difference operators.\n\n2. Additional constraints: monotonicity must now be understood and used\n   simultaneously in two independent directions, complicating every\n   estimate.\n\n3. Deeper techniques: the solution needs two-fold discrete summation by\n   parts, careful use of Fubini–Tonelli, uniform majorants, and a\n   multivariate dominated-convergence argument.  None of these appear in\n   the original one-dimensional exercise.\n\n4. Interacting concepts: parts (A)–(C) knit together power-series\n   boundary behaviour, discrete calculus, and Tauberian-type reasoning.\n   The final lemma mn a_{m,n}→0 generalises Abel’s classical result and\n   can only be extracted after the heavy machinery of part (B).\n\n5. Increased length and subtlety: every stage (especially the derivation\n   of formula (3) and the vanishing of boundary terms (4)) requires\n   multi-index bookkeeping that has no counterpart in the original\n   problem, making the enhanced variant significantly more intricate and\n   demanding."
      }
    }
  },
  "checked": true,
  "problem_type": "proof"
}