Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

One-step and multistep forecasts for a causal AR(1)

Example

Let ∣ϕ∣<1, σ2>0, and let (ϵt)t∈Z be centered, square-integrable white noise: E[ϵt2]=σ2 and Cov⁡(ϵs,ϵt)=0 for s≠t. Suppose a weakly stationary process has the causal L2 representation Xt−μ=∑j=0∞ϕjϵt−j and hence satisfies Xt−μ=ϕ(Xt−1−μ)+ϵt. For every n,h≥1, its forecast is X^n+h=μ+ϕh(Xn−μ) and its error variance is σ2∑j=0h−1ϕ2j.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The weakly stationary causal AR(1) representation and the centered, finite-variance, pairwise uncorrelated innovations specified above.

[F1]

Weak stationarity gives square-integrability of every coordinate and a common mean. Strict and weak stationarity for integer-indexed time series

[F2]

The finite-history best linear forecast is the unique class minimizing squared L2 error over the affine span of the observed history. Best linear forecast from a finite history

[F3]

Variance and covariance are centered second moments and covariance is bilinear on finite sums. Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space Variance and covariance identities for random variables

[F4]

Cauchy–Schwarz bounds the absolute expectation of a product of two square-integrable variables by the product of their L2 norms. Cauchy-Schwarz for random variables

Verification

1.1givenalgebra

Reindexing the convergent causal series gives Xt−μ=ϕ(Xt−1−μ)+ϵt; repeating this identity gives Xn+h−μ=ϕh(Xn−μ)+Rh, where Rh=∑r=0h−1ϕrϵn+h−r. Every innovation in Rh has index greater than n, while the causal series for each Xj−μ, 1≤j≤n, uses only indices at most j.

2.1givenF1F3F4step 1.1

For each j≤n, every finite partial sum for Xj−μ uses innovation indices at most j, so its covariance with each future term of Rh is zero by the uncorrelated-noise assumption; [F4] passes this covariance identity to the L2 limit. Thus Cov⁡(Rh,Xj)=0 and E[Rh]=0, making the residual orthogonal to the constant and every history variable.

3.1F2F3step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

Let H=μ+ϕh(Xn−μ) and let any competing affine forecast Z be in the history span; then D:=H−Z is also in that span. Step 2.1 gives E[Rh]=0 and Cov⁡(Rh,Xj)=0 for every j; bilinearity [F3] gives Cov⁡(Rh,D)=0, hence E[RhD]=0. Since Xn+h−Z=Rh+D, expansion yields E[(Xn+h−Z)2]=E[Rh2]+E[D2]≥E[Rh2], with equality exactly when D=0 as an L2 class. Thus H is the unique best class by [F2]. The innovations in Rh are pairwise uncorrelated, so [F3] gives Var⁡(Rh)=σ2∑r=0h−1ϕ2r. This proves both formulas without Gaussian or independent innovations.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

17 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