 Solution

The ordinary interpolation formulation is unambiguous for strictly increasing knots; repeated knots require specified confluent interpolation or a limiting convention. First take distinct knots and $k\ge 2$, and for fixed $t$ write $F_t(u)=(u-t{)}_{+}^{k-1}$. The two degree-at-most-$k-1$ Lagrange interpolation polynomials ${\ell }_i(\cdot ,t)$ and ${\ell }_{i+1}(\cdot ,t)$ agree at the $k-1$ shared knots $t_{i+1},\dots ,t_{i+k-1}$. Their difference is thereforeThis remains valid if their difference has lower degree: the coefficient is then zero. The leading coefficient of a degree-at-most-$k-1$ interpolant is its order-$(k-1)$ divided difference. Comparing leading coefficients and using the divided-difference recursion givesConsequently the Lee interpolation identity holds for every real $x,t$:No differentiability of the truncated power in its argument was needed for this distinct-node proof.

Sum the identity over $i=1,\dots ,n$. The right side telescopes, giving ${\sum }_i{\omega }_i(x)N_i(t)={\ell }_{n+1}(x,t)-{\ell }_1(x,t)$. When $t_k<t<t_{n+1}$, all the nodes for ${\ell }_1$ lie below $t$, so its interpolation data are zero and ${\ell }_1\equiv 0$. All the nodes for ${\ell }_{n+1}$ lie above $t$, where $F_t(u)=(u-t{)}^{k-1}$ is already a polynomial of the admissible degree. Uniqueness of polynomial interpolation gives ${\ell }_{n+1}(x,t)=(x-t{)}^{k-1}$. Therefore the Marsden identity isFor order one the empty product is one, the interpolants are constants and a consistent half-open interval convention for $(u-t{)}_{+}^0$ gives the same telescoping proof. Nondecreasing repeated-knot sequences can be treated by the appropriate confluent or limiting convention wherever that definition is valid; merely specifying repeated data values does not uniquely determine the interpolation polynomials. The basic open knot interval in the Marsden identity avoids endpoint convention ambiguity.