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.
Posterior computation error budget
Definition
Fix a measurable space and a bounded measurable functional , with . All target laws below are probability measures on this same space. If a model or discretization originally uses another state space, specify its measurable embedding into and compare its pushforward law; no identification of different state spaces is implicit. A posterior law here is the probability law for the unknown at the specified computation stage, conditional on the same fixed observed data. For a probability law , write .
Name the successive posterior laws as follows: is the intended target; is the posterior under the selected statistical or physical model; is the posterior after replacing the exact forward or PDE solution by the declared numerical solver output; and is the posterior after the declared finite-dimensional discretization. These labels refer to the exact adjacent laws recorded for the computation, even when two stages happen to agree.
Let be the implemented probability kernel on . An invariant law for is a probability measure satisfying Choose and report which invariant law is used if has more than one. If no invariant law has been established, the invariant-kernel and burn-in terms below are unavailable; they are not set to zero. Let be a time-homogeneous Markov chain with transition kernel relative to its natural filtration, with initial probability law . For burn-in length and retained sample size , set and let denote expectation under this initial law and the chain's transition randomness.
When all stages are present, define the component errors The last component is random and the earlier components are fixed for the declared data and computation. The posterior computation error budget is If a computation stops before one of these stages, report the shorter reference chain and its component terms. The term measures the invariant-law discrepancy induced by the implemented transition rule; it is not a one-step distance between kernels. A one-step kernel error cannot replace it without a separate perturbation theorem with its own hypotheses.
The successive scalar references are arranged as this directed error chain; each arrow is labelled by the absolute difference of its endpoints.
The budget is a bookkeeping bound only when its components are supplied with estimators or verified bounds; an unavailable component is reported as unquantified rather than silently set to zero. In particular, invariance alone does not provide a burn-in estimate, a mixing rate, or a Monte Carlo error estimate.
Definition references
A probability measure is a measure of total mass one.
A bounded functional has a finite expectation under a probability law.
A probability kernel has probability-measure rows and measurable event evaluations.
An invariant law satisfies on every measurable event.
A Markov chain has the stated kernel as its conditional one-step law relative to its filtration.
A scalar error ledger names successive reference targets and signed adjacent-stage errors.
Depends on
- The Axiom of Choice
- Expectation of a nonnegative or integrable random variable
- Invariant and stationary distribution for a Markov kernel
- Measure kernel and probability kernel
- Probability measures and probability spaces
- Successive statistical and computational error targets
- Time-homogeneous Markov chain with transition kernel
Used by
- Conditional flow matching for inverse posteriors Algorithm
- A biased forward solve shifts a Gaussian posterior Example
- An exact invariant kernel can be biased over a short run Example
- Correct invariance can coexist with low effective sample size Example
- Population regression and exact-flow meaning of conditional flow matching Lemma
- Dimension-uniform conditional flow error for function-valued Bayesian posteriors Open problem
- Bounded posterior functionals and stationary sample error Proposition
Dependency tree · two levels
21 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
- M. Dashti and A. M. Stuart, The Bayesian Approach to Inverse Problems, full lecture notes, arXiv:1302.6989v4 (standard reference, not scraped)
- S. L. Cotter, G. O. Roberts, A. M. Stuart, and D. White, MCMC Methods for Functions: Modifying Old Algorithms to Make Them Faster (standard reference, not scraped)
- Charles J. Geyer, Markov Chain Monte Carlo Lecture Notes (standard reference, not scraped)