Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Adaptive spectral regularization by SOLIT

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Logical flowchart

3 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)verified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Gaussian series norm tails and fourth moments

Statement

Assume Countable Choice. Let (ξj)j≥1 be given real random variables on a probability space such that every finite subfamily is independent and each variable has density (2π)−1/2e−z2/2. Let aj≥0 be deterministic with v:=∑jaj<∞, and put u:=sup⁡jaj and w:=∑jaj2. The nonnegative series Q:=∑jajξj2 is finite almost surely. Define N:=Q on that event and set N=0 on its null complement. Then EN2=v,EN4=v2+2w≤3v2. For every t>0, P{N2>v+2wt+2ut}≤e−t,P{N>v+2ut}≤e−t. The upper quantile q(t):=inf⁡{z≥0:P(N>z)≤e−t} is finite and satisfies P(N>q(t))≤e−t,q(t)≤v+2ut. These conclusions include v=0, in which case N=q(t)=0 almost surely. For a Gaussian series in a fixed orthonormal coordinate system with coordinate variances aj, N is its norm.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The supplied independent standard-normal coordinates and summable nonnegative weights in the Statement.

[A1]

The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω) is assumed; all countable coordinates are already given.

[F1]

Monotone convergence for the integral permits increasing limits of nonnegative measurable functions inside the integral.

[F2]

Chebyshev-Markov inequality for the integral bounds the probability that a nonnegative variable exceeds a positive level by its expectation divided by that level.

[F3]

A C^1 diffeomorphism satisfies the change-of-variables formula for nonnegative Lebesgue measurable functions gives scalar affine substitution under Countable Choice. The supplied normal density already has total mass one.

[F4]

Expectations factor over finite products of independent random variables factors finite products of nonnegative or integrable functions of independent coordinates.

Proof

1.1givenA1F3F4algebra

Put Qn=∑j≤najξj2, vn=∑j≤naj, and wn=∑j≤naj2. On finite intervals integration by parts with ϕ′(x)=−xϕ(x) gives ∫x2kϕ(x) dx=[−x2k−1ϕ(x)]+(2k−1)∫x2k−2ϕ(x) dx. The boundary terms vanish at infinity; the integrals converge since a polynomial times e−x2/2 is bounded by a constant times e−x2/4, whose integral is finite by [F3] and the given unit Gaussian integral. Starting from ∫ϕ=1 therefore gives Eξj2=1 and Eξj4=3. Thus EQn=vn and finite independence gives EQn2=vn2+2wn. Also u≤v and w≤uv≤v2.

2.1F1F2step 1.1algebra

The measurable series Qn↑Q satisfies EQ=v by [F1]; hence Q<∞ almost surely, since [F2] gives P(Q≥r)≤v/r for every r>0. Extending N by zero on the null exceptional set does not change an integral. Applying [F1] also to Qn2↑Q2 proves EN4=v2+2w≤3v2.

2.2givenF2F3F4step 1.1algebrachoose

Suppose u>0. For 0<s<(2u)−1 the scalar substitution y=1−2saj x in [F3], using the supplied unit density, gives Eesajξj2=(1−2saj)−1/2. Finite factorization [F4] and the power-series inequality −log⁡(1−z)−z≤z2/[2(1−z)] for 0≤z<1 therefore give log⁡Ees(Qn−vn)=∑j≤n[−saj−12log⁡(1−2saj)]≤s2wn1−2us. If wn>0, apply [F2] to this exponential and choose s=t/(wn+2ut). Substitution gives −s(2wnt+2ut)+s2wn/(1−2us)=−t, so P{Qn>vn+2wnt+2ut}≤e−t. If wn=0, then Qn=vn=0 almost surely and this inequality is immediate.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1step 2.2algebra

The deterministic levels vn+2wnt+2ut converge to v+2wt+2ut. Whenever Q strictly exceeds this final level, sufficiently large n have Qn exceeding their corresponding levels. The probability of this eventual-event set is at most the lower limit of their probabilities, as follows directly by countable additivity applied to unions of intersections. Step 2.2 thus gives the first tail inequality. Since w≤uv and v+2uvt+2ut≤(v+2ut)2, the second follows. If u=0, all weights vanish and both bounds hold directly.

