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.
The sample mean attains the unrestricted mean bound
Example
Let be any law on with , let , and consider the local model whose allowed paths are all bounded mean-zero tilts for sufficiently small . For , the sample mean is regular along each allowed one-sided path (the centered root- error has one common limit law for every fixed ), and is asymptotically linear with influence function . Its asymptotic variance equals the unrestricted mean bound.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A probability law on with , the stated bounded-score local model, and AC and Countable Choice.
A dominated differentiable-in-quadratic-mean submodel: a supplied common-dominated one-sided path is DQM when its square-root densities have the stated first-order expansion.
Pathwise differentiability and parameter influence curves: the tangent space is the closed span of allowed scores, and a parameter influence curve represents the path derivative by .
Asymptotically linear estimators and influence functions: asymptotic linearity means with .
Multivariate iid central limit theorem: under AC, iid square-integrable vectors have their centered Gaussian limit, including singular covariance.
A one-sided DQM path yields an iid LAN proxy: each bounded-score path has a mean-one local likelihood-ratio proxy with the Gaussian LAN expansion, an actual-law total-variation error tending to zero, and proxy-zero probability tending to zero.
Le Cam's third lemma for a Gaussian likelihood-ratio limit: under the proxy law, a joint Gaussian limit shifts the statistic's mean by its covariance with the log likelihood ratio and preserves its covariance.
Asymptotic linearity implies asymptotic normality: the estimator's base-law limit is normal with covariance equal to its influence-function covariance.
Semiparametric information bound for regular asymptotically linear estimators: every regular asymptotically linear estimator has influence covariance at least the canonical-gradient covariance.
Influence-curve representers form an affine orthogonal-complement class: the canonical gradient is the unique derivative representer in the tangent space; Countable Choice is assumed for its projection construction.
Cauchy-Schwarz inequality for : the pairing is continuous.
Slutsky's theorem for real random variables and Cramer wold device: scalar perturbations preserve projected limits, and all projection limits determine the vector limit.
A uniform derivative bound gives a uniform Taylor remainder bound: if the second derivative is bounded on an interval, the first-order Taylor polynomial has a remainder bounded by a constant times the square of the displacement.
The Axiom of Choice: AC is used by the iid CLT [F4]; the displayed tilt densities are explicit and require no selection.
The Axiom of Countable Choice (): Countable Choice is used for the tangent-space projection in [F9].
Verification
Given: , , and the bounded-score path family in the example.
For each bounded with , choose so small that everywhere. On , has , so . [F12] with gives uniformly. The remainder is in , so this is a DQM path with score . Its mean is , hence .
Bounded centered functions are dense in : for , the bounded functions are centered and converge to in by truncation and . Thus . By [F10], is continuous and is represented by ; [F9] makes this the canonical gradient. Its covariance is .
The identity proves exact asymptotic linearity with influence . Therefore [F7] gives the base limit .
Fix a bounded centered score and . Under the base law, the iid vectors have finite second moment. By [F4], their normalized sums converge jointly to a centered Gaussian with covariance entries , , and . The lemma [F5] also gives ; set when and otherwise, which changes the joint law only on an -probability event. Scalar Slutsky and Cramér–Wold [F11] give the joint Gaussian limit with ; exponentiation gives the likelihood-ratio limit required by [F6]. The proxy limit of is therefore , and total-variation closeness [F5] transfers it to the actual local law.
The target shift is exact: . Subtracting it from step 1.4 gives for every fixed , so the sample mean is regular on every allowed path. Its influence covariance is by step 1.2; [F8] shows it attains the regular asymptotically linear lower bound. This includes , when both covariance matrices vanish.
Depends on
- A dominated differentiable-in-quadratic-mean submodel
- Pathwise differentiability and parameter influence curves
- Influence-curve representers form an affine orthogonal-complement class
- Asymptotically linear estimators and influence functions
- Asymptotic linearity implies asymptotic normality
- A one-sided DQM path yields an iid LAN proxy
- Le Cam's third lemma for a Gaussian likelihood-ratio limit
- Multivariate iid central limit theorem
- Slutsky's theorem for real random variables
- Cramer wold device
- Semiparametric information bound for regular asymptotically linear estimators
- Cauchy-Schwarz inequality for $L^2$
- A uniform derivative bound gives a uniform Taylor remainder bound
- 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
86 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
- A. W. van der Vaart, Semiparametric Statistics, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1781, Lecture 2, Example 2.11 (Springer, 2002) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Edward H. Kennedy, Semiparametric theory, §§3–4 (2017) (standard reference, not scraped)