Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-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.

Uniform row partial sums of a nested finite-variance array

Statement

Let (Zij)i,j≥1 be one infinite iid real array with EZ11=0 and EZ112<∞. For every fixed C<∞, 1nmax⁡1≤i≤⌊Cn⌋max⁡1≤k≤n∣∑j=1kZij∣⟶0almost surely. The maximum over an empty index set is zero. The same conclusion holds with row and column coordinates exchanged.

Statement references

Bai and Silverstein, Chapters 3 and 5 (complete book); the argument below supplies its own counting and probability estimates.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

The iid convention is Identical distribution and IID families; First Borel-Cantelli lemma for events applies to every summable sequence of event probabilities. The finite stopping and exponential estimates used below are proved in the argument.

Proof

Given: The objects and hypotheses in the statement.

1.1givenF1algebra

If C≤0 the claim is vacuous. Suppose C>0, set v=EZ112 and fix ε>0. For a dyadic integer m=2ℓ put N=2m, I=⌈2Cm⌉, x=εm, r=4 and y=x/r. For one row write Zj=Zij and Wj=Zj1{Zj≤y}. These variables are independent with EWj=−E[Zj1{Zj>y}]≤0 and EWj2≤v. For t>0 and w≤y, etw≤1+tw+(ety−1−ty)w2/y2: the function (eu−1−u)/u2=∫01(1−s)esu ds, extended continuously at zero, is increasing in u. Consequently EetWj≤exp⁡{v(ety−1−ty)/y2}.

2.1step 1.1algebra

Set ψ=v(ety−1−ty)/y2≥0. Independence shows that Mk=exp⁡(t∑j≤kWj−kψ) has conditional expected next value at most Mk. If τ is the first k≤N with ∑j≤kWj≥x, stopping this finite sequence at τ or N preserves the expectation bound 1: condition each increment and observe that the indicator of not having stopped is determined by the preceding variables. On a crossing its stopped value is at least etx−Nψ. Nonnegativity therefore gives P(max⁡k≤N∑j≤kWj≥x)≤e−tx+Nψ. This proves the needed maximal bound directly.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1algebra

If v=0, every Zj=0 almost surely and the conclusion follows. Otherwise choose t>0 by ety=1+xy/(Nv). Then Nψ≤x/y=r, so the preceding probability is at most er(Nv/(xy))r≤Km−r, with K depending only on v,ε. On the event that all Zj≤y, the original and truncated partial sums agree; the complement has probability at most NP(Z11>y). Thus the positive original maximal tail is at most NP(Z11>y)+Km−r. Apply the same argument to −Zj for the negative tail and use a union bound over the I rows. The result is P(max⁡i≤I,k≤N∣∑j≤kZij∣≥εm)≤KCm2P(∣Z11∣>εm/4)+KC′m1−r.

4.1F1step 3.1algebra∎

The right-hand side is summable over dyadic m: for every a>0, ∑ℓ22ℓP(∣Z11∣>a2ℓ)≤KaE∣Z11∣2<∞, by summing the finite geometric progression ∑ℓ: a2ℓ<∣Z11∣22ℓ under expectation. Also ∑ℓ2(1−r)ℓ<∞. First Borel–Cantelli gives the displayed maximal estimate eventually on each dyadic block. Whenever m≤n≤2m, every i≤Cn and k≤n occurs in the corresponding block; division by n≥m bounds the desired ratio by ε eventually. Intersecting over positive rational ε proves convergence to zero. Exchanging the two coordinates preserves the iid law and gives the column version.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

6 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