4.1step 2.1step 3.1algebra∎

The second tail bound makes the set defining q(t) nonempty and implies 0≤q(t)≤v+2ut. This set is upward closed. Every q(t)+1/n therefore belongs to it: by the definition of an infimum some member lies strictly below that number. The events {N>q(t)+1/n} increase to {N>q(t)}, so countable additivity gives P(N>q(t))≤e−t. When v=0, step 2.1 gives N=0 almost surely and the quantile is zero. Finally, in a fixed orthonormal system the squared norm of the finite Gaussian sum is Qn; finiteness of Q gives norm convergence of that series and the asserted norm interpretation.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Ordered spectral filters, source indices, and variance grids

Definition

Assume Countable Choice. Let T:X→Y be an injective compact linear operator of infinite rank between separable real Hilbert spaces (each with a countable dense subset), and assume T is Hilbert–Schmidt, meaning that for its positive singular values sj the sum ∑j≥1sj2 is finite. Put S=T∗T, λj=sj2, and λ1=∥S∥, with the positive eigenvalues listed with multiplicity in nonincreasing order. Let φ:[0,∞)→[0,∞) be continuous and strictly increasing with φ(0)=0, and take its inverse on its range. Assume the paper's convexity condition on the spectral range: x↦xφ−1(x) is convex for 0≤x≤φ(λ1)2. Define the source class Wφ(ρ):={φ(S)w:w∈X, ∥w∥X≤ρ} for ρ>0; equivalently, it is the source ball with singular-value index ψ(t)=φ(t2).

An ordered spectral filter is a family of functions qα:[0,λ1]→[0,∞) indexed by a set A⊂(0,∞) with 0 as an accumulation point, such that for constants Cq′<∞ and Cq′′=1,

0≤αqα(x)≤Cq′,0≤xqα(x)≤1,

and qα(x)≤qα~(x) whenever α~<α, for every x∈[0,λ1]. The index function φ is a qualification of this filter if for some Cφ<∞,

sup⁡0≤x≤λ1φ(x)(1−xqα(x))≤Cφφ(α)(α∈A).

For α∈A, define the variance function

VT,q(α):=∑j≥1λjqα(λj)2.

For σ>0, a decreasing candidate sequence (αm)m∈N0 in A has geometric variance growth if VT,q(α0)>0 and there are constants 1<θ1≤θ2<∞ such that

θ1≤VT,q(αm)VT,q(αm−1)≤θ2(m≥1).

Set vm:=σ2VT,q(αm) and

um:=σ2sup⁡j≥1λjqαm(λj)2,

the operator norm of the estimator-noise covariance in the singular basis. The bound qαm(λj)≤Cq′/αm and ∑jλj<∞ make each um and vm finite. The finite candidate set ends at

mmax⁡:=min⁡{m∈N0:vm≥1}.

The geometric lower bound vm≥v0θ1m makes this index finite.

Remarks

The source class agrees with the earlier singular-value convention because its multiplier at a singular value sj is ψ(sj)=φ(sj2)=φ(λj). The variance function is finite for every fixed α∈A: the filter bound gives qα(λj)≤Cq′/α and ∑jλj<∞.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Risk decomposition and monotone bias for ordered spectral filters

Statement

Assume Countable Choice and the positive-noise Gaussian sequence model with σ>0, a fixed complete positive singular system (sj,vj,uj) for an injective compact Hilbert–Schmidt operator T:X→Y, and a truth with coordinates θj=⟨x,vj⟩X in ℓ2. Write λj=sj2 and let ξj be the independent standard-normal noise coordinates. Let qα be nonnegative and satisfy 0≤λjqαm(λj)≤1, qαm(λj)≤Cq′/αm, and qαm1(λj)≤qαm2(λj) whenever m1<m2. For each candidate m, form the finite sums

Xm,N:=∑j=1N(λjqαm(λj)θj+σsjqαm(λj)ξj)vj.

The conclusion below includes the existence of their limit x^m in L2(Ω;X). Put fm:=Ex^m, Bm:=∥fm−x∥X, and vm:=E∥x^m−fm∥X2. Then x^m is a measurable X-valued random element with finite second moment and

E∥x^m−x∥X2=Bm2+vm,vm=σ2∑j≥1λjqαm(λj)2.

