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.
One-sided maximal inequality for symmetric independent sums
Statement
For independent symmetric real random variables , , let . For every real , Consequently for every , No moment assumptions are needed.
Facts & Assumptions
Symmetric real random variables: A real random variable is symmetric if its law as defined in def-law-or-distribution-of-a-random-element equals the law of . Equivalently, for every Borel , where . No existence of an expectation is assumed in this definition. In particular atoms, including an atom at zero, are allowed.
Disjoint groups of an independent sigma-algebra family remain independent: Let be an independent family of sigma-algebras on a probability space, and let be pairwise disjoint index sets. For each , define Then the sigma-algebras are independent.
Measurable coordinatewise functions preserve independence: Let be an independent family of random elements . For each , let be measurable. Then the family is independent.
Independent random elements have product joint law: Let , and let for be independent random elements. Define Then is a random element of , and its law is the finite product of the marginal laws:
Proof
Given: The objects and hypotheses of the statement.
Let . They partition the crossing event. The unused tail is independent of the past by grouping. Its law is symmetric: the independent marginal laws are unchanged when each remaining variable is negated, so their sum has the same law as its negative. Hence , including .
On one has . Independence gives . These events are disjoint over , so summing proves the one-sided assertion. The argument works unchanged at and at negative .
Apply that assertion to and . The event of a strict absolute crossing of is contained in the union of a positive and a negative crossing. Their final events and are disjoint for , giving the displayed two-sided bound. Atoms at thresholds do not enter the strict events.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
17 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
- Section 2.2, Lemma 5.13 and proof, p. 8 (standard reference, not scraped)