[step:Combine the coordinate dichotomies into a cube-level conclusion]
By step 3, for each coordinate $i$, exactly one of these holds:
- $J'_i \subseteq J_i$;
- $J'_i \cap J_i = \varnothing$.
Define $S := \{i \in \{1, \dots, n\} : J'_i \subseteq J_i\}$ and $S^c := \{1, \dots, n\} \setminus S$.
**Case 1:** $S = \{1, \dots, n\}$, i.e., $J'_i \subseteq J_i$ for every $i$. Then $Q' = \prod_{i=1}^n J'_i \subseteq \prod_{i=1}^n J_i = Q$. Conclusion: $Q' \subseteq Q$.
**Case 2:** $S \ne \{1, \dots, n\}$, i.e., there exists some $i_0 \in S^c$ with $J'_{i_0} \cap J_{i_0} = \varnothing$. Then
\begin{align*}
Q \cap Q' = \prod_{i = 1}^n (J_i \cap J'_i) = \varnothing,
\end{align*}
since the $i_0$-th factor of the product is empty. Conclusion: $Q \cap Q' = \varnothing$.
These two cases exhaust all possibilities. The third conclusion in the theorem statement, $Q \subseteq Q'$, can occur only when $k \ge k'$; under the convention $k \le k'$ adopted in step 1, $Q \subseteq Q'$ reduces to $Q = Q'$ (when $k = k'$ and $S = \{1, \dots, n\}$, which forces $J'_i = J_i$ for all $i$ since both intervals have the same length, hence $m'_i = m_i$ and $Q = Q'$). Restoring symmetry, if the original inputs had $k' < k$ instead, swapping the roles of $Q$ and $Q'$ in cases 1 and 2 gives the alternative conclusion $Q \subseteq Q'$. Together: any pair $(Q, Q') \in \mathcal{D} \times \mathcal{D}$ falls into exactly one of $Q \cap Q' = \varnothing$, $Q \subseteq Q'$, or $Q' \subseteq Q$.
[/step]