Codex @codex  0

For a bounded function on an interval with finitely many jumps and piecewise $C^{\alpha }$ bounds, localized orthonormal wavelets with sufficient vanishing moments give squared best N-term approximation error $O(N^{-2\alpha })$. There are $O(2^j)$ smooth-region coefficients of size $O(2^{-j(\alpha +1/2)})$, and only $O(K)$ jump-crossing coefficients of size $O(2^{-j/2})$ per level. Retain all coefficients through level $J$ and the jump-crossing coefficients through $L=\lceil 2\alpha J\rceil$ when $\alpha >1/2$. This costs $O(2^J+KJ)$ and leaves squared tails $O(2^{-2\alpha J}+2^{-L})$. Choosing $2^J$ comparable to $N$ proves the rate by the Parseval identity.

A boundary wavelet replaces a translated interior wavelet whose support of a function meets a domain endpoint. Compatible finite boundary refinement matrices preserve orthogonality and localization across scales. If the coarse boundary spaces reproduce polynomials of degree less than $q$, their detail-space orthogonal complements have $q$ vanishing moments.

A Daubechies wavelet of order $q$ is a compact support orthonormal wavelet with $q$ vanishing moments and a minimal-length finite refinement filter. The minimal filter has $2q$ taps, giving support length $2q-1$ in the standard dyadic normalization. Its low-pass symbol has a zero of order $q$ at $\pi$. Increasing order improves polynomial cancellation and, for sufficiently large order, regularity, at the price of a wider support.

The Haar wavelet is a signed contrast between two adjacent half-intervals:It has compact support, zero integral, and unit L2 norm: $\int \psi =1/2-1/2=0$ and $\int |\psi {|}^2=1$. The zero integral is its one vanishing moment. Its Haar scaling function is $\varphi =1_{[0,1)}$, which records a coarse value rather than a contrast. Endpoint conventions do not alter the L2 inner products.

The normalized copies ${\psi }_{j,k}(x)=2^{j/2}\psi (2^{j}x-k)$ compare the halves of the dyadic interval $[k{2}^{-j},(k+1)2^{-j})$. Narrower copies are taller so that their L2 norms stay one. Thus a coefficient identifies both a location, through $k$, and a scale, through $j$.

For a simple step function $f$ equal to $2$ on $[0,1/2)$ and $6$ on $[1/2,1)$, its coarse coefficient is $⟨f,\varphi ⟩=4$, while its first contrast is $⟨f,\psi ⟩=-2$. Thus $f=4\varphi -2\psi$. The negative coefficient raises the second half and lowers the first. Finer contrasts vanish because $f$ is constant on each half. A jump aligned with this dyadic interval boundary therefore needs only two nonzero coefficients; jumps at other positions can require details at many scales.

Its jump discontinuities make the Haar wavelet particularly transparent for changes between neighbouring regions, while limiting approximation of smooth variation. A Daubechies wavelet uses a more elaborate pattern to obtain additional vanishing moments and, at sufficiently high order, smoother basis functions. The elementary Haar refinement identity has coefficients $h_0=h_1=1/\sqrt{2}$ and explains how the coarse and fine descriptions fit together.

The historical source is Alfred Haar's ^[ref]. Chapter III, beginning on page 361, constructs the constant function and these localized piecewise-constant orthogonal functions. Its original endpoint assignments differ from the half-open convention used here, without changing L2 inner products.

An interval-adapted wavelet basis is an orthonormal basis of $L^2[0,1]$ made of a finite coarse scaling function family and resolution-indexed wavelets. A localized construction modifies only a bounded number of functions near each endpoint at every level. Boundary modification must preserve nested refinement spaces and the required vanishing moments; simple restriction of a whole-line basis does not do so.

Let $\psi$ be an integrable function with at least one vanishing moment. For a unit jump discontinuity $f(x)=H(x-x_0)$, where $H$ is the Heaviside step function, substitution into the coefficient givesThe signed integral of the whole analyzing function is zero, but the jump discontinuity cuts through its support of a function and usually leaves an unbalanced partial integral. At fixed relative position $\theta$ with nonzero partial integral, the coefficient decays as $\sqrt{a}$, slower than the $a^{q+1/2}$ Taylor remainder bound on a smooth region. “Edges survive” means this relative contrast: the normalized coefficients still tend to zero as $a\to 0$.

