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.
Geometric strong mixing gives an Lp Poisson solution
Statement
Assume AC. Let be a probability kernel on an arbitrary measurable space with invariant probability . Let be its stationary Markov chain, and suppose its strong-mixing coefficients satisfy for , with and . Let be measurable with and for some finite .
For every , put . The kernel operators are understood on -almost-everywhere classes, with finite measurable versions obtained by setting divergent integrals to zero on their -null exceptional sets. Then and the series converges in , with Moreover, writing , one has The covariance sum is finite and nonnegative, and
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC, the stationary kernel and invariant probability, the geometric strong-mixing bound, centered real , and .
AC is assumed. The Axiom of Choice
For square-integrable variables in sigma-algebras with event mixing coefficient , , and for nonnegative Borel . Separation by bounds by . Strong-mixing covariance bound in terms of tail quantiles, Strong, uniform, and maximal-correlation mixing coefficients
The bounded Markov identity is ; its square-integrable extension identifies the conditional mean with the kernel integral on a full invariant-measure set. Chapman-Kolmogorov equations, Kernel conditional expectations for square-integrable Markov observables
Conditional expectation is an contraction, and on a probability space when . Conditional lp contraction, Finite-measure includes into for
Hölder and its product form bound products in the corresponding spaces; Minkowski bounds the norm of a finite sum by the sum of norms. Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases, Generalized Holder inequality puts products into , Minkowski's inequality for integrals, including
Under AC, is complete, consists of almost-everywhere classes of measurable representatives, and norm-convergent sequences have almost-everywhere convergent representative subsequences. Riesz-Fischer completeness of for , The space as the quotient by null functions
Increasing nonnegative measurable functions pass through integration by monotone convergence. Monotone convergence for the integral
Invariance means ; the identity extends from indicators to nonnegative measurable functions by increasing simple approximations. Invariant and stationary distribution for a Markov kernel
Centered second moments are variances, covariance is the centered product expectation, and covariance is bilinear and symmetric. Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space, Covariance is symmetric and bilinear in finite linear combinations
Proof
Invariance [F7], extended with [F6], gives for integrable , so the absolute kernel integral is finite off a measurable -null set. A change of representative on a -null set does not change its image class, since implies almost everywhere. For , [F3] gives , and [F2] identifies with . Conditional contraction [F3] and stationarity give . The bounded iteration identity in [F2] extends to these classes by replacing with its bounded clipped truncations: their error tends to zero because the integrable tail tends to zero, as follows from [F6] applied to its complementary truncations; conditional and kernel contractions pass this error to zero. Thus is a well-defined linear contraction on , its iterates agree with the kernel iterates, and . This also proves before any covariance estimate is used.
Fix , put , and let and for integers . This function is bounded, belongs to , and satisfies . The centered is in by [F3]. Step 1.1 and bounded conditional multiplication give ; since , this expectation is the covariance of and . Bounded conditional multiplication here follows directly from the defining conditional expectation event identity, first for simple and then by uniform bounded approximation. Thus [F1] is applied only to square-integrable variables, even though .
Put . The quantile identity in [F1] gives and . Since , apply the product inequality [F4] to these two quantile functions in , and then Hölder with , whose norm is . Therefore [F1] and step 2.1 give . If the quantile integral and the right-hand side are zero. Let using [F6]. If the required bound is immediate; otherwise divide by to obtain . The restriction ensures and makes all Hölder exponents just used valid.
The geometric bound makes , including . By step 3.1, [F4] makes a Cauchy sequence in . Completeness [F5] gives . The contraction in step 1.1 gives , while in by step 3.1. Thus as almost-everywhere classes. Choose the finite measurable representative supplied by [F5], setting it to zero on its measurable null exceptional set if necessary, and use the version convention from step 1.1 for . These choices make the asserted almost-everywhere identity precise on the original sigma-algebra without completing the measure.
Apply [F1] directly to , both square-integrable. Their quantiles have common norm . Two applications of [F4], with reciprocal exponents , yield . The exponent is positive because ; the geometric bound therefore gives . At a zero mixing coefficient the quantile integral is zero, so no division by that coefficient is needed.
Centering, stationarity and [F8] give . To pass to its limit, choose any finite ; the terms converge individually to , while the absolute value of either remaining weighted or limiting tail is at most , which tends to zero as by step 4.2. The limit is the claimed finite covariance sum . Each left-hand side is nonnegative, hence . When almost everywhere all bounds and the choice hold directly; no claim of uniqueness of is made. The strict exponent range and all zero-mixing cases were handled in steps 3.1, 4.1, 4.2. AC is used through the Markov/conditional and completeness suppliers, not as an imported covariance or Poisson theorem.
Source notes
The actual Doukhan–Massart–Rio full PDF was retrieved and its printed p. 66 inspected as a rendered page, including the finite-variance restriction of Lemma 1 and the covariance-sum conclusion of Proposition 1. The proof above consumes the fully proved local quantile lemma. Its test variable is bounded before that lemma is applied; the unbounded dual variable, whose exponent is less than two, is never inserted into a result requiring square integrability. The Poisson-series construction, norm convergence and nonnegative variance limit are proved here, not replaced by a source citation.
Depends on
- The Axiom of Choice
- Invariant and stationary distribution for a Markov kernel
- The space $L^p(\mu)$ as the quotient by null functions
- Strong, uniform, and maximal-correlation mixing coefficients
- Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space
- Strong-mixing covariance bound in terms of tail quantiles
- Kernel conditional expectations for square-integrable Markov observables
- Conditional lp contraction
- Chapman-Kolmogorov equations
- Finite-measure $L^r$ includes into $L^p$ for $p < r$
- Generalized Holder inequality puts products into $L^r$
- Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases
- Minkowski's inequality for integrals, including $p = \infty$
- Riesz-Fischer completeness of $L^p$ for $1 \le p \le \infty$
- Monotone convergence for the integral
- Covariance is symmetric and bilinear in finite linear combinations
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
69 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
- P. Doukhan, P. Massart and E. Rio, The functional central limit theorem for strongly mixing processes, Lemma 1 and Proposition 1 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Galin L. Jones, On the Markov Chain Central Limit Theorem, §§3–4 (standard reference, not scraped)