If m1<m2, then Bm2≤Bm1, ∥fm2−fm1∥X≤Bm1, and

vm1,m2:=E∥(x^m2−fm2)−(x^m1−fm1)∥X2=σ2∑j≥1λj(qαm2(λj)−qαm1(λj))2≤vm2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice, the experiment and hypotheses in the Statement, a fixed complete positive singular system (sj,vj,uj) with λj=sj2, and a fixed candidate m or pair m1<m2.

[A1]

The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω): Countable Choice is assumed by the SVD coordinate model; after its fixed countable basis is supplied, the proof below makes no further selections.

[F1]

Gaussian sequence inverse model: In the positive-noise sequence experiment, Zj=θj+σsj−1ξj with independent ξj∼N(0,1), and θ=(θj)∈ℓ2.

[F2]

Singular value decomposition for compact operators: The fixed positive singular vectors form complete orthonormal bases on the minimum-norm parameter space and the closure of the range, with Tvj=sjuj and T∗Tvj=λjvj.

[F3]

Ordered spectral filters, source indices, and variance grids: For each candidate 0≤λjqαm(λj)≤1; if m1<m2, then qαm1(λj)≤qαm2(λj); and qαm(λj)≤Cq′/αm.

[F4]

Isonormal Gaussian white-noise inverse experiment: The Gaussian coordinates are centered with variance one and independent on every finite orthonormal tuple.

[F5]

Monotone convergence for the integral permits passing increasing limits of nonnegative coordinate-square sums through the expectation.

[F6]

Chebyshev-Markov inequality for the integral bounds the probability that a nonnegative random variable is at least a positive level by its expectation divided by that level.

Proof

1.1givenA1F1F2F3F4F5F6algebra

Put cj:=λjqαm(λj)θj and dj:=σsjqαm(λj). By [F3], ∣cj∣≤∣θj∣, so (cj)j∈ℓ2. Also qαm(λj)≤Cq′/αm and ∑jλj<∞ by [F2], so ∑jdj2=σ2∑jλjqαm(λj)2<∞. The partial sums of Q:=∑jdj2ξj2 increase, and [F5] gives EQ=∑jdj2<∞. For each integer r≥1, [F6] gives P(Q≥r)≤EQ/r; since {Q=+∞}⊆{Q≥r} for every r, Q<∞ almost surely. Thus on a measurable event of probability one the coordinate series ∑j(cj+djξj)vj converges in X; define its pointwise limit there and set it to zero on the null complement. The finite partial sums are measurable, and their pointwise limit on this event, extended by zero, is measurable because X is separable. By Parseval and [F5], for each N, E∥x^m−Xm,N∥X2=∑j>NE(cj+djξj)2=∑j>Ncj2+∑j>Ndj2, where [F4] gives Eξj=0 and Eξj2=1. Both deterministic and noise tails tend to zero, so this constructed measurable pointwise limit is the L2(Ω;X) limit. In particular it has finite second moment.

2.1F1F2F3step 1.1algebra

For m1<m2, [F3] gives 0≤1−λjqαm2(λj)≤1−λjqαm1(λj). Squaring these nonnegative terms and summing against θj2 gives Bm22≤Bm12. Moreover, fm2−fm1 has coordinate λj(qαm2−qαm1)θj, whose multiplier equals (1−λjqαm1)−(1−λjqαm2) and lies between zero and 1−λjqαm1; coordinatewise comparison therefore yields ∥fm2−fm1∥X≤Bm1.

2.2F1F2F4step 1.1algebra

Subtracting x in each singular coordinate gives deterministic bias coefficient −(1−λjqαm(λj))θj and centered noise coefficient σsjqαm(λj)ξj. Since Eξj=0 and Eξj2=1 by [F1] and [F4], summing the coordinate second moments and using monotone convergence gives E∥x^m−x∥X2=∑j(1−λjqαm(λj))2θj2+σ2∑jλjqαm(λj)2=Bm2+vm.

3.1F2F3F4step 1.1algebra∎

The centered pairwise noise difference has coordinate variance σ2λj(qαm2(λj)−qαm1(λj))2. By [F3], each difference lies between zero and qαm2(λj); summing its squared value against σ2λj proves vm1,m2≤vm2.

Remarks

The L2-limit definition is needed because white noise is not an Y-valued observation in infinite dimension. The estimator itself is X-valued because its filtered noise covariance has finite trace.

