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.
Covariance of overlapping Brownian increments
Example
Assume the Axiom of Choice. If is a standard Brownian motion, , and , then
Thus the covariance is the length of the overlap of the time intervals and ; an intersection consisting of one endpoint has length zero.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC, a standard Brownian motion , and , .
Brownian motion is centered with ; its values are square-integrable normal random variables. Brownian motion, Brownian covariance is equivalent to independent stationary normal increments.
Covariance of square-integrable real random variables is defined by centered products and is symmetric and bilinear in finite linear combinations. Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space, Covariance is symmetric and bilinear in finite linear combinations.
AC is inherited through the Brownian and normal-law interfaces. The Axiom of Choice.
Verification
Bilinearity and the Brownian covariance kernel give Every term is finite because the Brownian values are square-integrable.
Both sides of the claimed formula are unchanged when the ordered pairs and are exchanged, the left side by symmetry of covariance. It therefore suffices to assume . If , the four minima in step 1.1 are respectively , so the covariance is zero; also , so the stated overlap length is zero. This includes and all zero-length first intervals.
Still assuming , suppose . The four minima in step 1.1 are , so the covariance is . Here and , giving the same positive overlap length. This case includes and , but excludes , already handled in step 2.1.
Finally, if , the four minima in step 1.1 are , so the covariance is . Here and . The value is zero exactly when , so zero-length second intervals are included. These three cases exhaust ; pair symmetry handles .
Steps 2.1, 3.1, and 4.1 prove the formula for every allowed endpoint order, including coincident endpoints, , , and . There is no empty family or biconditional. AC is used only through [F1]; expanding four covariances and comparing endpoints uses no further choice.
Source notes
Durrett, Section 7.1, printed p. 355, derives for from independent increments. The four-term overlap calculation and its complete endpoint case split are given above.
Remarks
The upper schematic shows : the thick segment has length . The lower schematic shows : the intersection is one point and has length zero. Each panel uses one common time scale for both intervals; the vertical separation only distinguishes the intervals. These are time intervals, not sample paths or equal random increments. The endpoint case analysis in the Verification proves the formula independently of this illustration.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
18 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
- Rick Durrett, Probability: Theory and Examples, fifth edition, Section 7.1 (standard reference, not scraped)