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.
Weak order two for additive-noise stochastic Heun
Statement
Assume AC and the Brownian filtration conventions in Continuous Brownian Ito processes. Consider on , where , is constant, and is deterministic. For and , let denote the solution of the same SDE started from at time . Let have a bounded classical backward solution with , , , and all mixed derivatives for and continuous and bounded. On a uniform grid , initialize and apply the additive-noise stochastic Heun update in Explicit stochastic Heun update for additive noise. There is a constant , independent of , such that This is weak order two, meaning the expectation error is bounded by a constant times for the stated payoff class. The claim is specific to constant additive diffusion; no multiplicative-noise order-two result is asserted.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC; the scalar additive-noise SDE, deterministic initial value , drift and constant diffusion assumptions; the backward solution and derivative bounds; and the uniform grid of the Statement.
One-step moment matching for additive-noise stochastic Heun: for every starting time/state, the expectation of over one Brownian increment has absolute value at most , uniformly in the starting state.
Continuous Brownian Ito processes: each next Brownian increment is independent of the current filtration and has its stated normal law.
The Axiom of Choice: AC is inherited through the Brownian interface [F1]; the telescoping argument uses no further choice.
Proof
Given: The assumptions above.
For each , the numerical value is -measurable by induction from the update [L1]. The next increment is independent of by [F1]. Therefore the joint law of is the product of the law of and ; integrating the uniform one-step bound [L2] against the law of gives
Sum the inequalities in step 1.1 over . The intermediate expectations telescope, so because .
The terminal condition gives . Since and is the expectation of for the exact SDE started at , . Substituting these identities into step 2.1 yields the claimed weak error. The argument uses only the admitted additive-noise backward solution and makes no inference for state-dependent diffusion.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
16 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
- M. Tretyakov, Lecture Notes for a Mini-Course on Numerical Methods for SDEs, Theorem 7.1 and Section 7.3, PDF pp. 39-42 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Kloeden and Platen, Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations, Theorem 14.5.2 and Section 15.1, printed pp. 474-480 and 485-487 (standard reference, not scraped)