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

SOLIT parameter choice on a geometric-variance grid

Definition

Assume Countable Choice. Let T:X→Y be an injective compact Hilbert–Schmidt operator of infinite rank between separable real Hilbert spaces, let S=T∗T, and let (sj,vj,uj) be a fixed positive singular system with λj=sj2. Let Z be a real isonormal Gaussian process on Y, meaning that g↦Z(g) is linear into L2, is centered, has covariance E[Z(g)Z(h)]=⟨g,h⟩Y, and has independent standard-normal values on every finite orthonormal tuple. In the weak observation experiment Yx(g)=⟨Tx,g⟩Y+σZ(g) with known noise standard deviation σ>0, use the ordered filter qα, the geometric-variance candidates α0>⋯>αmmax⁡, and variances vm=σ2∑jλjqαm(λj)2 from the preceding definition. For each candidate index m, the regularized estimator x^m is the L2 limit of its finite singular-coordinate sums; its jth coordinate is λjqαm(λj)θj+σsjqαm(λj)ξj, where θj=⟨x,vj⟩X and ξj=Z(uj).

Take as input the observed sequence y=(yj)j≥1, where yj:=Yx(uj). For each candidate m and each N=1,2,…, compute

x^m,Nobs:=∑j=1Nsjqαm(λj)yjvj.

If these partial sums converge in X, define x^m(y) to be their limit; otherwise set x^m(y)=0X. This specifies an X-valued output for every input sequence. The quantities vm1,m2 and zm1,m2(x) are determined by the known operator, filter, noise level and Gaussian coordinate law.

For 0≤m1<m2≤mmax⁡, set

vm1,m2:=σ2∑j≥1λj(qαm2(λj)−qαm1(λj))2

and let Nm1,m2 be the norm of the centered estimator difference divided by σ. For x>0, define its upper quantile by

zm1,m2(x):=inf⁡{z≥0:P(Nm1,m2>z)≤e−x}.

Given fixed β>0 and γ>0, for 0≤m<mmax⁡ put xm:=2(1+γ)log⁡(vm+1/v0), and for each pair m1<m2 put ηm1,m2:=σzm1,m2(xm1)+βvm1,m2. Accept an index m1 exactly when ∥x^m1(y)−x^m2(y)∥X≤ηm1,m2 for every m2 with m1<m2≤mmax⁡, and output the smallest accepted index m^ and parameter α^=αm^. For m1=mmax⁡, accept without comparisons, including when mmax⁡=0. This rule uses only the observed sequence, the known operator and filter, the noise level, the fixed candidate grid, and β,γ; it does not use x or its source index φ.

Rule diagram

The arrows show the order of the finite procedure: form the regularized estimates, compare each candidate with every finer one using the two-index threshold, then return the smallest candidate that passes all of its comparisons. The diagram illustrates the algorithm only; the proofs of its properties use the coordinate definitions and inequalities.

observationsyj=Yx(uj)observed-datapartialsumsbxm;Nall¯ner-indextwo-indextestssmallestacceptedindexbm

Remarks

The constant γ controls the strength of the noise quantiles, while β controls the bias tolerance. The quantile definition remains meaningful when a pairwise Gaussian difference is degenerate; then its upper quantile is zero.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

SOLIT oracle risk bound and spectral rates

Statement

Assume Countable Choice. Let T:X→Y be an injective compact Hilbert–Schmidt operator of infinite rank between separable real Hilbert spaces. Write A:=T∗T, and list its positive eigenvalues with multiplicity as λ1≥λ2≥⋯>0, where λ1=∥A∥ and ∑jλj<∞. Observe the weak Gaussian experiment Yx(g)=⟨Tx,g⟩Y+σZ(g),g∈Y, where σ>0 is known and Z:Y→L2(Ω) is centered and linear with covariance E[Z(g)Z(h)]=⟨g,h⟩Y, and has independent standard-normal values on every finite orthonormal tuple.

