Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

Common drift and strongly aperiodic minorization give a uniform geometric bound

Statement

Let (Pγ)γ∈Γ be probability kernels on a measurable space (X,X) with a common invariant probability π (Invariant and stationary distribution for a Markov kernel). Suppose there are a measurable set C, a finite measurable V:X→[1,∞), and constants v≥1, 0<δ≤1, 0<λ<1, and 0≤b<∞ such that sup⁡x∈CV(x)≤v and, for every γ, there is a probability measure νγ with νγ(C)=1 satisfying Pγ(x,A)≥δνγ(A)(x∈C, A∈X),PγV(x):=∫V(y)Pγ(x,dy)≤λV(x)+b1C(x)(x∈X). Then there are constants M<∞ and 0<ρ<1, depending only on v,δ,λ,b, such that ∥Pγn(x,⋅)−π∥TV≤MV(x)ρn(x∈X, n≥0, γ∈Γ). The support condition νγ(C)=1 is the strong-aperiodicity hypothesis in the cited drift/minorization route.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The kernels, common invariant probability, set C, drift function, and uniform minorization/drift constants in the Statement.

[F1]

Small-set minorization and geometric drift: a one-step minorization means Pγ(x,⋅)≥δνγ(⋅) for every x∈C, and the geometric drift inequality is pointwise.

[F2]
[F3]

Measure kernel and probability kernel: kernel rows are probability measures and kernel evaluations are measurable.

[F4]

Total variation duality, kernel contraction, and coupling bound: a measurable event on which coupled coordinates agree bounds total variation by its complement probability, and fixed kernels contract total variation.

[F5]

Finite products of probability kernels are probability kernels: finite products of probability kernels are probability kernels.

[F6]

Measurability of integration against a kernel: integration of nonnegative measurable functions against these kernels is measurable.

[F7]

Monotone convergence for the integral: increasing truncations converge under integration.

[F8]

Markov's inequality for random variables: for nonnegative Z and t>0, P(Z≥t)≤EZ/t.

Proof

Given: The Statement and [F1]–[F8]. No choice axiom is used: for each fixed γ the proof uses a witness νγ and all resulting bounds depend only on the common numerical constants.

1.1F6F7construct

We record the finite-horizon construction used below. If T is a probability kernel on (S,Σ), start with any probability measure μ0 on S (in particular μ0=δs for a fixed start s). Given a probability measure μm on Sm+1, the map T^m((s0,…,sm),A):=T(sm,A) is a probability kernel from Sm+1 to S, since the last-coordinate projection is measurable. For E∈Σ⊗(m+2), set μm+1(E):=∫Sm+1∫S1E((s0,…,sm),z) T(sm,dz) μm(d(s0,…,sm)). The inner integral is measurable by [F6]. Sections of product-measurable sets are measurable, and countable additivity of the rows of T together with [F7] gives countable additivity of μm+1; its total mass is one. For every measurable prefix set A⊆Sm+1 and B∈Σ, μm+1(A×B)=∫AT(sm,B) μm(d(s0,…,sm)). Thus this recursion gives a probability law for each finite path, with the stated one-step transition identity; the identity for all prefix events is the displayed formula for arbitrary product-measurable A. Kernel integration of a nonnegative measurable test g has the corresponding form ∫A×Sg(z) μm+1(d(w,z))=∫A∫Sg(z)T(sm,dz) μm(dw), first for simple g and then by [F7]. These identities are exactly the finite-horizon conditional transition and expectation rules used below. Kernel compositions used below are kernels as well: iterating (K1K2)(x,A)=∫K2(y,A)K1(x,dy) preserves measurable evaluations by [F6] and countable additivity by [F7]. This applies to probability kernels and finite subprobability kernels.

