What is the Definition and Characteristics of an Extended Real-Valued Function?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wayneckm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the behavior of convex functions within the context of extended real-valued functions, particularly when a function takes on the value -1 at a point. It highlights that if a convex function is defined on the real numbers and reaches -∞ at one point, it must also be -1 for all values leading up to that point, while being +∞ beyond it. The conversation questions the necessity of continuity in defining extended real-valued functions and explores the implications of defining operations like +∞ + -∞, which are undefined in the extended real number system. Participants suggest that a more suitable definition for convexity in the context of extended reals could be developed. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the need for clarity in defining mathematical concepts within the extended real number framework.
wayneckm
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

Recently I came across the following statement:

What happens when a convex function f achieves the value −1 at some point xo? Usually, a degenerate behaviour occurs. For instance, suppose that f is defined on R, and f(0) =
− infinity. If f(1) is finite (say), then one must have f(x) = −1 for all 0 <= x < 1 and f(x) = +infinity for all x > 1.

Apparently there is no restriction on the function characteristics, e.g. continuity, on f, why is it a "MUST"? If f is continuous (is this allowed for extended real-valued function?), it seems this is not a "MUST".

Or please kindly advise me on the definition of extended real-valued function as well as its characteristics.

Thanks very much.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Surely there's at least one typo in there?


Anyways, I don't think the term "convex function" really makes sense in this context.
 
Oops, I think I omiited the assumption of convexity in f.

For 0 \leq \alpha &lt; 1, by convexity, we have f(\alpha) \leq \alpha f(0) + (1-\alpha) f(1) \; \Rightarrow \; f(\alpha) \leq -\infty, so we deduce that f(x) = -\infty \quad \forall x \in [0,1)

Similarly we can prove f(x) = +\infty \quad \forall x \in (1,+\infty) otherwise it would violate the assumption of convexity, in particular at f(1) which is finite.
 
Alas, convexity is violated anyways: we have now shown the right hand side of
f(1) \leq (1/2) f(0) + (1/2) f(2)​
must be undefined. (being of the form (+\infty) + (-\infty))
 
So it seems the results rely on whether one define the operation +\infty + -\infty? And are we free to define this kind of operation in the extended real number system?
 
In the extended real number system, (+\infty) + (-\infty) is undefined.

There is, of course, nothing stopping you from defining a different number system in whatever way you like whose numbers are extended real numbers.


More fruitful is to come up with an appropriate definition for the extended reals, rather than try to force a definition meant for standard reals to work.

Now that I think more about it, I suspect "convex function" really is a reasonable notion for extended real numbers. I would guess its definition would be equivalent to:
f is convex iff the set of all real numbers (x,y) satisfying y \geq f(x) is a convex subset of the plane​
(One could write an equivalent definition in terms of the algebraic identity you used, but with ad hoc additions to treat the cases where the function is somewhere infinite)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K