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.
Homogeneous Poisson likelihood and a Hawkes intensity specification
Example
Homogeneous Poisson case. Let be a supplied homogeneous Poisson process of rate on , with , and let be the observed count. The likelihood ratio against the unit-rate Poisson reference is , with , so the parameter-dependent likelihood is . Over the parameter space , the maximum-likelihood estimate is when and when .
For the temporal-model interface, extend the finite-window process by holding its count fixed after . Thus the Poisson survivor formula below applies within ; after the next-event kernel has only its terminal mass.
Hawkes specification. For parameters , , and , condition on a common specified initial history with finite initial excitation . For past event times and , this is , requiring the weighted sum to be finite; take when or the initial history is empty. Although the history is fixed, may depend on the parameters. On , consider the pre-event-history intensity For any supplied non-explosive law whose conditional hazards and separate compensator contract satisfy the temporal model with this specification, and any compatible event pattern , the likelihood ratio is For empty initial history, , so both initial-excitation terms vanish. This is a finite-pattern likelihood calculation conditional on a compatible law. Writing the candidate specification does not prove that such a law exists, is non-explosive, or is stationary.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Poisson and Hawkes cases above on , with the Hawkes law conditioned on the specified initial history and its finite excitation . For the Poisson case, extend by zero after and use the event-history filtration .
Disjoint-set counts of a Poisson process are independent and have the specified scalar Poisson laws. (Poisson and Cox point processes)
There exists a finite-window homogeneous Poisson process of rate with no ties and ordered pattern density ; the zero-rate Poisson count law is concentrated at zero. (Finite-window homogeneous Poisson construction and ordered event-time density, The scalar Poisson count law)
A Poisson count of finite mean has mean , factorial moment , and second moment . (Normalization, moments, and generating function of the Poisson count law)
Independence on a generating pi-system extends to the sigma-algebras it generates. (Independent pi-systems generate independent sigma-algebras)
A deterministic Borel function of time is predictable for the predictable sigma-algebra convention. (Progressively measurable and predictable processes)
The finite-horizon model contract requires a continuous predictable compensator with finite expectation and a square-integrable martingale . (Simple counting-process intensity and compensator contract)
Conditional-intensity pattern likelihoods use the product of pre-event intensities and the terminal integrated-hazard factor, with ratio against the unit-rate reference. (Conditional-intensity inter-event law and point-pattern likelihood)
The natural logarithm has derivative on . (The natural logarithm has derivative 1/x and equals the integral from 1 to x of 1/t)
The mean value theorem converts derivative signs into monotonicity; the exponential is strictly increasing. (The mean value theorem, as the case of Cauchy's: for continuous on with and differentiable on there is with , The exponential function is strictly increasing)
, so the exponential-kernel integral has its elementary antiderivative. (The exponential function is smooth and , The first fundamental theorem: if is integrable on and continuous at , then ; in particular a continuous has as a primitive)
The temporal model requires a measurable history random element, a measurable event-append update, and a next-event probability kernel on with jointly measurable finite-time density compatible with the effective pre-event intensity. (Temporal point-process models and conditional intensity)
AC is inherited through the temporal model and compensator contract. (The Axiom of Choice)
Countable Choice is used by the finite-window Lebesgue construction. (The Axiom of Countable Choice ())
Verification
By [F1], the supplied process has total count with law , hence finite almost surely; at it is empty. For , partition into equal half-open intervals. A cell count has mean , and gives by [F3]. Thus the probability that any cell contains two events is at most . Any repeated event forces such a collision for every , so its probability is zero. The supplied process is therefore simple. Extend its count by . For , is the count on , independent of each finite cylinder of past Borel-set counts by [F1]. Indeed, refine any finite family of past Borel sets into the disjoint atoms of the finite Boolean algebra they generate. Each atom lies in and is disjoint from , so [F1] makes the atom-count vector independent of the future increment; the cylinder vector is a function of those atom counts. Such cylinders generate , so [F4] extends independence to the whole history sigma-algebra. Therefore , and is a martingale for . The effective intensity is , which is deterministic Borel and predictable by [F5]; its integral is , continuous and bounded by . Also has finite second moment by [F3]. Thus is square-integrable and the Poisson process meets the compensator contract [F6].
