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.
Finite nonlinear observation designs, local identifiability, and weighted information
Definition
Let , let be open, and let be a finite nonempty set of experimental conditions. For each , let , let be in the sense of Continuously differentiable maps, local inverses, and local diffeomorphisms, and let be a symmetric positive-definite weight matrix, meaning for every nonzero .
An approximate design is a function with , as in Approximate designs and linear-model optimality criteria. Its support is . Define the joint observation map by where the finite product is ordered by any fixed listing of . Its stacked sensitivity Jacobian at is the vertical concatenation of the matrices for . The associated weighted information matrix is The matrix is symmetric positive semidefinite because each summand has nonnegative quadratic form.
Because the support is finite, is with derivative : the finite collection of component first-order remainders has a stacked Euclidean norm that is still , and the stacked derivative is continuous because each is continuous.
For a fixed design , the observation map is locally identifiable at if it is injective on some open neighborhood of in . It is globally identifiable on if it is injective on all of . A matrix has full column rank when implies . Its smallest singular value is ; thus means for every .
Remarks
The approximate design uses real weights. An exact -run design instead restricts weights to multiples with integer counts, and is a separate finite allocation problem in Approximate designs and linear-model optimality criteria.
Depends on
- Approximate designs and linear-model optimality criteria
- Continuously differentiable maps, local inverses, and local diffeomorphisms
- The Euclidean inner product $\langle x,y\rangle = \sum_{k<n} x_k y_k$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$
- The Jacobian matrix of partial derivatives and the gradient in the scalar-valued case
- Rectangular matrix multiplication and the identity matrix $I_n$, including zero-sized shapes
Used by
- Finite-budget multiplicative update for approximate D-optimal design Algorithm
- A small sensitivity solve error can reverse a two-design ranking Example
- A zero Jacobian does not prevent local identifiability of the cubic map Example
- Endpoint sensor times are D-optimal for an intercept-slope model Example
- Parallel first-order decay observations depend only on the sum of two rates Example
- The observation theta squared is locally identifiable but globally aliased Example
- Computed Jacobian error controls the weighted information-matrix error Lemma
- The Gauss–Newton information term omits residual curvature from the full Hessian Remark
- A lower singular-value bound and Lipschitz Jacobian control local parameter error Theorem
- Finite-budget multiplicative design updates preserve the simplex and nonsingularity Theorem
- Full column rank of the sensitivity Jacobian implies local identifiability Theorem
- The weighted information matrix is positive definite exactly at full sensitivity rank Theorem
- Uniform information errors control approximate D-optimal design gaps Theorem
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
- Stephen Boyd and Lieven Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization, §§7.5.1–7.5.2 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Leah R. McLean et al., Estimability Analysis and Optimal Design in Dynamic Multi-scale Models of Cardiac Electrophysiology (standard reference, not scraped)
- Henrik Madsen, Optimal Experimental Design for Grey-box Models (standard reference, not scraped)