Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-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.

Finite-dependent vector central limit theorem

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let d≥1 and m≥0 be finite integers, and let (Yt)t∈Z be a centered strictly stationary sequence of Rd-valued random vectors with E∥Y0∥2<∞. Strict stationarity means that every finite-dimensional law is invariant under integer shifts. Assume m-dependence: for each a∈Z, the sigma-algebras generated by (Yt)t≤a and (Yt)t≥a+m+1 are independent, in the sense of Independent sigma-algebras and independent events. Set Σm=∑∣j∣≤mCov⁡(Y0,Yj), where Cov⁡(U,V)=E[(U−EU)(V−EV)T] (Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space). Then Σm is symmetric positive semidefinite and 1n∑t=1nYt ⇒ Nd(0,Σm). The conclusion allows singular Σm, including Σm=0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume AC. Let (Yt)t∈Z be centered, strictly stationary, m-dependent Rd-valued random vectors with finite second moment, as in the Statement.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice is assumed (The Axiom of Choice).

[F1]

A centered row-wise independent triangular array with finite second moments and the Lindeberg condition has a standard normal normalized row-sum limit (Lindeberg-Feller central limit theorem: sufficiency); the row and Lindeberg conventions are those of Row-wise independent centered triangular array and Total row variance and the Lindeberg condition.

[F2]

Slutsky's theorem permits multiplication of a convergent real random variable by a sequence converging in probability to a constant (Slutsky's theorem for real random variables).

[F3]

If two sequences on a common metric space differ by a quantity tending to zero in probability, they have the same weak limit (Converging together lemma).

[F4]

Under AC, pointwise convergence of characteristic functions to a specified characteristic function implies weak convergence of the corresponding real laws (Characteristic function criterion for weak convergence).

[F5]

Under AC, a positive semidefinite covariance matrix, including a singular one, defines Nd(0,Σ) (Multivariate normal law, including singular covariance); convergence of all one-dimensional linear projections to the corresponding projections of a specified law implies vector weak convergence (Cramer wold device).

[F6]

A square-integrable real random variable satisfies Chebyshev's inequality, so a sequence whose second moments tend to zero converges in probability to zero (Chebyshev's inequality for random variables).

[F7]

Dominated convergence removes the tails of a square-integrable random variable when it is clipped at levels K→∞ (Dominated convergence).

[F8]

Cauchy--Schwarz for square-integrable real random variables bounds expectations of products by the product of their L2 norms (Cauchy-Schwarz for random variables).

Proof

Given: The objects and assumptions in the Statement.

1.1A1givenF5F8algebra

For h∈Z put Ch=Cov⁡(Y0,Yh). These covariance terms are finite by [F8]. Strict stationarity gives C−h=ChT, and m-dependence gives Ch=0 when ∣h∣>m. Expanding the finite variance of the sum yields 1nCov⁡ ⁣(∑t=1nYt)=∑∣h∣≤m(1−∣h∣n)+Ch⟶Σm. Thus Σm is symmetric, and for every a∈Rd, aTΣma is the limit of nonnegative variances divided by n, so it is nonnegative. Hence Nd(0,Σm) exists by [F5].

2.1givenF3F6F7F8step 1.1algebra

Fix a∈Rd and let Zt=aTYt and σ2=aTΣma. If σ2=0, step 1.1 gives E∣n−1/2∑t=1nZt∣2→0; [F6] and then [F3] give convergence in distribution to zero. Suppose σ2>0. For K≥1 define Zt(K)=max⁡(−K,min⁡(K,Zt))−E[max⁡(−K,min⁡(K,Z0))]. This is centered, stationary, m-dependent and bounded by 2K; [F7] gives ∥Z0−Z0(K)∥2→0. Write σK2=lim⁡nn−1Var⁡(∑t=1nZt(K))=∑∣h∣≤mCov⁡(Z0(K),Zh(K)). Finite summation and [F8] give σK2→σ2, so σK2>0 for all sufficiently large K.

3.1A1F1F2givenstep 2.1choosealgebra

Fix such a K, put ℓn=⌊n1/4⌋, and retain qn=⌊n/(ℓn+m)⌋ blocks of length ℓn, with m omitted indices between successive blocks. Write b for the last index in a retained block. The next block starts at b+m+1, so m-dependence makes its sigma-algebra independent of the sigma-algebra generated by all earlier blocks; induction gives row-wise independence of the block sums Bn,r. If γh(K)=Cov⁡(Z0(K),Zh(K)), stationarity gives Var⁡(Bn,r)=ℓnγ0(K)+2∑h=1m(ℓn−h)γh(K),sn2n:=qnVar⁡(Bn,1)n⟶σK2. Here qnℓn/n→1 and qn/n→0. Also ∣Bn,r∣≤2Kℓn and sn/n→σK>0. Thus qn≥1 and sn>0 for all sufficiently large n; on this tail, for each ε>0 every block is eventually bounded by εsn, so the Lindeberg sum is zero. Applying [F1] to this tail of rows, sn−1∑rBn,r⇒N(0,1), and [F2] gives n−1/2∑rBn,r⇒N(0,σK2).

4.1F3F6givenstep 3.1algebra

The omitted gaps and terminal remainder contain rn≤mqn+ℓn+m=O(n/ℓn+ℓn)=o(n) indices. For a centered m-dependent sequence bounded by 2K, at most (2m+1)rn ordered pairs of omitted terms can have nonzero covariance, each covariance having absolute value at most 4K2. Therefore the omitted sum divided by n tends to zero in L2, hence in probability by [F6]. By [F3], n−1/2∑t=1nZt(K)⇒N(0,σK2).

5.1A1F4F8step 2.1step 4.1algebra

The centered m-dependent truncation errors Wt(K)=Zt−Zt(K) satisfy E∣n−1/2∑t=1nWt(K)∣2≤(2m+1)E∣W0(K)∣2⟶0(K→∞), by expanding the variance and bounding each of its at most 2m+1 nonzero lag terms with [F8]. For fixed real u, ∣eiux−eiuy∣≤∣u∣∣x−y∣; thus the characteristic function of n−1/2∑Zt differs from that of its K-truncation by at most ∣u∣(2m+1)E∣W0(K)∣2. First taking n→∞ using step 4.1 and then K→∞ using σK2→σ2 proves convergence to e−u2σ2/2. By [F4], n−1/2∑Zt⇒N(0,σ2). This also covers every projection with positive variance; the zero-variance case was handled in step 2.1.

6.1A1F5step 1.1step 2.1step 5.1∎

Steps 2.1 and 5.1 show for every a∈Rd that aTn−1/2∑t=1nYt⇒N(0,aTΣma). These are precisely the projections of the law Nd(0,Σm) established in step 1.1, so [F5] gives the asserted vector convergence, including singular and zero covariance.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

67 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