Let φ:[0,∞)→[0,∞) be continuous and strictly increasing with φ(0)=0. Assume u↦uφ−1(u) is convex for 0≤u≤φ(λ1)2, where φ−1 is the inverse on the range of φ. For ρ>0, define the source ball Wφ(ρ):={φ(A)w:w∈X, ∥w∥X≤ρ}. Assume x∈Wφ(ρ). Let qα:[0,λ1]→[0,∞) be an ordered filter indexed by α∈A⊂(0,∞), with 0 an accumulation point of A, such that for finite Cq′,Cφ>0 and every t∈[0,λ1] and α∈A, 0≤αqα(t)≤Cq′,0≤tqα(t)≤1, qα(t)≤qα~(t) whenever α~<α, and sup⁡0≤t≤λ1φ(t)(1−tqα(t))≤Cφφ(α).

Define Σ(t):=#{j:λj≥t}. Assume there is a continuous S:(0,λ1]→[0,∞) with lim inf⁡α↓0S(α)/Σ(α)>0, αS(α)→0, and α−1∫0αΣ(t) dt≤CSS(α) for some CS>0 for every candidate α∈A∩(0,λ1].

Let α0>α1>⋯ be candidates in A∩(0,λ1], with the initial candidate α0 fixed independently of σ, and set vm:=σ2∑j≥1λjqαm(λj)2, and assume v0>0 and 1<θ1≤vm/vm−1≤θ2<∞ for m≥1. Set mmax⁡:=min⁡{m∈N0:vm≥1}. Fix a positive singular system (sj,vj,uj) with Tvj=sjuj and λj=sj2, set θj=⟨x,vj⟩X and ξj=Z(uj), and define x^m as the L2(Ω;X) limit with coordinates ⟨x^m,vj⟩X=λjqαm(λj)θj+σsjqαm(λj)ξj. For m1<m2, define the pairwise variance vm1,m2:=σ2∑j≥1λj(qαm2(λj)−qαm1(λj))2. Let Gm1,m2:=(x^m2−Ex^m2)−(x^m1−Ex^m1) be the centered estimator difference, and for a>0 set zm1,m2(a):=inf⁡{z≥0:P(∥Gm1,m2∥X/σ>z)≤e−a}. For fixed β,γ>0, define ηm1,m2:=σzm1,m2(2(1+γ)log⁡(vm1+1/v0))+βvm1,m2 for m1<m2. Let m^ be the smallest m1∈{0,…,mmax⁡} such that ∥x^m1−x^m2∥X≤ηm1,m2 for every m2 with m1<m2≤mmax⁡, and set α^=αm^. Define m∗ as the smallest m for which every pair m≤m1<m2≤mmax⁡ satisfies ∥Ex^m1−Ex^m2∥X2≤β2vm1,m2, and put Rm∗:=E∥x^m∗−x∥X2. Write M:=mmax⁡, k:=m∗, bm:=∥Ex^m−x∥X, and Rm:=bm2+vm, so Rk=Rm∗. Put D0:=0, and for k≥1 put Dk:=(1+β)vk+4(1+γ)uklog⁡(vk/v0),um:=σ2sup⁡jλjqαm(λj)2. If k<M, define pm:=min⁡{1,(M−m+1)(v0/vm)2(1+γ)}(k<m≤M),Pk:=min⁡{1,(M−k)(v0/vk+1)2(1+γ)}, Ak:=3∑m=k+1Mvmpm,Bk:=23Rk(v0/vk)1+γ∑m=k+1MM−m+1(vk/vm)γ. If k=M, set Pk=Ak=Bk=0. Then the unchanged pairwise-quantile selector satisfies the finite oracle inequality E∥x^m^−x∥X2≤(Rk+Dk)2+min⁡{(bkPk+Ak)2,Bk}. In particular, put δ:=12(1+γ),K:=θ1θ1−1+11−θ1−γ,WM:={v0Mδ,M≥1,0,M=0. Then Ak≤3KWM and Bk≤23Mθ1γ−1(v0/vk)1+γRk, and a rate-oriented consequence is E∥x^m^−x∥X2≤(Rk+Dk)2+2bk2+23KWM. When M=0 the selected index is identically zero and its risk is exactly R0. When k=0, the first term in both displayed oracle bounds is R0 because D0=0; when k=M, the late-selection term vanishes. The bounds retain the pairwise quantiles in the stated rule.