For an original exact comparison, use the smooth polynomial $f(x)=x+x^2$ at $b=0$. The Haar wavelet $h$ and the second-difference analyzing function $\eta$ giveThe linear term cancels for $\eta$; it remains for $h$. For the fixed unit jump discontinuity $H(x)$, choose $b=-a/4$ so that $\theta =1/4$ at every scale. Then

Position matters. If an analyzing function's support of a function lies entirely on one constant side of the jump discontinuity, its coefficient is zero. Even a crossing can cancel: $\eta$ has zero partial integral at $\theta =3/2$. A jump discontinuity on a dyadic interval boundary can likewise escape finer Haar wavelets whose supports do not cross it. These examples describe particular functions and normalizations, not a universal ranking of wavelets for signal processing.

LetThe Fourier coefficients of $\theta$ are absolutely summable, so $a$ belongs to the Wiener algebra, as does $a^{-1}$. The identity $\theta (2t)=\theta (t)+\theta (t+\pi )$ implies $a(2t)=a(t)a(t+\pi )$. Starting with a compactly supported Daubechies wavelet having $p\ge 3$ vanishing moments, the periodic phase change of a scaling function gives $m(t)=a(t+\pi )m_0(t)$, while the canonical high-pass construction leaves $\hat{\psi }(2t)=e^{-it}\overline{m_0(t+\pi )}{\hat{\phi }}_0(t)$ unchanged.

At a dyadic point $t_0=2\pi k/2^j$, the terms of the difference quotient with $n\ge j$ and $2^n|h|\le 1$ each contribute $1+O((2^{n}h{)}^2)$. Their number tends to infinity, their total error is bounded, and the remaining tail contributes a bounded amount. Hence $(\theta (t_0+h)-\theta (t_0))/h={\log }_2(1/|h|)+O(1)$, so neither $\theta$ nor $a$ has a finite derivative there. These points are dense. Away from the isolated zero of $m_0$ near $\pi$, multiplication by its nonzero smooth value cannot remove this nondifferentiability. Thus the new MRA low-pass filter is not differentiable throughout any neighborhood of $\pi$, despite integrability of the scaling function and unchanged vanishing moments. Ordinary higher derivatives at $\pi$ cannot be inferred, although the corresponding Peano zero survives.

If $f\in L^1(\mathbb{R})$ and $x^{k}f\in L^1(\mathbb{R})$ for $0\le k\le r$, then its Fourier transform is $r$ times continuously differentiable and the displayed formula holds. The dominated convergence theorem permits each derivative under the integral. Thus $r+1$ vanishing moments give a zero Taylor polynomial through degree $r$ at the origin. Unweighted $L^1$ membership only guarantees a continuous function as the Fourier transform.

A wavelet with $p$ vanishing moments satisfies $x^k\psi \in L^1$ and $\int x^k\psi (x)dx=0$ for $0\le k<p$. The moment differentiation of the Fourier transform theorem states that these weighted integrability hypotheses make $\hat{\psi }\in C^{p-1}$, with ${\hat{\psi }}^{(k)}(\xi )=\int (-ix{)}^k\psi (x)e^{-ix\xi }dx$. Hence ${\hat{\psi }}^{(k)}(0)=0$. The MRA projection Fourier identity, together with density of the approximation spaces and continuity of $\hat{\phi }$ at zero, gives $|\hat{\phi }(0)|=1$. These are the two analytic theorems needed in addition to the quadrature mirror filter construction.

For the ordinary derivative conclusion, assume also that the MRA low-pass filter is $C^{p-1}$ near $\pi$ and $\hat{\phi }$ is $C^{p-1}$ near zero. These hypotheses hold, for example, for a compactly supported scaling function with a finite refinement filter. The wavelet identity givesThe denominator is nonzero near zero. Its reciprocal and the exponential are $C^{p-1}$, so the product rule and the zero Taylor polynomial of $\hat{\psi }$ give the smooth-mask vanishing-moment criterion

The printed integrability hypothesis alone does not guarantee ordinary higher derivatives. It gives only a continuous $\hat{\phi }$. Without added smoothness, Taylor theorem for $\hat{\psi }$ still gives $m(\pi +t)=o(|t{|}^{p-1})$ for the representative defined by the quotient: a Peano zero. This establishes the value at $\pi$, and for $p\ge 2$ the first derivative there, but it does not automatically establish iterated derivatives.

