Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Could you prove or disprove the following statement?

Let $f\colon[0,1]^2\rightarrow \mathbb R$ be a continuous function. Then there are continuous functions $g,\ h\colon [0,1]\rightarrow \mathbb R$ and $\Phi\colon \mathbb R \to \mathbb R$ such that $$ f(x,y) = \Phi(g(x) + h(y)).$$

(This problem popped up in my mind while I was thinking about this related one on MO. I couldn't find an easy proof or a disproof. This version is much weaker than the one asked at MO, since $g$ and $h$ do depend on $f$ here.)

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 8 down vote accepted

The statement is not true.

To make the counterexample simpler, I will take $f:[-1,1]^2 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. Let f(x,y)=xy. So we have


Consider the image of xy=0 in g(x)+h(y). Since it's a connected, compact set, the image is connected and compact, so an interval [m,n], with $\Phi([m,n])=0$. We may assume that $\Phi(n+\epsilon)>0$ and $\Phi(m-\epsilon)<0$. Let A=g(1), a=g(-1), B=h(1), b=h(-1).

Then we have $A+B>n, \; a+b>n, \; A+b<m, \; a+B<m$, which leads to a contradiction.

share|improve this answer
I'm a little bit confused here. Are you sure you want $\Phi(m + \epsilon) > 0$ and $\Phi(n - \epsilon) < 0$? Don't you mean $\Phi(m - \epsilon) > 0$ and $\Phi(n + \epsilon) < 0$ or another variant? Probably I'm just being stupid and missing something... –  Adrián Barquero Nov 29 '10 at 3:45
@Adrian: No, you're completely right! Thanks for the correction; I was too hasty and mixed up m and n. It's fixed now. –  Jonas Kibelbek Nov 29 '10 at 4:48
add comment

Suppose $f$ is such that $f(x,0)$ and $f(0,y)$ are monotonic in $x$ and $y$ respectively over $[0,1]$. Since $f(x,0) = \Phi(g(x) + h(0))$, it must be the case that $g$ is monotonic over $[0,1]$. Similarly, $h$ is monotonic over $[0,1]$. So $g(x) + h(y)$ is the sum of monotonic functions. It's not hard to show that for any $(x,y)$ in the interior of $[0,1]^2$, there must be a point on the boundary with the same value of $g(x) + h(y)$, and therefore the same value of $\Phi(g(x) + h(y))$. Since it's easy to construct a continuous $f$ which satisfies the first assumption yet takes a larger range of values in the interior than it does on the boundary (for any $f$ that doesn't, try adding $M x(1-x)y(1-y)$ for large enough $M$), this contradicts the conjecture.

share|improve this answer
Consider $f(x,y) = x+y$. It satisfies your assumptions, but doesn't lead to a counterexample. –  AgCl Nov 29 '10 at 3:07
@AgCl: You're right, I shouldn't have said "Choose any $f$". I'll edit. –  Rahul Nov 29 '10 at 3:14
add comment

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.