For the rate conclusions as σ2↓0, assume additionally that λ1≤e−1. In both rate regimes let φ(t)=tν(−log⁡t)−τ for t∈(0,λ1], extend it by φ(0)=0, take the natural logarithm, and assume the displayed φ satisfies the index-function, convexity, and filter-qualification hypotheses above; here either ν>0,τ∈R or ν=0,τ>0.

If λj≍j−a with a>1, S(α)≍α−1/a, and vm≥cvσ2S(αm)/αm for some cv>0, then for some constant C>0, sup⁡x∈Wφ(ρ)E∥x^m^−x∥X2≤C(σ2)2ν2ν+1/a+1(−log⁡σ2)−2τ(1+1/a)2ν+1+1/a. If instead λj≍j−ae−bjϑ with a∈R, b>0, and 0<ϑ≤12, assume also S(α)≍(−log⁡α)1/ϑ and vm≥cvσ2S(αm)/((−log⁡αm)αm) for some cv>0; then for some C>0, sup⁡x∈Wφ(ρ)E∥x^m^−x∥X2≤C(σ2)2ν2ν+1(−log⁡σ2)2ν/ϑ−2τ2ν+1. The severe-rate assertion requires exactly 0<ϑ≤12; the source does not establish adaptive-minimax optimality of the polynomial-smoothness severe rate. For spectral cut-off filters, the uniform geometric-variance candidate condition may fail when ϑ>1. When ν=0, both displayed rates simplify to (−log⁡σ2)−2τ.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice, the weak experiment, all ordered-filter, source, surrogate, grid and selector hypotheses in the Statement, and the additional stated hypotheses when a rate is asserted.

[A1]

The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω) supplies the fixed countable spectral coordinates; the finite minima and the explicit integer choices below require no further choice.

[F1]

Risk decomposition and monotone bias for ordered spectral filters gives Rm=bm2+vm, nonincreasing bm, the pairwise bias bound ba,b≤ba, and va,b≤vb for a<b.

[F2]

SOLIT parameter choice on a geometric-variance grid supplies the unchanged pairwise-quantile acceptance rule and the smallest accepted index. The last candidate is always accepted.

[F3]

Gaussian series norm tails and fourth moments gives E∥G∥4≤3(E∥G∥2)2, the norm-quantile bound Q(t)≤v+2ut, and the upper-tail inequality at that quantile for the given countable Gaussian coordinates.

[F4]

Ordered spectral filters, source indices, and variance grids gives the nonnegative coordinate ordering, the geometric variance ratios, and source qualification. Spectral-index source balls for compact operators and Compact spectral filters, source conditions, and qualification identify the source multipliers.

[F5]

Monotone convergence for the integral permits summation and integration of the nonnegative coordinate terms.

[F6]

Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases gives scalar Cauchy–Schwarz on the probability space, including E[UV]≤(EU2)1/2(EV2)1/2 for square-integrable nonnegative U,V.

[F7]

Minkowski's inequality for integrals, including p=∞ gives the L2 triangle inequality for scalar random variables; applied to Hilbert-valued errors through their norm functions, it is the mean-square triangle inequality.

Proof

1.1givenA1F1F2algebra

Work in the supplied singular coordinates, and write fm=Ex^m, εm=x^m−fm, and ba,b=∥fb−fa∥X. By [F1] all these variables have finite second moments and Rm=bm2+vm. Each finite observed-data sum in [F2] is a measurable X-valued random element. For each fixed candidate, its Cauchy set Cm=⋂r≥1⋃N≥1⋂p,q≥N{∥x^m,pobs−x^m,qobs∥X≤1/r} is a measurable event, since it is a countable combination of measurable pairwise-distance events; completeness of X makes it the convergence event. Its limit on Cm, extended by 0X outside Cm, is measurable as a pointwise limit into separable X. Under the observation law, yj=sjθj+σξj, so the pointwise construction in [F1] identifies this pointwise limit with the L2 estimator almost surely; the finitely many candidates share a full-probability agreement event. Thus the finite comparison conditions are measurable, and [F2] ensures an accepted index exists. Hence m^ is a measurable finite-valued index. Fix k=m∗; its defining condition gives ba,b≤βva,b whenever k≤a<b≤M.