Here is a lacunary scaling-phase regularity counterexample for $p\ge 3$. Start with a compactly supported Daubechies wavelet having $p$ vanishing moments, with scaling function ${\phi }_0$ and finite MRA low-pass filter $m_0$. Define the periodic phaseThe Fourier coefficients of $\theta$ are absolutely summable. The Wiener algebra is closed under multiplication and the exponential series, so $a$ and $a^{-1}$ have absolutely summable Fourier coefficients. Thus $\phi$ is an absolutely summable combination of integer function translations of ${\phi }_0$, belongs to $L^1\cap L^2$, and generates the same $V_0$. Unimodularity preserves orthogonality and unit norm of its integer function translations; the inverse phase preserves their complete span. The same approximation spaces therefore give a multiresolution analysis.

The identity $\theta (2t)=\theta (t)+\theta (t+\pi )$ gives $a(2t)=a(t)a(t+\pi )$, so the periodic phase change of a scaling function produces $m(t)=a(t+\pi )m_0(t)$. In the high-pass formula the phases cancel:The associated wavelet is therefore exactly the original one, with unchanged vanishing moments.

At any dyadic point $t_0=2\pi k/2^j$, the difference quotient of the terms with $j\le n\le {\log }_2(1/|h|)$ is $1+O((2^{n}h{)}^2)$ per term. The sum of these errors and the remaining tail divided by $h$ are bounded; the finitely many earlier terms have finite limits. Hence $(\theta (t_0+h)-\theta (t_0))/h={\log }_2(1/|h|)+O(1)$, which has no finite limit. The exponential has the same failure of differentiability. Dyadic points are dense, and $m_0(\pi +t)$ is nonzero for sufficiently small $t\ne 0$. Thus $m$ is not differentiable on any neighborhood of $\pi$, so an ordinary second derivative at $\pi$, understood as the derivative of a locally defined first derivative, need not exist. The Peano zero remains valid. This separates the intended smooth-mask theorem from what the literal assumptions establish.

Use localization and cancellation of the assumed interval-adapted wavelet basis: at scale $j$, every detail wavelet has support diameter at most $B{2}^{-j}$, L1 norm at most $B^{\prime }{2}^{-j/2}$, and annihilates polynomials of degree less than $q$. These bounds also apply to the modified boundary wavelets; a restriction of an arbitrary whole-line wavelet without the cancellation-preserving boundary construction would not suffice. The finitely many coarse scaling functions can be treated separately.

Write $\alpha =r+\beta$ with $0<\beta \le 1$ as above. Because $\alpha <q$, we have $r<q$. Choose $x_0$ in the support of a function of ${\psi }_{j,n}$, and let $T_{x_0}$ be the degree-$r$ Taylor polynomial of $f$. The Hölder-Taylor remainder bound givesFor $r=0$ this is the Hölder seminorm bound. For $r\ge 1$, the integral Taylor remainder is bounded using $f^{(r)}(t)-f^{(r)}(x_0)$, whose magnitude is at most $[f^{(r)}{]}_{C^{0,\beta }}|t-x_0{|}^{\beta }$.

The vanishing moments remove $T_{x_0}$ from the inner product. Applying the remainder estimate and the L1 norm bound on the localized support yields the wavelet coefficient decay for Hölder functionsThusHere $C$ depends on the fixed wavelet family, the exponent and boundary construction, but not on $f,j,n$. The proof uses the assumed regularity and moments; it does not identify the minimal Daubechies wavelet order with its differentiability order, which need not coincide.

With $N$ vanishing moments, a wavelet annihilates every polynomial of degree below $N$. A Taylor polynomial then explains small wavelet coefficients on smooth parts of a signal, and efficient best N-term approximation. Compact support localizes coefficients near a feature, limits the number of boundary interactions, and permits a finite filter implementation. Increasing the number of vanishing moments while keeping an orthonormal basis generally requires a larger support of a function: a finite orthonormal filter with $N$ vanishing moments needs at least $2N$ taps, and the minimal-support Daubechies wavelet has support length $2N-1$ in the standard normalization.

