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.
Randomized procedures as probability kernels
Definition
Let be a statistical experiment (Statistical experiments) and let be a measurable action space: a set of available actions equipped with a sigma-algebra of action events, hence a measurable space (Measurable spaces and measurable sets). A randomized procedure (or randomized decision rule) is a probability kernel from to , in the pointwise sense of Measure kernel and probability kernel. Thus is a probability measure on for every , and is -measurable for every . After observing , the procedure assigns probability to taking an action in . The kernel is specified without reference to the unknown parameter. This definition imposes no measurable structure on . The kernel is the specification of the procedure; no representation by a separate random seed is asserted for arbitrary measurable action spaces.
Depends on
Used by
- The one-sample Hotelling F test has exact size alpha Corollary
- A nonmeasurable rule is not a statistic or test Counterexample
- Bayes risk and minimax risk Definition
- Conformal scores and rank p-values Definition
- Loss functions and risk Definition
- Randomized tests Definition
- A coin-flip randomized test Example
- A dense Gaussian mean lower bound by Assouad’s method Example
- A deterministic statistic is a Dirac kernel Example
- A Gaussian two-point lower bound Example
- A sparse Gaussian sequence lower bound by Fano’s method Example
- Randomization lowers worst-case risk under zero-one loss Example
- A randomized procedure has a measurable action law Lemma
- A statistic induces a deterministic probability kernel Lemma
- Clean block-sparse Gaussian covariance has squared operator lower rate s log(ep/s) over n Lemma
- Clean Gaussian covariance has a capped squared operator lower rate Lemma
- Every measurable rejection function defines a randomized test Lemma
- A posterior-risk minimizer minimizes prior risk Theorem
- Assouad lower bound for a squared-error hypercube Theorem
- Exact finite-group permutation p-values and tests Theorem
- Fano’s packing bound with a reference-distribution KL bound Theorem
- Gaussian sparse-sequence minimax lower bound Theorem
- Randomization does not improve convex action loss Theorem
- Rao–Blackwell theorem for scalar finite-variance estimators Theorem
- Two-point Le Cam lower bound for squared-error risk Theorem
- Validity of identity-corrected random-permutation Monte Carlo p-values Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
9 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
- Ryan Martin, Lecture Notes on Advanced Statistical Theory, §5.1, PDF pp. 100–102 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Peter Hoff, Statistical Decision Problems, §§2–4.2, PDF pp. 2–8 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Peter Kempthorne, MIT 18.655 Lecture Note 6: Sufficiency, PDF pp. 14–15 (standard reference, not scraped)