Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
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.

Almost-sure martingale convergence need not preserve expectation

Statement

Assume AC. On ([0,1],B,λ) with F0={∅,[0,1]} and Fn=σ((0,2−1],…,(0,2−n]), take M0=1 and Mn=2n1(0,2−n] for n≥1. This integrable martingale has EMn=1 for every n but almost-sure limit M∞=0 with expectation zero. Thus almost-sure convergence need not preserve expectations.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses, objects, and conventions in the Statement.

[F1]

An L1-bounded martingale need not converge in L1 verifies this process is a nonnegative martingale, computes its means, and proves its pointwise limit.

[F2]

Closed martingale characterization explains the missing uniform-integrability hypothesis.

[F3]

The Axiom of Choice is inherited from the martingale construction.

Counterexample

1.1F1

By F1, Mn→0 almost surely while EMn=1 for every n. Therefore lim⁡nEMn=1≠0=E[lim⁡nMn]. This is the required explicit failure.

2.1F2F3step 1.1∎

If (Mn) were uniformly integrable, F2 would force L1 convergence to its almost-sure limit. That would imply E∣Mn∣→0, contradicting the computed value one. Thus the failure is exactly outside the closed/UI regime. AC has only the inherited role in F3.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

11 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