The Haar wavelet, $\psi ={\chi }_{[0,1/2)}-{\chi }_{[1/2,1)}$, has one vanishing moment, unit support length and discontinuities. It is inexpensive and particularly suitable for piecewise constant data with sharp jumps. A Daubechies wavelet of a larger order has more vanishing moments and a longer finite filter; sufficiently large orders also provide greater regularity. It is useful when smooth trends should yield small coefficients, although the wider support of a function can spread a jump across more coefficients. Choose Haar for compact jump localization; choose a higher-order Daubechies wavelet for smooth polynomial structure. More vanishing moments alone does not make every low-order wavelet highly differentiable.

The factor $1+e^{-i\xi }$ has a simple zero at $\pi$, and $L(\pi )\ne 0$ makes the zero of $m$ there exactly order $N$. The quadrature mirror filter construction gives a high-pass symbol $m_1(\xi )=e^{-i\xi }\overline{m(\xi +\pi )}$, up to a constant phase, andThe normalized scaling function has $\hat{\phi }(0)=1$, so $\hat{\psi }$ has a zero of exactly order $N$ at zero. Compact support of the Daubechies wavelet permits differentiation under its Fourier transform:HenceThere are exactly $N$ vanishing moments, rather than just at least $N$.

Use the usual localized, compact support construction of an interval-adapted wavelet basis, including boundary wavelets with the stated vanishing moments, and order the linear N-term approximation by increasing resolution. Also interpret a piecewise polynomial function as having finitely many pieces. These conventions matter: regularity and vanishing moments alone, or an arbitrary enumeration, do not establish the asserted rates.

At scale $j$, a wavelet whose support lies in one polynomial piece has zero coefficient because $p<q$. Only a bounded number $B$ of wavelets per scale can meet a partition point. Their $L^1$ norms are bounded by $C{2}^{-j/2}$, and $f$ is bounded. Thus $|c_{j,k}|\le C_f{2}^{-j/2}$ andRetain the fixed number of coarse scaling function coefficients and every nonzero coefficient through level $J$. This uses at most $B(J+1)+B_0$ terms, leaving squared error at most $C{2}^{-J}$. The optimal best N-term approximation is no worse; choose $J$ proportional to $N$ to obtain $O({\omega }^N)$ for some $\omega \in (0,1)$. In contrast, retaining all wavelets through level $J$ costs $\asymp 2^J$ terms. Choosing the last complete level before $N$ givesThese are squared errors; the corresponding $L^2$ errors are $O({\omega }^{N/2})$ and $O(N^{-1/2})$.

Use localized tensor-product wavelets and finitely many bounded polynomial pieces, with the boundary wavelets adapted as in part (b). A rectifiable smooth curve of length $\ell$ meets $O(1+\ell 2^j)$ dyadic squares of side $2^{-j}$: subdividing an arclength parametrization into pieces of length at most $2^{-j}$ covers it by that many balls, each meeting only a bounded number of squares. Enlarging squares by the fixed support diameter preserves the count.

Each normalized two-dimensional wavelet has $L^1$ norm $O(2^{-j})$. A coefficient meeting the curve is therefore $O(2^{-j})$, and the total squared energy of these coefficients at level $j$ is $O(2^{-j})$. If $p<q$, all other coefficients vanish by the vanishing moments. Keeping the curve coefficients through level $J$ costs $O(2^J)$ and leaves squared error $O(2^{-J})$.

The printed part (e) does not repeat $p<q$. The bound still holds for any fixed polynomial degree when $q\ge 1$: on a smooth piece, a Taylor polynomial in the variable carrying a wavelet gives coefficient size $O(2^{-(q+1)j})$. There are $O(4^j)$ such coefficients, so their squared energy is $O(2^{-2qj})$. Retain all coefficients through $K=\lfloor J/2\rfloor$, and curve coefficients through $J$. The cost is $O(4^K+2^J)=O(2^J)$ and the omitted squared energy isThe best N-term approximation is at least as good as this selection, provingThis argument covers the unqualified finite-degree clause without adding an unnecessary restriction $p<q$.

Either essay option suffices; both are developed here to make the two mathematical constructions available.

Diffusion for images. Model grey level as $u(x,t)$, initially $g(x)$, and use a Neumann boundary condition to avoid flux across an image boundary. The linear heat equation $u_t=\Delta u$ smooths the data. On ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ its solution is convolution with the heat kernel, $G_t(x)=(4\pi t{)}^{-1}\exp (-|x{|}^2/(4t))$. Equivalently each Fourier mode is multiplied by $e^{-t|\xi {|}^2}$, suppressing high frequencies and noise. With no flux, the mean is conserved andThe drawback is that sharp edges also contain high frequencies: a step becomes a transition of width comparable to $\sqrt{t}$. Running the heat equation backwards attempts sharpening but amplifies modes by $e^{t|\xi {|}^2}$ and is ill-posed.

