Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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.

An EM likelihood with two strict local maxima

Example

Let Θ=[−2,2] with its Borel sigma-algebra, and let X=Z={0,1} with the power-set sigma-algebra and counting measure. Set r(θ)=12−(θ2−1)236,pθ(x,z)=r(θ)x(1−r(θ))1−x12. For the observed value x=1, the likelihood has strict local maxima at θ=−1 and θ=1, and both points are global maximizers. Starting at θ0=−1, the exact Q maximizer set at either point contains both points. The fixed selector θt+1=−θt therefore produces the infinite sequence θt=(−1)t+1, which does not converge.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC, the displayed finite latent model and the fixed observation x=1.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: AC is required by the cited observed-likelihood ascent theorem used to contextualize the example.

[F1]

Latent-variable joint and observed-data factorization: a complete-data density is normalized on each parameter fiber.

[F2]

The observed density is the latent marginal under Tonelli: the observed density is the latent marginal, and its positive finite fibers define normalized latent conditional densities.

[F3]

Expectation-maximization: exact mode selects an attained Q maximizer over an admissible set containing the current iterate.

[F4]

EM does not decrease the observed log likelihood: every admissible exact update with nondecreasing Q does not decrease the observed log likelihood.

[F5]

Likelihood ascent alone gives no global optimality or convergence conclusion: the ascent theorem supplies no unique-mode or parameter-convergence conclusion.

Verification

1.1givenF1F2algebra

Since 0≤(θ2−1)2≤9 on [−2,2], 1/4≤r(θ)≤1/2. Thus pθ is nonnegative and sums to one over (x,z)∈{0,1}2 for every θ. The observed density at x=1 is mθ(1)=r(θ).

2.1givenstep 1.1algebra

The squared term (θ2−1)2 vanishes exactly at θ=±1 and is positive elsewhere. Therefore r(θ), and hence the observed likelihood and log likelihood, have strict local maxima at those two distinct parameter values; both are global maximizers with equal value, so neither is a strict global maximum.

3.1givenA1F3F4F5step 1.1algebra∎

For every current value θt=±1, the latent conditional law is uniform on Z. For any candidate θ, Q(θ∣θt)=log⁡r(θ)−log⁡2, so its exact maximizer set is again {−1,1}. Starting from θ0=−1, choosing θt+1=−θt at each step is an attained exact M-step; all fibers have positive finite marginals and identical latent support, with finite Q and KL. The algorithm therefore emits the infinite alternating sequence, which has no limit while its log likelihood is constant. This verifies the limitation described in [F5] without contradicting the one-step ascent result [F4].

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

30 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