Let be the space of finite counting measures on with its evaluation sigma-algebra, and define for Borel . Each is finite and measurable by the evaluation measurability of , and . For finite put ; the evaluation identity shows that the update is jointly measurable and appends one event.
The specified initial history contributes at time ; its past-event representation follows by factoring out of the nonnegative weighted sum. For a fixed finite observed pattern, the pre-event intensity at is therefore . Integrating the baseline gives , and integrating the initial excitation gives by [F10]. For each observed event time , the integral equals by [F10], also when , when both sides are zero. Summing these terms gives the displayed cumulative hazard.
For and , supply the next-event kernel, supported on , by for Borel , where . Its finite-time mass is , so each is a probability measure, including when or . For fixed , the finite-time term is , a Borel function of because the tail integral is monotone on and zero for ; the atom mass is also Borel. The finite-time density is jointly measurable in . Independent increments give the same conditional survivor, so the kernel is compatible with the observed finite-window Poisson law and supplies its terminal continuation after . Its hazard is on and for , agreeing with (and is identically zero at ). Thus the homogeneous survivor formula used in the likelihood is exactly for .
Substitute the Hawkes pre-event values and integrated hazard from step 1.3 into [F7], conditioning on the same specified initial history for every parameter value. This gives exactly the displayed Hawkes likelihood ratio, including the initial-excitation contribution when ; for empty history . The calculation is conditional on a compatible process law and proves no existence, non-explosion, or stationarity property for the specification.
Within the observation window, , the probability of no event in is , so the no-event hazard is there. Applying [F7] to the events gives exact ratio , including by the empty-product and terminal-survival conventions.
If and , the log-likelihood is , with derivative by [F8]. It is positive for and negative for . The mean value theorem [F9] therefore makes increase up to and decrease thereafter; at the likelihood is zero because . Thus the unique maximum is .
If , the likelihood is , which strictly decreases on because and the exponential is strictly increasing. Its maximum is attained at . If zero were excluded from the parameter space, this case would have only a boundary supremum.
Source notes
Rasmussen's Examples 2.3 and 3.1 give the Hawkes conditional-intensity form and homogeneous-Poisson MLE; Proposition 3.1 derives the likelihood under an empty initial history (PDF p. 12). The local likelihood theorem allows a common specified initial history, whose exponential excitation is retained here. Kass, Eden, and Brown independently cover Poisson event-time densities and history-dependent conditional intensities. The Hawkes calculation proves only finite-pattern algebra under the stated compatibility hypotheses.
Depends on
- Temporal point-process models and conditional intensity
- Finite-window homogeneous Poisson construction and ordered event-time density
- Conditional-intensity inter-event law and point-pattern likelihood
- Poisson and Cox point processes
- The scalar Poisson count law
- Normalization, moments, and generating function of the Poisson count law
- Progressively measurable and predictable processes
- Simple counting-process intensity and compensator contract
- Independent pi-systems generate independent sigma-algebras
- The natural logarithm has derivative 1/x and equals the integral from 1 to x of 1/t
- The mean value theorem, as the case $g(x) = x$ of Cauchy's: for $f$ continuous on $[a,b]$ with $a < b$ and differentiable on $(a,b)$ there is $c \in (a,b)$ with $f(b) - f(a) = f'(c)(b-a)$
- The exponential function is strictly increasing
- The exponential function is smooth and $(\exp)'=\exp$
- The first fundamental theorem: if $f$ is integrable on $[a,b]$ and continuous at $c$, then $F'(c) = f(c)$; in particular a continuous $f$ has $F$ as a primitive
- The Axiom of Choice
- The Axiom of Countable Choice ($\mathrm{AC}_\omega$)
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
89 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
- Jakob Gulddahl Rasmussen, Lecture Notes: Temporal Point Processes and the Conditional Intensity Function (standard reference, not scraped)
- Robert E. Kass, Uri T. Eden, and Emery N. Brown, Analysis of Neural Data, Chapter 19: Point Processes (standard reference, not scraped)