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

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wayneckm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition and characteristics of extended real-valued functions, particularly in the context of convexity and the behavior of such functions at specific points. Participants explore the implications of a convex function achieving certain values and the conditions under which these behaviors manifest.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that if a convex function f achieves the value -1 at some point, it leads to degenerate behavior, suggesting that f must equal -1 for a range of values and +infinity for others, depending on the definition of f.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the term "convex function" in this context, indicating a potential misunderstanding or misapplication of the concept.
  • A later reply acknowledges the omission of the assumption of convexity and attempts to derive implications based on that assumption, leading to conclusions about the behavior of f over specific intervals.
  • One participant argues that the results depend on the definition of the operation +infinity + -infinity, questioning whether such operations can be defined within the extended real number system.
  • Another participant clarifies that in the extended real number system, the operation (+infinity) + (-infinity) is indeed undefined and suggests that a more appropriate definition for extended reals should be established rather than forcing standard definitions onto them.
  • There is a proposal that the definition of "convex function" could be adapted for extended real numbers, suggesting an alternative characterization based on the geometric properties of the function.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of convexity to extended real-valued functions and the implications of certain operations within this framework. There is no consensus on the correct approach or definition, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the assumptions made about convexity and the operations involving infinity, as well as the need for clarity in definitions when transitioning from standard to extended real numbers.

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 [tex]0 \leq \alpha < 1[/tex], by convexity, we have [tex]f(\alpha) \leq \alpha f(0) + (1-\alpha) f(1) \; \Rightarrow \; f(\alpha) \leq -\infty[/tex], so we deduce that [tex]f(x) = -\infty \quad \forall x \in [0,1)[/tex]

Similarly we can prove [tex]f(x) = +\infty \quad \forall x \in (1,+\infty)[/tex] otherwise it would violate the assumption of convexity, in particular at [tex]f(1)[/tex] which is finite.
 
Alas, convexity is violated anyways: we have now shown the right hand side of
[tex]f(1) \leq (1/2) f(0) + (1/2) f(2)[/tex]​
must be undefined. (being of the form [itex](+\infty) + (-\infty)[/itex])
 
So it seems the results rely on whether one define the operation [tex]+\infty + -\infty[/tex]? And are we free to define this kind of operation in the extended real number system?
 
In the extended real number system, [itex](+\infty) + (-\infty)[/itex] 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 [itex]y \geq f(x)[/itex] 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
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K