1.2F2F3F7given

Fix any γ. For r≥1, set Vr=V∧r. By [F2], ∫(PγVr−Vr) dπ=0. On C the integrand is at most λv+b; on Cc∩{V≤r} it is at most −(1−λ)V; and on Cc∩{V>r} it is at most zero, because PγVr≤min⁡(PγV,r). Hence (1−λ)∫Cc∩{V≤r}V dπ≤(λv+b)π(C)≤λv+b. Letting r→∞ by [F7] gives the uniform finite bound πV≤v+(λv+b)/(1−λ)=:Kπ.

2.1F1F3F6step 1.1given

Put λ′=(1+λ)/2 and c=b/(1−λ′). Choose d≥v so 2c/(d+1)<1/4, then choose N≥1 with d(λ′)N≤1/2, and finally choose L>N+1 with (λ′)L<1/4. Let D={x:V(x)≤d}. For fixed γ, the killed subprobability kernel Kγ(x,A)=1Cc(x)Pγ(x,A) satisfies KγV≤λ′V. To make its finite paths explicit, adjoin a cemetery point † and equip Xˉ=X⊔{†} with Xˉ={A,A∪{†}:A∈X}. Define the probability kernel Kˉγ on this measurable space by Kˉγ(x,A)=Kγ(x,A∩X)+1C(x)1{†∈A} for x∈X, and Kˉγ(†,A)=1{†∈A}. This is measurable: the first term is a kernel evaluation, the second is measurable, and each row has mass one. Step 1.1 constructs its finite path laws. Let Vˉ=V on X and Vˉ(†)=0; then Vˉ is Xˉ-measurable, KˉγVˉ=KγV on X, KˉγVˉ(†)=0, and by iteration KˉγN+1Vˉ(x)=KγN+1V(x). The event that the killed path is in X after N+1 transitions has probability KγN+11(x). Under the finite Pγ-path law from step 1.1, the same recursive formula inserts 1Cc at each current state, so for τC=inf⁡{m≥0:Xm∈C} one has Px(τC>N)=KγN+11(x). Px(τC>N)=KγN+11(x)≤KγN+1V(x)≤(λ′)N+1V(x)≤1/2 for every x∈D. Hence Px(τC≤N)≥1/2.

3.1F1step 2.1given

Since νγ(C)=1, the minorization gives νγPγ≥δνγ, and induction gives νγPγq≥δqνγ for every q≥0. Split the L-step transition according to the first hit time t≤N of C. From a state in C, the first step minorizes by δνγ and the remaining L−t−1 steps preserve at least δL−t−1νγ. Hence, for every x∈D and measurable A, PγL(x,A)≥∑t=0NPx(τC=t)δL−tνγ(A)≥δL2νγ(A). Thus D is one-step small for Qγ=PγL, with common ϵ=δL/2.

3.2F3F5step 2.1algebra

Iterating PγV≤λV+b1C≤λ′V+b gives QγV≤(λ′)LV+c. Put h(x,y)=(V(x)+V(y))/2. Outside D×D, at least one coordinate has V>d and the other has V≥1, so (Qγ⊗Qγ)h(x,y)≤(λ′)Lh(x,y)+c≤ah(x,y),a:=(λ′)L+2cd+1<1. This a is independent of γ.

4.1F1F3F5step 3.1step 3.2

For x∈D, QγV(x)≤d+c. The residual probability Rγ,x=(Qγ(x,⋅)−ϵνγ)/(1−ϵ) is well-defined by step 3.1 and satisfies Rγ,xV≤(d+c)/(1−ϵ). Consequently Rγ,x⊗Rγ,y(h)≤H:=(d+c)/(1−ϵ) for x,y∈D. All constants here are independent of γ.

