Alphabeta Math
ExampleConstruction: AI-generatedVerification: AI-generatedPipeline-generated
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.

A bounded-weight mixing filter has bounded asymptotic variance

Example

Let X={0,1}, set the initial target and proposal to the uniform law, and use at every step the true transition and proposal kernel K(x,⋅)=(1/2,1/2), with constant likelihood one. Thus all incremental weights equal one. For ϕ(x0:t)=1{xt=1}, compute the asymptotic variance and verify the time-uniform bound.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The two-state model, its uniform transition/proposal kernel, unit likelihood and test in the Example.

[F1]

Finite-horizon SMC CLT classes and variance recursions: If target and proposal transitions agree and likelihood is one, then υs=1, and for last-state tests h(x0:s)=hs(xs) the restricted operator is Eshs=Khs.

[F2]

Dobrushin contraction coefficient for a probability kernel: δ(K) is the supremum total-variation distance between two transition rows.

[F3]

Uniform density ratios bound the Dobrushin coefficient: A common density ratio bound C implies δ(K)≤1−C−1.

[F4]

Centered filtering Feynman–Kac operators contract terminal tests: the stated filtering density row bound C gives a centered last-state image estimate with A=C and ρ=1−C−2.

[F5]

Time-uniform SMC asymptotic variance under uniform weight and operator bounds: bounded weights and the multistep centered-image bound give Vt(ϕ)≤A2B2(Δϕ)2/(1−ρ2).

Verification

Given: The finite two-state filtering model in the Example.

1.1F1F2F3givenalgebra

Every transition row is (1/2,1/2), so the target and proposal transitions coincide and the likelihood contributes no correction. By [F1], υs=1, hence B=1, and πs is uniform for every s≥0. Since the row does not depend on its predecessor, [F2] gives δ(K)=0; its density rows are identical, so [F3] also applies with C=1.

1.2F1F4givenalgebra

On the closed last-state subspace the forward operator is Eshs=Khs, which maps a last-state test to its uniform average. The true transition and proposal density versions relative to counting measure are all 1/2, so [F4] applies with C=1, A=1, and ρ=0. No contraction of arbitrary path-history functions is asserted. The test has Δϕ=1 and is centered by 1/2. Every earlier backward image is zero; the final k=t term in the variance expansion is Var⁡πt(ϕ)=1/4. Hence Vt(ϕ)=1/4 for every t.

2.1F5step 1.1step 1.2∎

Applying [F5] with A=B=1, ρ=0 and Δϕ=1 gives Vt(ϕ)≤1, uniformly in t; the exact variance 1/4 from step 1.2 satisfies the bound. This verifies a time-uniform asymptotic-variance result under explicit mixing and weight conditions.

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.