Given $0 < \alpha_1, \alpha_2 <1$ and $1/2 < p <1$, how to prove that the following expression is always non-negative? \begin{align*} (1 - \alpha_2)^2 p^2 (2 p -1) + \alpha_1^2 \, p\, \left(2 \alpha_2^2 \,(1 - p)^2 + p (2 p - 1) + \alpha_2 (-1 + 5 p - 4 p^2) \right) + \alpha_1 \left(-2 p^2\, (2 p - 1) + \alpha_2^2\, p \,(-1 + 5 p - 4 p^2) + \alpha_2 (1 - 7 p^2 + 8 p^3) \right) \geq 0 \end{align*}
It's easy to see that there is only one term, $-2 p^2 \alpha_1 (2p-1) $, that will be negative in this expression. I have tested this inequality using Mathematica's Reduce function and also by brute forcing using a small Java program. However, I still don't know of a rigorous proof. The inequality arose when I was trying to design a primal-dual approximation algorithm for a graph matching problem.
Also, is there a way I can get Mathematica's proof (that uses the Reduce function) for this inequality in a human understandable format?
First, we determine whether the function has a minimum in the allowed region via the first derivative.
So the function has exactly one local minimum in the allowed region, but that minimum is positive. There may yet be a minimum on the boundary of the region. (The derivatives of the function don't know anything about our region...) There are two ways forward:
and explicitly finding the minima on each chunk of the boundary, finding that most chunks don't have a stationary point.
and we can, if we choose manually verify that all of these minima (for the regions that contain local minima) are nonnegative. We also see that $p=7/12$ is somewhat interesting.
This is not Mathematica providing a proof that the minimum of your expression in your region is positive. (Mathematica is not designed to provide proofs.) However, all the ingredients you need are here.