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.
A nontight sequence with no probability law subsequence limit
Statement refuted
The laws on the real line form a nontight sequence with no subsequence converging weakly to a probability law on the real line.
Facts & Assumptions
A compact subset of a metric space is closed and bounded: Let be a metric space (def-metric-space) and let be a compact subset (def-metric-compactness). Then is closed in (def-metric-topology) and bounded (def-metric-bounded-diameter).
No choice principle is used: both covers below are given by a rule, and the indexed form of lem-compactness-is-intrinsic returns indices rather than sets.
The converse is false in general. A closed and bounded subset of an arbitrary metric space need not be compact (fs-closed-and-bounded-implies-compact-in-every-metric-space); it is exactly in that the converse holds (thm-heine-borel-rn).
Tight family of probability measures: A family of Borel probabilities on a metric space S is tight if, for every , there is a compact such that for every . One K must work for the whole family. Compactness is def-metric-compactness. The empty family is tight, witnessed by the empty compact set.
Portmanteau theorem: For Borel probabilities on a metric space S, the following are equivalent: (i) ; (ii) integrals converge for all bounded uniformly continuous real tests; (iii) for every closed F; (iv) for every open G; (v) for every Borel A with .
Continuity from below for measures: Let be an increasing sequence of measurable sets for a measure , so . Then
No finiteness hypothesis is required.
Counterexample
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
Every compact K is bounded by F1. Thus for all sufficiently large n, n is outside K and (K)=0. No compact K can give all the laws outside mass below 1/2, so F2 fails.
If along a subsequence, tends to infinity. For every positive integer m, the open set (-m,m) eventually has delta_{} mass zero. F3 would give . These intervals increase to R, so F4 would give (R)=0, contradicting probability mass one.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
25 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- van Gaans, example after Theorem 5.2, p. 18; Dirac variant (standard reference, not scraped)