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.
Integrable stopping time alone does not suffice for arbitrary martingale increments
Statement
Assume AC. There is a martingale and an integrable stopping time such that is integrable but . Thus is insufficient when martingale increments are unbounded.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The hypotheses, objects, and conventions in the Statement.
Martingale submartingale and supermartingale gives the event-integral test used to verify the process locally.
Equivalent event tests for a discrete stopping time tests through .
Expectation of a nonnegative or integrable random variable and Monotone convergence for the integral compute its tail expectation.
Optional stopping requires a passage-to-the-limit hypothesis identifies the missing bounded-increment/dominating mechanism.
The Axiom of Choice is inherited from the martingale conditional-expectation interface.
Counterexample
On put , trivial, , , and for . On the atom , equals on a half-measure subatom and zero on the other half, so its conditional average is ; off both variables vanish. Thus F1 proves directly that is a nonnegative martingale with .
Let . For , , so F2 makes a stopping time. Its tail sum is
The intersection of the is empty, so every path eventually leaves and . Hence is integrable but On the next increment has magnitude , so no deterministic increment bound exists; this is exactly the missing hypothesis flagged by F4. The proof reconstructs its martingale locally and does not depend on a B-page supplier. AC has only the role in F5.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
24 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 der Vaart, Martingales, Diffusions and Financial Mathematics, warning after Theorem 2.42, p. 22 (standard reference, not scraped)