Current task: —

← Session 28 — ii′-5e: partial-fraction identity (zero series + F entire)

#1541 assistant 2026-08-23 17:44:01.973 UTC · 1845→1449 tok open ⤢
thinking (3718 chars)
The bytes look clean (UTF-8 symbols, spaces, no tabs). So the parse issue isn't invisible chars. Let me think again about "unknown identifier linarith at 150:4" — WAIT. Maybe the issue is that `induction N with | zero => ... | succ N ih => ...` — and hle2's by-block ENDED the case because... hmm. Actually — hold on. Let me reconsider: maybe the `apply Real.log_le_log (by positivity)` at line 146 leaves the goal `|a + ↑N| + 3 ≤ |a| + (↑N + 1) + 3` — then `have h1 : ...` — but WAIT: `Real.log_le_log` — what if its signature is `(hx : 0 < x) (hy : x ≤ y) : log x ≤ log y`?? Then apply Real.log_le_log (by positivity) leaves goal |a+↑N|+3 ≤ |a|+(↑N+1)+3 ✓ then h1 + linarith closes ✓ — hle2 done at 149 ✓ then 150... should be fine. Hmm — let me test a minimal hypothesis: is it the `Nat.cast_nonneg N)]` — the `show (0 : ℝ) ≤ (N : ℝ) from Nat.cast_nonneg N` inside the rw — inside a `(by rw [abs_of_nonneg (...)])` nested inside `.trans (...)` nested inside a `have` inside a `by` inside a case... the nesting depth with `show ... from` — fine. New approach: bisect. Replace the final `linarith [ih, hwin, hle1, hle2]` with `sorry`-free alternative and see if the error moves. Actually — better diagnostic: put `all_goals` markers... Let me try just running the file up to that lemma: comment out everything after Ncount_chain_le and see if IT parses alone... Actually — simpler theory test: the error "unsolved goals case succ" at 104:14 lists the context with hle1 but NOT hle2 and NOT the final goal proof — so the succ case ended with the goal unproven and hle2 missing from the context shown — because the error at 150:4 killed the rest. The context display shows hle1 as the LAST hypothesis — meaning hle2 (line 143) was NEVER PROCESSED! So the succ-case block ended BEFORE hle2 — i.e., after hle1 (which ends at line 142 `exact h4.trans h5`)! So the parser considered the succ case complete at line 142 — because hle1's by-block consumed... no wait — if the case ended at 142, then `have hle2` at 143 (indent 4) would be the parse error location, not 150. Hmm — unless hle1's by-block absorbed lines 143-149! hle1's by-block tactics are at indent 6+; line 143 ` have hle2` at indent 4 — ends hle1's block ✓... OK wait, actually — the calc: `calc STEP1 ≤ STEP2 := by INNER-BLOCK`. The inner block at indent 12. Line 143 at indent 4. The calc is one tactic in hle1's by (indent 6 for the calc keyword at... let me check: line 132 ` calc ...` indent 6 ✓ within hle1's by (tactics at indent 6). The calc continuation at indent 10 ✓. Inner by tactics at 12 ✓. `exact h4.trans h5` at 12 ends the inner by. Then hle2 at indent 4 — ends hle1's by-block ✓... You know what — let me stop theorizing and bisect concretely: temporarily replace the whole succ-case with `sorry` to check the file parses, then add back piece by piece. Actually — an even quicker check: maybe `Nat.cast_nonneg N)]` — the `show (0 : ℝ) ≤ (N : ℝ) from Nat.cast_nonneg N` — N here — WAIT. In hle2's `have h1`, the `(N : ℝ)` — fine. Hmm — actually let me look VERY carefully at line 137: `mul_le_mul_of_nonneg_left h2 (mul_nonneg A0count_pos.le hN0)` — mul_le_mul_of_nonneg_left signature: `mul_le_mul_of_nonneg_left (h : b ≤ c) (ha : 0 ≤ a) : a * b ≤ a * c`? or (h : b ≤ c) (a0 : 0 ≤ a)? — in this Mathlib the order variants exist (journal-025 gotcha: "this Mathlib's add_le_add_left/right are swapped vs classic"). If mul_le_mul_of_nonneg_left h2 (proof) has a DIFFERENT signature here (e.g. (ha : 0 ≤ a) first!), then the term is ill-typed → error INSIDE hle1 — but no error was reported at 137! OK — empirical bisect. Let me comment out from hle1 to the end of the lemma and add a sorry, verify parse, then restore pieces.
Let me bisect: temporarily stub the tail of the succ case to isolate the parse failure.