1.2givenF4F5algebra

For later use, qualification gives bm2≤ρ2Cφ2φ(αm)2. The filter bounds give λqα(λ)2≤Cq′/α and λqα(λ)2≤(Cq′)2λ/α2. With C=max⁡{Cq′,(Cq′)2}, splitting eigenvalues at α and summing nonnegative terms therefore gives VT,q(α):=∑jλjqα(λj)2≤Cα2(αΣ(α)+∑λj<αλj)=Cα2∫0αΣ(t) dt≤CCSS(α)/α. The equality follows by integrating each indicator 1{t≤λj}; [F5] justifies the interchange. Further um≤Cq′σ2/αm, since λjqαm(λj)≤1.

2.1F1F3F4step 1.1algebra

The centered difference Ga,b has coordinate variances σ2λj(qαb(λj)−qαa(λj))2. By nonnegative coordinate ordering their sum and supremum satisfy va,b≤vb and ua,b≤ub. Applying [F3] to their squared weights gives σza,b(t)≤va,b+2ua,bt,E∥εm∥4≤3vm2. Also the probability of exceeding the actual pairwise quantile is at most e−t, including a degenerate difference. These are statements about the supplied normal sequence; no new infinite product law or general Gaussian concentration theorem is needed.

2.2givenF4step 1.2algebra

For the rates let s=σ2↓0 and L=log⁡(1/s). The initial variance is v0=sVT,q(α0) with a fixed positive factor, and the geometric lower ratio implies M≤1+log⁡(1/v0)/log⁡θ1=O(L). In the mild case put D=2ν+1+1/a, t=s1/DL2τ/D and r=s2ν/DL−2τ(1+1/a)/D. In the severe case put p=1/ϑ≥2, D=2ν+1, t=s1/DL(2τ+p)/D and r=s2ν/DL(2νp−2τ)/D. In either case log⁡(1/t)≍L, r→0, r/s→∞, and direct substitution gives φ(t)2≍sS(t)/t≍r. All implicit constants in the rest of the argument are independent of the truth in the fixed source ball and of sufficiently small s.

3.1F2F7step 1.1step 2.1algebra

On {m^≤k}, acceptance gives ∥x^m^−x^k∥≤ηm^,k when m^<k, and the difference is zero when equality holds. For m<k, xm=2(1+γ)log⁡(vm+1/v0)≤2(1+γ)log⁡(vk/v0), so step 2.1 bounds every ηm,k by Dk. Minkowski's inequality in L2(Ω) [F7], applied to the norm functions of the two Hilbert-valued errors, consequently bounds the early-selection contribution by (Rk+Dk)2. For k=0, this uses the identically zero difference and hence D0=0.

3.2F2step 1.1step 2.1algebra

For m>k, the event {m^=m} implies rejection of m−1. Its oracle bias bound from step 1.1 shows that a rejecting comparison with ℓ≥m must satisfy ∥Gm−1,ℓ∥>σzm−1,ℓ(xm−1). The union bound over M−m+1 such comparisons and the quantile-tail property from step 2.1 therefore give P(m^=m)≤pm. Similarly {m^>k} implies rejection of k, so P(m^>k)≤Pk. Here e−xm−1=(v0/vm)2(1+γ) exactly.

3.3givenstep 1.2step 2.2algebrachoose

Let j be the first candidate with vj≥r. For small s, v0<r<1, so this index exists and r≤vj≤θ2r. Step 1.2 implies r≤CsS(αj)/αj. First αj→0: otherwise a subsequence bounded away from zero has bounded S(αj)/αj, contradicting r/s→∞. In the mild case the function S(α)/α is comparable to α−1−1/a, so the last inequality and r≍st−1−1/a give αj≤C′t. In the severe case it is comparable to h(α)=α−1(log⁡(1/α))p. For any fixed A>1, h(At)/h(t)→1/A as t↓0; since h is decreasing for small positive arguments, choosing A larger than the fixed comparison constant gives the same conclusion αj≤C′t. Qualification and φ(C′t)2≍φ(t)2 now give bj2≤C′′r.

