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 locally finite translation-invariant Borel measure on is a multiple of Lebesgue measure
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Let be a Borel measure on that is finite on compact sets and translation invariant. Put and . Then
for every Borel , where is Borel Lebesgue measure. In particular, if then is the zero measure.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A natural number , Countable Choice, a locally finite Borel measure on , translation invariance , and .
Countable Choice: for every sequence of nonempty sets there is a sequence . (The Axiom of Countable Choice ())
A measure is countably additive on disjoint measurable sequences, and local finiteness means finite measure on every compact set. (Measures on sigma-algebras)
Under Countable Choice, a translation-invariant Borel measure on that assigns mass to agrees with on all Borel sets. (A translation-invariant measure on the Borel sets of giving the unit cube measure one is the restriction of Lebesgue measure)
Proof
Given: Countable Choice and a locally finite translation-invariant Borel measure on .
Fix a coordinate and either face of in that coordinate. For each integer , translate the lower face by , or the upper face by , for . These translates are pairwise disjoint compact subsets of , each has measure by translation invariance, and by local finiteness. Hence for every , which forces . The boundary of is a finite union of such faces.
The symmetric difference of and is contained in that boundary, so [F1] and step 1.1 give .
If , the integer translates , , are a countable disjoint partition of . Translation invariance gives for every , and countable additivity gives . Monotonicity then gives for every Borel .
If , is a translation-invariant Borel measure and, by step 2.1, . Applying [F2] gives , hence for every Borel .
The cases and exhaust the nonnegative value , proving the statement. The proof uses Countable Choice only through [F2]; no stronger choice principle is used.
Sources
Last and Penrose, Chapter 8, Proposition 8.7 proof; Baddeley, Lecture 2, §2.4. The local face argument supplies the normalization change from to the source theorem's convention.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
29 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
- Günter Last and Mathew Penrose, Lectures on the Poisson Process, §8.2 proof of Proposition 8.7 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Adrian Baddeley, Spatial Point Processes and their Applications (standard reference, not scraped)