tool: Bash
input
{
  "command": "cd D:/Python/Quantum/research/lean/NguyenRH1 && cp NguyenRH1/LiCircleBound.lean /tmp/LiCircleBound.bak && python - << 'PYEOF'\nimport re\np = 'NguyenRH1/LiCircleBound.lean'\nsrc = open(p, encoding='utf-8').read()\n# Replace from \"    have hle1\" to \"    linarith [ih, hwin, hle1, hle2]\" with sorry\nstart = src.index('    have hle1 :')\nend = src.index('    linarith [ih, hwin, hle1, hle2]') + len('    linarith [ih, hwin, hle1, hle2]')\nsrc = src[:start] + '    sorry' + src[end:]\nopen(p, 'w', encoding='utf-8').write(src)\nprint('stubbed')\nPYEOF\nexport PATH=\"$HOME/.elan/bin:$PATH\" && lake env lean NguyenRH1/LiCircleBound.lean 2>&1 | head -20",
  "description": "Bisect: stub the hle1..end block",
  "timeout": 600000
}
raw content_json (database row)
[{"type":"thinking","thinking":"The bytes look clean (UTF-8 symbols, spaces, no tabs). So the parse issue isn't invisible chars.\n\nLet me think again about \"unknown identifier linarith at 150:4\" — WAIT. Maybe the issue is that `induction N with | zero => ... | succ N ih => ...` — and hle2's by-block ENDED the case because... hmm.\n\nActually — hold on. Let me reconsider: maybe the `apply Real.log_le_log (by positivity)` at line 146 leaves the goal `|a + ↑N| + 3 ≤ |a| + (↑N + 1) + 3` — then `have h1 : ...` — but WAIT: `Real.log_le_log` — what if its signature is `(hx : 0 < x) (hy : x ≤ y) : log x ≤ log y`?? Then apply Real.log_le_log (by positivity) leaves goal |a+↑N|+3 ≤ |a|+(↑N+1)+3 ✓ then h1 + linarith closes ✓ — hle2 done at 149 ✓ then 150... should be fine.\n\nHmm — let me test a minimal hypothesis: is it the `Nat.cast_nonneg N)]` — the `show (0 : ℝ) ≤ (N : ℝ) from Nat.cast_nonneg N` inside the rw — inside a `(by rw [abs_of_nonneg (...)])` nested inside `.trans (...)` nested inside a `have` inside a `by` inside a case... the nesting depth with `show ... from` — fine.\n\nNew approach: bisect. Replace the final `linarith [ih, hwin, hle1, hle2]` with `sorry`-free alternative and see if the error moves. Actually — better diagnostic: put `all_goals` markers... Let me try just running the file up to that lemma: comment out everything after Ncount_chain_le and see if IT parses alone... Actually — simpler theory test: the error \"unsolved goals case succ\" at 104:14 lists the context with hle1 but NOT hle2 and NOT the final goal proof — so the succ case ended with the goal unproven and hle2 missing from the context shown — because the error at 150:4 killed the rest. The context display shows hle1 as the LAST hypothesis — meaning hle2 (line 143) was NEVER PROCESSED! So the succ-case block ended BEFORE hle2 — i.e., after hle1 (which ends at line 142 `exact h4.trans h5`)! So the parser considered the succ case complete at line 142 — because hle1's by-block consumed... no wait — if the case ended at 142, then `have hle2` at 143 (indent 4) would be the parse error location, not 150.\n\nHmm — unless hle1's by-block absorbed lines 143-149! hle1's by-block tactics are at indent 6+; line 143 `    have hle2` at indent 4 — ends hle1's block ✓...\n\nOK wait, actually — the calc: `calc STEP1 ≤ STEP2 := by INNER-BLOCK`. The inner block at indent 12. Line 143 at indent 4. The calc is one tactic in hle1's by (indent 6 for the calc keyword at... let me check: line 132 `      calc ...` indent 6 ✓ within hle1's by (tactics at indent 6). The calc continuation at indent 10 ✓. Inner by tactics at 12 ✓. `exact h4.trans h5` at 12 ends the inner by. Then hle2 at indent 4 — ends hle1's by-block ✓...\n\nYou know what — let me stop theorizing and bisect concretely: temporarily replace the whole succ-case with `sorry` to check the file parses, then add back piece by piece. Actually — an even quicker check: maybe `Nat.cast_nonneg N)]` — the `show (0 : ℝ) ≤ (N : ℝ) from Nat.cast_nonneg N` — N here — WAIT. In hle2's `have h1`, the `(N : ℝ)` — fine.\n\nHmm — actually let me look VERY carefully at line 137: `mul_le_mul_of_nonneg_left h2 (mul_nonneg A0count_pos.le hN0)` — mul_le_mul_of_nonneg_left signature: `mul_le_mul_of_nonneg_left (h : b ≤ c) (ha : 0 ≤ a) : a * b ≤ a * c`? or (h : b ≤ c) (a0 : 0 ≤ a)? — in this Mathlib the order variants exist (journal-025 gotcha: \"this Mathlib's add_le_add_left/right are swapped vs classic\"). If mul_le_mul_of_nonneg_left h2 (proof) has a DIFFERENT signature here (e.g. (ha : 0 ≤ a) first!), then the term is ill-typed → error INSIDE hle1 — but no error was reported at 137! \n\nOK — empirical bisect. Let me comment out from hle1 to the end of the lemma and add a sorry, verify parse, then restore pieces.","signature":""},{"type":"text","text":"Let me bisect: temporarily stub the tail of the succ case to isolate the parse failure."},{"type":"tool_use","id":"Bash_293","name":"Bash","input":{"command":"cd D:/Python/Quantum/research/lean/NguyenRH1 && cp NguyenRH1/LiCircleBound.lean /tmp/LiCircleBound.bak && python - << 'PYEOF'\nimport re\np = 'NguyenRH1/LiCircleBound.lean'\nsrc = open(p, encoding='utf-8').read()\n# Replace from \"    have hle1\" to \"    linarith [ih, hwin, hle1, hle2]\" with sorry\nstart = src.index('    have hle1 :')\nend = src.index('    linarith [ih, hwin, hle1, hle2]') + len('    linarith [ih, hwin, hle1, hle2]')\nsrc = src[:start] + '    sorry' + src[end:]\nopen(p, 'w', encoding='utf-8').write(src)\nprint('stubbed')\nPYEOF\nexport PATH=\"$HOME/.elan/bin:$PATH\" && lake env lean NguyenRH1/LiCircleBound.lean 2>&1 | head -20","description":"Bisect: stub the hle1..end block","timeout":600000},"extra_content":null}]