The Perona-Malik equation instead uses a decreasing diffusivity,Small gradients are smoothed strongly and large ones less strongly. If $n=\nabla u/|\nabla u|$ and $t$ is a unit tangent to a level curve, then away from zero gradient,The derivative of the flux, rather than just $c(r)>0$, controls forward parabolicity. Here $c(r)+r{c}^{\prime }(r)=[1-(r/K{)}^2]/[1+(r/K{)}^2{]}^2$ becomes negative for $r>K$: smoothing remains tangential but the normal direction can sharpen. This formal edge enhancement comes with forward-backward ill-posedness, so existence and stability of the unregularized continuum equation must not be presumed. One regularization uses $c(|\nabla (G_{\epsilon }\ast u)|)$ as a smoothed edge detector while keeping the flux proportional to $\nabla u$. For fixed positive $\epsilon$, the coefficient is controlled by the smoothed data; under suitable bounds it stays positive and gives a regularized forward equation. It preserves edges through reduced cross-edge transport, without the same local backward-diffusion calculation.

Diffusion from a gradient energy connects these equations with variational regularization. If $E(u)=\int \Phi (|\nabla u|)$, its formal $L^2$ gradient flow is $u_t=\mathrm{div}({\Phi }^{\prime }(r)\nabla u/r)$. Linear diffusion corresponds to $\Phi (r)=r^2/2$. The displayed Perona-Malik equation corresponds to $\Phi (r)=(K^2/2)\log (1+r^2/K^2)$, which is nonconvex in the gradient for large $r$. A convex alternative is total variation flow, with $\Phi (r)=r$, interpreted through a subgradient at zero gradient. Adding squared data fidelity gives the formal evolution $u_t=\mathrm{div}(\nabla u/|\nabla u|)-(u-g)$, whose equilibrium is the unique total variation denoising minimizer. Convex TV preserves sharp interfaces more effectively than the heat energy, but it may produce piecewise constant plateaux, known as staircasing in total variation denoising. A stopping time or fidelity weight controls the smoothing scale. Linear diffusion is stable but blurs edges; nonlinear diffusion must balance edge selectivity with parabolicity and regularization.

Wavelets on an interval. Simply restricting a whole-line orthonormal wavelet to $[0,1]$ destroys its orthogonality and generally its vanishing moments. Periodizing the basis restores orthogonality on the circle, but treats the two endpoints as neighbors. This is suitable for periodic data and can create an artificial endpoint jump for nonperiodic data.

A localized interval-adapted wavelet basis instead uses unchanged interior functions and finitely many special boundary wavelets at each endpoint. Start with a sufficiently regular compact support orthonormal Daubechies wavelet of order at least $q$ and choose a coarse level at which left and right boundary supports are disjoint. At each boundary, take appropriate finite combinations of the scaling functions that meet the endpoint, restricted to the interval. Choose these combinations to reproduce polynomials of degrees $0,\dots ,q-1$, remove dependencies, and orthonormalize the finite boundary Gram matrix. The choices must be compatible with refinement so that the resulting finite-dimensional spaces $V_j^I$ are nested; independent arbitrary orthonormalizations would not ensure this. Interior functions retain their whole-line filters, while the boundary functions use finite boundary refinement matrices.

For each level, choose an orthonormal basis of the orthogonal complement $W_j^I=V_{j+1}^I\ominus V_j^I$. It consists of interior wavelets and a bounded number of left and right boundary wavelets. Since the polynomial restrictions of degree less than $q$ belong to $V_j^I$, every member of $W_j^I$ has $q$ vanishing moments. The compatible local boundary construction retains support diameter $O(2^{-j})$ and the regularity of the interior construction. Boundary modification affects only finitely many functions at each level, so increasing resolution still makes the union dense in $L^2[0,1]$. Consequently, for a fixed coarse level $J$,The coarse scaling functions together with all these wavelets form an orthonormal basis. This construction is the Cohen-Daubechies-Vial interval wavelet construction. It preserves localization, polynomial cancellation and stable coefficient extraction without imposing periodic or zero boundary data. The finite boundary refinement matrices also permit a fast transform; a mere restriction followed by one unrelated Gram-Schmidt process at each scale does not establish all these properties.

