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.
Period is constant on communicating classes
Statement
If and communicate, then , including and the convention when no positive return exists.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A countable transition matrix and communicating states .
Communication means and , where accessibility is witnessed by some with . Accessibility, communication, and irreducibility
; if , and otherwise is the greatest positive integer dividing every element of . Period of a state
Proof
If , the conclusion is the identity , whether or not is empty. Suppose . By [F1], choose route lengths with and . By [F4], neither length is zero, so . Twice applying [F3] and retaining the route terms gives and . Thus both return-time sets are nonempty and both periods are positive.
Fix any . By [F3], the route from to , a -step return at , and the route from to give . Step 1.1 also shows . Hence the positive integer divides both and , so it divides their difference . As this holds for every , is a common positive divisor of and therefore by [F2].
Interchanging and in step 2.1 shows that every is divisible by ; hence is a common positive divisor of and . Together with step 2.1 this proves equality for distinct communicating states. The case was settled in step 1.1.
If , there are no communicating states and the assertion is vacuous. If and there is no positive return, both sides equal the stipulated zero; if communicate, step 1.1 proves positive returns exist, so neither period is zero. One-state, deterministic, and absorbing cases are covered by the same alternatives. The accessibility witnesses are positive for distinct states because [F4] makes a zero-step transition possible only from a state to itself. The proof chooses routes only for this fixed pair, so it uses no choice function. This one-way equality statement is not an iff.
Depends on
Used by
- Aperiodic irreducible chain Definition
- Period two on a bipartite graph Example
Dependency tree · two levels
10 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
- Levin, Peres and Wilmer, Markov Chains and Mixing Times, second edition (standard reference, not scraped)