4.1F1F6F7step 3.1step 3.2step 2.1algebra

Scalar Cauchy–Schwarz [F6] and step 2.1 give E[∥εm∥21{m^=m}]≤3vmpm. Summing gives a late selected-noise second moment at most Ak. By [F1], the corresponding selected bias has mean-square norm at most bkPk. Minkowski's inequality [F7] thus bounds the late risk by (bkPk+Ak)2. Alternatively, ∥εm+fm−x∥2≤2∥εm∥2+2bk2 and pm≤pm give a late risk bound 23∑m>k(vm+bk2)pm. Since vm+bk2≤(vm/vk)Rk, dropping the minimum in pm yields exactly Bk. Together with step 3.1 these prove the first finite oracle inequality. If k=M, both late sums are empty.

4.2F1F4F7step 1.1step 2.2step 3.3algebrachoose

Put cβ=β2(θ1−1)2>0 and choose a fixed nonnegative integer J with θ1J≥C′′/cβ. For small s, θ2J+1r<1, so the infinite candidate sequence has ℓ=j+J<M, vℓ≤θ2J+1r, and bℓ2≤C′′r≤cβvℓ. For every ℓ≤a<b, monotone bias gives ba,b2≤ba2≤cβva. The reverse triangle inequality for the square-summable noise coefficient vectors follows from [F7] with counting measure and gives va,b≥(vb−va)2≥(θ1−1)2va. Thus ba,b2≤β2va,b and k≤ℓ. If k<ℓ, the oracle property implies E∥x^k−x^ℓ∥2≤(1+β2)vk,ℓ≤(1+β2)vℓ. Hence Rk≤2(1+β2)vℓ+2Rℓ≤Cr; the case k=ℓ is immediate. In particular vk≤Cr and log⁡(vk/v0)≤CL.

5.1F4step 4.1algebra

Suppose M≥1 and put w=v0Mδ. For f(v)=vmin⁡{1,M(v0/v)1+γ} one has f(v)=v for v≤w and f(v)=w1+γv−γ for v>w. The geometric variance lower ratio gives ∑vm≤wvm≤θ1w/(θ1−1) and ∑vm>wvm−γ≤w−γ/(1−θ1−γ), by summing the backward and forward geometric series from the respective last and first indices. Thus Ak≤3Kw. Also vm/vk≥θ1m−k and M−m+1≤M in the definition of Bk prove its stated simpler bound. The inequality (a+b)2≤2a2+2b2 applied to the first late alternative in step 4.1 gives the rate-oriented oracle bound. If M=0, the only index is zero, its risk equals R0, and all late sums vanish as stipulated.

5.2givenstep 1.2step 2.2step 4.2algebra

In the mild case the stated lower variance bound gives vk≥csαk−1−1/a. Combined with step 4.2 and r≍st−1−1/a, this yields αk≥c′t. Therefore step 1.2 gives uklog⁡(vk/v0)≤CsL/t=o(r), because Lt1/a→0. It follows that Dk2≤C(vk+uklog⁡(vk/v0))≤Cr for k≥1, while D0=0 handles k=0.

5.3givenstep 1.2step 2.2step 4.2algebra

In the severe case put H=log⁡(1/t)≍L. If αk≥t, then αk≥t/H for small s. If αk<t, the lower variance bound and S(α)≍(log⁡(1/α))p give csαk−1Hp−1≤vk≤Cr≤Cst−1Hp, so again αk≥c′t/H. Hence uklog⁡(vk/v0)≤CsHL/t≤CsH2/t≤CsHp/t≍Cr, using exactly p≥2. Consequently Dk2≤Cr in this case also, with D0=0 as before.

6.1step 5.1step 2.2step 4.2step 5.2step 5.3algebra∎

By step 2.2, WM=O(sLδ)=o(r): when ν>0, r/s has a strictly positive power of 1/s multiplied by a fixed logarithmic power; when ν=0 and τ>0, r=L−2τ. The rate-oriented oracle bound from step 5.1, together with Rk≤Cr, bk2≤Rk and the two rate estimates just proved, therefore gives the asserted uniform risk upper bound Cr in each regime. Substituting the explicit expressions for r from step 2.2 gives exactly the two displayed rates and their ν=0 specializations. The severe proof uses ϑ≤1/2 at step 5.3 and asserts only the stated upper rate, preserving the given qualification and grid hypotheses. This completes both the finite oracle and rate conclusions.

Remarks

The finite oracle bound accounts explicitly for the number of pairwise comparisons. Its proof and the rate argument above use the specified pairwise selector throughout. The source's sharper displayed oracle constants are not used as a premise.

4 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

None yet.

Sources