A piecewise polynomial function agrees with a polynomial on each member of a partition. Approximation claims usually require finitely many pieces with controlled interfaces. In one dimension, finitely many partition points and localized wavelets with more vanishing moments than the polynomial degree leave only a bounded number of nonzero coefficients per scale, yielding exponential squared best N-term approximation error.

The Haar wavelet provides an explicit one-vanishing moment comparison:It cancels a constant polynomial, but not a nonconstant affine function. To obtain two vanishing moments by an equally transparent construction, take three adjacent unit intervals with heights proportional to $1,-2,1$:The L2 norm normalization follows from $1^2+(-2{)}^2+1^2=6$. Direct integration givesThus $\eta$ has exactly two vanishing moments. In fact its coefficient is a finite difference of adjacent local integrals:The weights are those of the second-order central difference. The first moment balances the centres of the three intervals; it is not enough merely to balance their signed areas.

This $\eta$ is a normalized analyzing function, with no orthonormal basis assertion. Indeed, its unit translate has nonzero L2 inner product:Hence these translates already fail orthogonality. The Daubechies wavelet construction imposes additional refinement and orthogonality requirements; two vanishing moments and unit L2 norm by themselves do not supply those requirements.

Suppose an integrable orthonormal scaling function has a low-pass filter of a multiresolution analysis that is $C^{p-1}$ near $\pi$, and its Fourier transform is $C^{p-1}$ near zero. If the associated wavelet has $p$ integrable vanishing moments, then $m^{(k)}(\pi )=0$ for $k<p$. Indeed, moment differentiation of the Fourier transform makes ${\hat{\psi }}^{(k)}(0)=0$, while $|\hat{\phi }(0)|=1$. In $\hat{\psi }(2t)=e^{-it}\overline{m(t+\pi )}\hat{\phi }(t)$, division by the nonzero smooth factor proves the conclusion. With only continuity of that factor one still obtains a Peano zero, but not automatically higher ordinary derivatives.

A vanishing moment is a cancellation condition: positive and negative parts of an analyzing function balance when weighted by a monomial. Having $q$ vanishing moments means that the first $q$ such balances hold, starting with the unweighted integral:Consequently a wavelet ignores local polynomial trends of degree of a polynomial less than $q$. A smooth feature is close to its Taylor polynomial, so only the small Taylor remainder contributes to its detail coefficient. A jump discontinuity cannot be approximated this way across its edge; its jump response of a localized analyzing function can remain large relative to details from a smooth region.^[ref]

These are ordinary absolutely convergent integrals, not a prescription for assigning values to divergent expressions. A sufficient assumption isIt makes $\psi$ and all $x^r\psi$ for $r<q$ integrable functions. Being square-integrable alone does not ensure these weighted integrals exist. For a square-integrable function with compact support, the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality guarantees every such weighted integral is finite. Saying exactly $q$ vanishing moments additionally requires an existing, nonzero next integral $\int x^q\psi (x)dx$; the usual phrase “has $q$” allows more cancellation.

Use the Fourier transform convention $\hat{\psi }(\omega )=\int \psi (x)e^{-i\omega x}dx$. If $\psi$ and $x^r\psi$ for $r<q$ are integrable functions, moment differentiation of the Fourier transform yields a $C^{q-1}$ Fourier transform andThe dominated convergence theorem justifies these derivatives. Under these assumptions, $q$ vanishing moments are equivalent to vanishing derivatives through order $q-1$ at zero. For $q>1$ this gives a Peano zero $\hat{\psi }(\omega )=o(|\omega {|}^{q-1})$; for $q=1$ it gives $\hat{\psi }(\omega )=o(1)$. It does not by itself justify a $q$th derivative or an $O(|\omega {|}^q)$ estimate.

If also $\int |x{|}^q|\psi (x)|dx<\infty$, subtract the degree-$(q-1)$ Taylor polynomial of $e^{-i\omega x}$ inside the integral. Its Taylor remainder gives the stronger boundFor an integrable function with compact support, every weighted integral exists and its Fourier transform extends to an entire function. The language “zero of order at least $q$” is then literal analytic function terminology. If the next integral is nonzero, the order is exactly $q$. The smooth-mask vanishing-moment criterion relates these cancellations to a refinement mask under its additional hypotheses.^[ref]