53

Is the following statement true?

Let $f: \mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ be continuous and differentiable.

$f$ Lipschitz $\leftrightarrow \exists M:\forall x\in\mathbb{R}\ |f'(x)|\leq M$

If $f'$ is bounded, it is Lipschitz, that's obvious.

Does that work the other way around?

Let $f$ be $M$-Lipschitz, that is to say $\forall x_1, x_2\in\mathbb{R},\ |f(x_1) - f(x_2)| \leq M|x_1 - x_2|$, where $M$ is independent of $x_1, x_2$.

Let $x_1 <x_2$ be arbitrary. $f$ is continuous, so by the mean value theorem,

there exists $c\in\mathbb{R}, x_1 < c < x_2$, such that $f'(c) = \frac{f(x_2) - f(x_1)}{x_2 - x_1} \Rightarrow |f'(c)| = |\frac{f(x_2) - f(x_1)}{x_2-x_1}| \leq M$.

Does this hold? Can you, using the mean value theorem, "reach" every point in the derivative?

Also, another question: If $f$ is Lipschitz, is it necessarily differentiable?

Thanks!

JonTrav
  • 743

3 Answers3

48

Assume that $f$ is a M-Lipschitz function. So $|f(x+h)-f(x)|\leq M|h|, \quad \forall x, h \in \mathbb{R}.$ It is equivalent to $|\frac{f(x+h)-f(x)}{h}|< M$. By taking que limit, $|f'(x)|\leq M$.

For the converse, use the mean value theorem. Let $x,y \in \mathbb{R}$, there exists $c\in \mathbb {R}$ so that $f(x)-f(y)=(x-y)f'(c)$ (you have to assume that $f$ is differentiable) and now use the fact that $|f'(c)|\leq M$.

As the previous poster said, Rademacher's theorem says that every Lipschitz function is almost everywhere differentiable.

A simple example of non differentiable Lipschitz function is the absolute value.

Patissot
  • 2,495
22

You don't have to use the mean value theorem. Just use the definition of the derivative: $$ | f'(x) | = \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{|f(x+h)-f(x)| }{|h|} \leq \lim_{h \to 0} \frac{M |x+h -x|}{|h|} = M.$$

And no, Lipschitz functions don't have to be differentiable, e.g. the absolute value $| \cdot |$ is Lipschitz. Lipschitz functions are differentiable almost everywhere though.

  • 2
    If you have multiple dimensions you can use the definition of the derivative as a linear operator to bound the operator norm $|\nabla f(x)| \equiv \sup_v \frac{|\nabla f(x) v|}{|v|}$. First you introduce a limit $v\to 0$ to the right of the supremum (using the scalability of the norm), then you use the triangle inequality to add and subtract $f(x+v) - f(x)$ from the derivative. One fraction goes to zero in the limit by the definition the derivative, the other is bounded by the lipschitz constant – Felix B. Jul 05 '21 at 14:45
  • @FelixB. could I trouble you to elaborate? Sorry, but I only follow partially. (I could also post a separate question, if that's better) – husB Nov 11 '21 at 13:59
  • @husB https://math.stackexchange.com/a/4303207/445105 – Felix B. Nov 11 '21 at 14:16
  • However, in one dimension, on a bounded interval the Lipschitz continuous functions are those with a bounded weak derivative, i.e. $W^{1, \infty}$. – Joshua Siktar Jan 08 '22 at 22:17
8

On request, here is a multidimensional version of Three.One.Four's answer.

\begin{align*} \|\nabla f(x)\| &= \sup_{v} \frac{\|\nabla f(x)v\|}{\|v\|} =\sup_{v} \lim_{\lambda\to0}\frac{|\lambda|\|\nabla f(x)v\|}{|\lambda|\|v\|} =\sup_{v} \lim_{\lambda \to0}\frac{\|\nabla f(x)(\lambda v)\|}{\|\lambda v\|}\\ &\le \sup_{v} \lim_{\lambda \to0} \frac{ \|f(x+\lambda v) - f(x) -\nabla f(x)(\lambda v)\|}{\|\lambda v\|} + \frac{ \|f(x+\lambda v) - f(x) \|}{\|\lambda v\|}\\ &\le \sup_{v} \lim_{\lambda \to0} \frac{ \|f(x+\lambda v) - f(x) -\nabla f(x)(\lambda v)\|}{\|\lambda v\|} + \frac{ M\|(x+\lambda v) - (x) \|}{\|\lambda v\|}\\ &= \sup_{v} \underbrace{\lim_{\lambda \to0} \frac{ \|f(x+\lambda v) - f(x) -\nabla f(x)(\lambda v)\|}{\|\lambda v\|}}_{=0} + M\\ &\le M \end{align*}

Note that we simply used the definition of the multidimensional derivative here.

Felix B.
  • 2,425
  • Thanks for typing this up. Can I confirm that $f:\mathbb{R}^n \to \mathbb{R}^m$, and $\nabla f$ refers to the Jacobian here? – husB Nov 11 '21 at 15:28
  • sure - haven't really thought about the domain and image. But no arguments depend on it so yes I guess. – Felix B. Nov 11 '21 at 16:04
  • Oh, I now see that this applies in a general setting (as a general linear operator). cool. – husB Nov 12 '21 at 03:41