Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge 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.

Bernoulli root laws are uniformly close in Levy–Prokhorov distance

Statement

For n≥1 and p∈[0,1], let μn,p be the law of Sn,p:=1n∑i=1n(Bi(p)−p), where B1(p),…,Bn(p) are IID Bernoulli(p). For every p,q∈[0,1], π(μn,p,μn,q)≤∣p−q∣1/3, where π is the Levy–Prokhorov metric. The bound is uniform in the sample size and choice-free.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Integers n≥1, p,q∈[0,1], and the laws μn,p,μn,q.

[F1]

Bernoulli random variables and binomial random variables as sums of independent Bernoulli trials: A Bernoulli(p) variable is 1 with probability p and 0 otherwise; a binomial variable is a finite sum of independent Bernoulli variables.

[F2]

A Bernoulli(p) variable has mean p and variance p(1−p); a binomial(n,p) variable has mean np and variance np(1−p): A binomial(n,r) variable has mean nr and variance nr(1−r), including r=0,1.

[F3]

Chebyshev's inequality for random variables: For a square-integrable real random variable Y and t>0, P(∣Y−EY∣≥t)≤Var⁡(Y)/t2.

[F4]

Levy prokhorov metric: The Levy–Prokhorov distance is the infimum of radii ε>0 for which both closed-set inequalities μ(A)≤ν(A[ε])+ε and ν(A)≤μ(A[ε])+ε hold for every closed A.

Proof

Given: The integers, parameters, and laws in the statement.

1.1F1F2algebraconstruct

If p=q, the laws coincide. Suppose p≤q. For each i, give (Bi,Ci)∈{0,1}2 probabilities p at (1,1), q−p at (0,1), 1−q at (0,0), and zero at (1,0), and take n independent copies of this finite pair. Then Bi∼Bernoulli⁡(p), Ci∼Bernoulli⁡(q), and Di:=Ci−Bi∼Bernoulli⁡(q−p); the pairs are independent across i. Thus Sn,q−Sn,p=n−1/2∑i(Di−(q−p)), whose mean is zero and whose variance, by [F2], is (q−p)(1−q+p)≤q−p. If q<p, interchange the two parameters and change the sign of the difference; its variance is ∣p−q∣(1−∣p−q∣)≤∣p−q∣.

2.1F3F4step 1.1algebra∎

Put r=∣p−q∣ and ε=r1/3 for r>0. By [F3] and step 1.1, the coupling just constructed satisfies P(∣Sn,p−Sn,q∣>ε)≤r/ε2=ε. For any closed set A, the event {Sn,p∈A, ∣Sn,p−Sn,q∣≤ε} is contained in {Sn,q∈A[ε]}, so μn,p(A)≤μn,q(A[ε])+ε. Interchanging p and q gives the reverse inequality. Hence ε is admissible in [F4], so the infimum defining π is at most ε. For r=0 the laws coincide and their distance is zero by [F4]. This proves the bound for every endpoint case as well.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

20 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