4.2F1F3F5F6step 3.1step 1.1given

Fix γ. Let Δ(z)=(z,z); this map from (X,X) to (X2,X⊗X) is measurable, since inverse images of rectangles are measurable intersections. Write Δ∗η(E)=η(Δ−1(E)) for the image of a measure η. Extend the residual rows to all x∈X by setting Rx=(Qγ(x,⋅)−ϵνγ)/(1−ϵ) on D and Rx=π on Dc; this is a probability kernel by step 3.1 and measurable piecewise definition. On S=X2×{0,1}, for a measurable E⊆S write Ei={(u,v):(u,v,i)∈E}. Define a transition Tγ as follows: - from ((x,y),0) with (x,y)∉D2, its row on flag 0 is Qγ(x,⋅)⊗Qγ(y,⋅); - from ((x,y),0) with (x,y)∈D2, its row is (1−ϵ)(Rx⊗Ry) on flag 0 plus ϵΔ∗νγ on flag 1; - from ((x,y),1), its row is Δ∗Qγ(x,⋅) on flag 1. Here each Ei is measurable by sectioning the finite flag coordinate, and the displayed measures on X2 are placed on their indicated flag sections. The maps (x,y)↦Qγ(x,A) and (x,y)↦Qγ(y,A) (and the analogous maps for R) are measurable by the coordinate projections, so [F5] gives the two product-kernel rows. The image-kernel rows are measurable by measurability of Δ and of Qγ(x,A). Since D2 is measurable, the three cases define a measurable probability kernel on S. At flag 0, each coordinate marginal is its corresponding Qγ row, because on D one has ϵνγ+(1−ϵ)Rx=Qγ(x,⋅). At flag 1 the coordinates coincide on every reachable state and both then advance with Qγ. Applying the finite-horizon construction in step 1.1 to Tγ defines the finite path laws used below. Starting from B0=0, once Bk=1 the coordinates remain equal; {Bk=1} is measurable and on it Xk=Yk.

5.1step 3.2step 4.1step 4.2step 1.1given

Let T=inf⁡{m≥1:Bm=1} and let Nk count failed split attempts in the first k transitions. Choose B≥max⁡{1,(1−ϵ)H/a} and define Zk=a−kB−Nkh(Xk,Yk)1{T>k}. For each finite horizon, the coordinate process under its path law from step 1.1 is a nonnegative supermartingale with respect to its coordinate filtration: on {T>k} an outside-D×D update contracts expected h by step 3.2 and leaves the flag and failure count unchanged; on D×D a successful split makes the indicator zero, while the failed-split contribution has ratio at most (1−ϵ)H/(aBh(Xk,Yk))≤1 because h≥1. Since T≥1, Z0=h(x,y), and therefore Ex,yZk≤h(x,y) for every finite k.

6.1F4F8step 5.1algebra

For every integer j≥1, the probability of at least j failed split attempts is at most (1−ϵ)j, by conditioning successively at the first j attempts. On {T>k,Nk<j}, Zk≥a−kB−(j−1), so Markov's inequality [F8] gives Px,y(T>k)≤(1−ϵ)j+akBj−1h(x,y). Choose θ>0 with aBθ<1 and take j=max⁡(1,⌊θk⌋). Both terms are bounded by M0h(x,y)ρ0k for constants M0<∞, 0<ρ0<1 determined only by a,B,ϵ. On the measurable event {T≤k} the flagged chains agree, so [F4] yields ∥Qγk(x,⋅)−Qγk(y,⋅)∥TV≤M0h(x,y)ρ0k.

7.1F2F4F5step 1.1step 1.2step 6.1

For each finite k, start the flagged path law with initial measure δx⊗π⊗δ0 on S, which exists by [F5] and step 1.1. The second coordinate has initial law π and transition marginal Qγ, so invariance gives Yk∼π. Integrating step 6.1 over Y0 and using step 1.2 yields ∥Qγk(x,⋅)−π∥TV≤M02(V(x)+πV)ρ0k≤M02(1+Kπ)V(x)ρ0k. This bound is uniform in γ.

8.1F2F4step 7.1algebra∎

Write n=Lk+s with 0≤s<L. By kernel contraction and πPγs=π, ∥Pγn(x,⋅)−π∥TV≤∥Qγk(x,⋅)−π∥TV. Set ρ=ρ01/L and enlarge the constant by ρ−(L−1). The resulting M is finite and depends only on v,δ,λ,b, proving the stated bound.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

35 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