Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge 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.

Bayes factorization of the smoothing backward kernel

Statement

Assume AC, a finite-horizon Markov state-space model with standard-Borel states, dominated observation kernels, and data-indexed filtering and smoothing kernels as in Filtering, predictive, and smoothing laws in a finite-horizon state-space model. Fix an observation history y1:T in the full-measure set where the dominated filtering recursion Exact state-space filtering recursion under dominated observations applies. Write ηt for the filtering law of Xt given y1:t. Suppose the transition kernel Mt+1 from time t to t+1 has a product-measurable density ft+1(x′∣x) with respect to a sigma-finite measure λt+1, meaning Mt+1(x,A)=∫Aft+1(x′∣x) λt+1(dx′) for every state x and measurable set A. Put qt+1(x′)=∫ft+1(x′∣x) ηt(dx),Dt+1={x′:0<qt+1(x′)<∞}. The backward conditional kernel is Bt(x′,A)={∫Aft+1(x′∣x) ηt(dx)qt+1(x′),x′∈Dt+1,ηt(A),x′∉Dt+1. It is a probability-kernel version of the conditional law of Xt given Xt+1=x′ and y1:t. The finite-horizon smoothing kernel factors as ψT(dx0:T)=ηT(dxT)∏t=T−10Bt(xt+1,dxt) for observation-almost every full history, with the product interpreted as successive backwards kernel integration. If the transition is supplied only as a probability kernel, the same factorization uses a supplied regular conditional kernel of Xt given (Xt+1,Y1:t); no transition density is asserted in that case. Null-history values remain version-dependent.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC; the finite-horizon Markov state-space model; the stated filtering, predictive, and smoothing kernels; dominated observation laws; and the transition density or supplied backward conditional kernels.

[A1]

AC supports the finite-horizon kernel law and the regular conditional-law interfaces used below. The Axiom of Choice

[F1]

Filtering and smoothing kernels are data-indexed probability kernels and are regular conditional distributions after composition with the observed histories; conditional versions can differ on null histories. Filtering, predictive, and smoothing laws in a finite-horizon state-space model

[F2]

For standard-Borel state and observation spaces the finite-horizon filtering, predictive, and smoothing kernels exist. Filtering and finite-horizon smoothing laws exist

[F3]

Under dominated observations, the recursive normalized update gives the exact filtering kernels and their predictive laws. Exact state-space filtering recursion under dominated observations

[F4]

A joint probability with a product-measurable density has a conditional-density kernel equal to the normalized density on finite positive marginal-density fibers and a supplied probability filler elsewhere. Conditional density formula

[F5]

The finite-horizon state-space path law has the ordered Markov-kernel factorization; future transitions and observations depend on the past through the current state. Finite-horizon state-space kernel law exists and is unique

[F6]

Nonnegative product-measurable functions integrate measurably against probability kernels. Measurability of integration against a kernel

[F7]

Equality of finite measures on generating measurable rectangles extends to the generated history sigma-algebra. Dynkin's pi-lambda theorem

Proof

Given: The hypotheses in the Statement.

1.1A1F3F4F5F6given

Fix t<T and condition on Y1:t=y1:t. The conditional pair law of (Xt,Xt+1) is the ordered kernel integral ηt(dx)Mt+1(x,dx′) by [F3] and [F5]. In the density case this pair law has density ft+1(x′∣x) with respect to ηt×λt+1, and its second marginal has density qt+1(x′). Applying [F4] gives the displayed Bt on Dt+1 and the supplied filler ηt off it. The conditional-density result proves that Bt is an everywhere probability kernel and the conditional law of Xt given (Xt+1,y1:t) on its predictive support.

2.1F1F2F5step 1.1given

In the full path factorization [F5], after fixing Xt+1=x′ and the observations through time T, every factor after time t+1 depends only on x′ and the future states. Those factors cancel from the conditional distribution of Xt; the observation factor at time t+1 is also constant in Xt. The remaining factors are exactly the conditional pair law in step 1.1, so the conditional distribution of Xt given (Xt+1:T,Y1:T) equals Bt(Xt+1,⋅) almost surely. With a general transition kernel the same cancellation leaves the supplied regular conditional kernel, without evaluating a density or particle-point singleton.

3.1F1F2F6F7step 2.1given∎

Apply the conditional chain rule successively from t=T−1 down to 0. Step 2.1 identifies each conditional factor with Bt(Xt+1,⋅), while the terminal factor is the filtering law ηT. Integrating first over rectangles in the finite product state space gives the displayed product kernel; [F6] makes each iterated kernel measurable, and [F7] extends the conditional identities to all Borel path events. Thus the product is a version of the finite-horizon smoothing kernel. The argument concerns histories under their actual observation law and makes no pointwise uniqueness claim on null histories.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

38 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