Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
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.

Bounded-function form of the Markov property

Statement

Assume Choice. An adapted process has the indicator Markov property with kernel K if and only if, for every bounded E-measurable real function f and every n0, E[f(Xn+1)Fn]=Kf(Xn)a.s.,Kf(x):=Ef(y)K(x,dy).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Choice, a probability kernel K, and an adapted E-valued process X.

[F1]

The indicator Markov property is the conditional-probability identity in Time-homogeneous Markov chain with transition kernel.

[F2]

If f is measurable and its kernel integral is defined, then Kf is measurable. (Measurability of integration against a kernel)

[F3]

Every nonnegative measurable function is the pointwise increasing limit of nonnegative measurable simple functions. (Every nonnegative measurable function is the increasing limit of simple measurable functions)

[F4]

Dominated convergence passes a pointwise limit under an integral when one integrable majorant dominates the sequence. (Dominated convergence)

[F5]

Two conditional expectations of the same integrable variable given the same sigma-algebra are equal almost surely. (Conditional expectation is unique almost surely)

Proof

1.1

Assume [F1]. If s=j=1raj1Aj is a nonnegative measurable [F1, F2] simple function, then, for BFn, finite additivity of the integral and [F1] give E[1Bs(Xn+1)]=jajE[1B1{Xn+1Aj}]=E[1BKs(Xn)]. The variable Ks(Xn) is Fn-measurable by [F2], so it is a version of E[s(Xn+1)Fn].

F1F2
2.1

Let 0fM. By [F3], choose simple sjf, replacing [F2, F3, F4, F5, step 1.1] sj by sjM if necessary. Then Ksj(x)Kf(x) for every x; this follows from [F4] with the probability measure K(x,) and majorant M. For each BFn, [F4] under P on both sides of the identity from step 1.1 gives E[1Bf(Xn+1)]=E[1BKf(Xn)]. Thus Kf(Xn) is a conditional-expectation version; [F5] makes the equality an equality of almost-everywhere classes.

F2F3F4F5step 1.1
3.1

For bounded real f, apply step 2.1 to f+ and f. Subtracting the [F2, F5, step 2.1] two defining event-integral identities shows that Kf(Xn)=Kf+(Xn)Kf(Xn) is a version of the desired conditional expectation. This proves the bounded-function form.

F2F5step 2.1
4.1

Conversely, put f=1A. Then Kf(Xn)=K(Xn,A), so the asserted [F1, step 3.1] bounded-function identity is exactly [F1] for A. Together with the forward direction through step 3.1, this proves the equivalence.

F1step 3.1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

44 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