Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: 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 finite MDP policy generates action-state-reward trajectories

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let a finite MDP have nonempty state set S, and let π be a stationary Markov policy. Fix an initial state s0∈S and let

Z={(s,a,r,s′):s∈S, a∈A(s), r∈R, s′∈S}

with its discrete sigma-algebra. There is a probability law on S×ZN whose first state is S0=s0 and whose subsequent coordinates are Zn=(Sn,An,Rn+1,Sn+1). For every m≥0 and every feasible finite trajectory (s0,a0,r1,s1,…,am−1,rm,sm), its probability is

∏n=0m−1π(an∣sn) p(sn+1,rn+1∣sn,an),

where the empty product for m=0 is 1.

Its state-reward marginal also has the finite-prefix probabilities

∏n=0m−1∑a∈A(sn)π(a∣sn)p(sn+1,rn+1∣sn,a)

for each feasible finite state-reward path (s0,r1,s1,…,rm,sm).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC, a finite MDP with S≠∅, a stationary Markov policy π, and an initial state s0∈S.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: every family of nonempty sets has a choice function.

[F1]

Finite Markov decision process with joint reward-transition law: S, R, and each A(s) are finite; p(s′,r∣s,a)≥0 and ∑s′,rp(s′,r∣s,a)=1; π(⋅∣s) is a probability distribution on A(s).

[F2]

Finite, countably infinite, countable, uncountable: a finite set is in bijection with a natural number.

[F4]

Measure kernel and probability kernel: a probability kernel assigns a probability measure at each input and has measurable event sections.

[F5]

The product sigma-algebra and its finite iterates: finite product sigma-algebras make coordinate projections measurable.

[F6]

The well-ordering principle: every nonempty subset of N has a least element.

[F7]

Ionescu-Tulcea construction of a Markov chain: under AC, an initial probability and a sequence of probability kernels determine a probability law with the prescribed iterated finite-prefix laws.

[F8]

A finite MDP and stationary policy generate a reward-state Markov chain: the reward-state marginal under π has the finite-prefix laws obtained by mixing the joint law p(s′,r∣s,a) with π(a∣s).

[F10]

Ionescu-Tulcea construction of a Markov chain: a probability law with prescribed consistent finite-prefix laws is unique.

Proof

Given: The hypotheses and conventions in the Statement.

1.1givenF1F2F3F4F6algebra

The blocks {s}×A(s) are finite by [F3] and pairwise disjoint because distinct blocks have different first coordinates. Since S is finite, [F3] makes D=⋃s∈S{s}×A(s) finite. Its product with the finite reward and state sets is finite by [F3], so Z is finite. For each s∈S and B⊆Z, define Kπ(s,B)=∑a∈A(s)π(a∣s)∑s′∈S∑r∈R1B(s,a,r,s′)p(s′,r∣s,a). Every term is nonnegative, and [F1] gives Kπ(s,Z)=∑a∈A(s)π(a∣s)=1. If (Bj) is a disjoint sequence of subsets of finite Z, only finitely many Bj are nonempty: enumerate Z and assign each nonempty Bj its least element in that enumeration; disjointness makes these assigned elements distinct. Therefore finite additivity of the displayed finite sums gives countable additivity. Since Z and S have discrete sigma-algebras, B↦Kπ(s,B) is a probability measure and s↦Kπ(s,B) is measurable; hence Kπ is a probability kernel by [F4].

2.1givenA1F4F5F7step 1.1construct

Set E0=S and En=Z for n≥1, with initial measure δs0. For each n≥0, let Kn from E0×⋯×En to Z be Kn(h,B)=Kπ(sn,B), where sn=s0 when n=0 and sn is the final next-state coordinate of the last trajectory record in h when n≥1. That coordinate projection is measurable by [F5], so each Kn is measurable in h; its sections are probability measures by step 1.1. Thus the hypotheses of [F7] hold.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1F1F7algebra

Apply [F7] to obtain the probability law with these finite-prefix kernels. For a feasible atom (s0,a0,r1,s1,…,am−1,rm,sm), its iterated prefix mass is the product over n<m of the atom masses Kπ(sn,{(sn,an,rn+1,sn+1)}). The definition of Kπ makes each such mass π(an∣sn)p(sn+1,rn+1∣sn,an), giving the displayed formula. For m=0, the initial point mass is 1.

4.1step 3.1F8F9F10algebra∎

Fix a finite state-reward path (s0,r1,s1,…,rm,sm). Summing the action-path formula from step 3.1 over its finitely many action sequences and regrouping the finite sums by time gives the displayed state-reward marginal formula by [F9]. These are the finite-prefix probabilities in [F8]. The initial state is the same point mass, so uniqueness [F10] identifies the state-reward marginal with the stationary-policy path law.

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