I'm aware that strict monotonicity implies invertibility, but I've never seen the opposite direction being stated formally. It seems to me invertibility also implies strict monotonicity if the function is continuous. Both Claude and ChatGPT kept telling me that this is not true until I pointed out some error in their counterexamples, so I'm half believing half doubting myself. Here's my reasoning:
If $f$ is a continuous, invertible function defined on $I$, then for any $x_1,x_2\in I$ such that $x_1 < x_2$, we have $f(x_1) \neq f(x_2)$. Suppose $f$ is not strictly monotone, then there exists $a, b, c \in I$ such that $a<c<b$ but $f(b)$ is not between $f(a)$ and $f(c)$. We may assume that $f(a) < f(c)$ but $f(c) \geq f(b)$. If $f(c) = f(b)$, we have a contradiction as $f$ is invertible. If $f(c) >f(b)$, by the Intermediate Value Theorem, there exists $s\in(a,c)$ and $t\in (c,b)$ such that $f(s)=f(t)$, a similar contradiction. Thus, $f$ is strictly monotone.
Are this reasoning and the proposed statement correct?
Thank you!