Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: 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.

Assouad lower bound for a squared-error hypercube

Statement

Let d≥1, a>0, and consider the finite experiment indexed by ω∈{0,1}d with sample laws Pω. The target is tω=aω∈Rd, the action is in Rd, and loss is squared Euclidean distance. For each coordinate i, let ω(i) denote the vector with bit i flipped, and set v:=max⁡ω∈{0,1}d, 1≤i≤d∥Pω−Pω(i)∥TV. For every randomized estimator kernel K, max⁡ωRω(K)≥a2d8(1−v), and the same lower bound holds for the minimax risk. The total variation convention is ∥P−Q∥TV=sup⁡A∣P(A)−Q(A)∣.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A positive integer d, a number a>0, the finite hypercube experiment, and an arbitrary randomized action kernel K.

[F1]

Statistical experiments and Parameter-measurable statistical models as kernels: the parameter set {0,1}d is finite with its power-set sigma-algebra and the model assigns Pω to ω.

[F2]

Randomized procedures as probability kernels: action-event probabilities x↦K(x,B) are measurable, and each K(x,⋅) is a probability measure.

[F3]

Loss functions and risk: the squared-error risk is the nonnegative kernel integral Rω(K)=∫∫∥z−aω∥22K(x,dz)Pω(dx).

[F4]

Total variation distance for probability laws: total variation is the event supremum sup⁡A∣P(A)−Q(A)∣ and lies in [0,1].

[F5]

Bayes risk and minimax risk: minimax risk is the infimum over procedures of the supremum of their risks.

Proof

1.1F1F2F3givenalgebra

For each coordinate i, define ϕi(x)=K(x,{z∈Rd:zi≥a/2}). This is a measurable [0,1]-valued function by [F2]. If the true bit is 0, an action counted by ϕi has coordinate squared error at least a2/4; if the true bit is 1, an action outside that event has coordinate squared error at least a2/4. Thus Rω(K)≥a24∑i=1d[(1−ωi) Pωϕi+ωi Pω(1−ϕi)], where Pf:=∫f dP.

2.1F4step 1.1algebra

For any two probability laws P,Q and measurable ϕ:X→[0,1], the finite approximants ϕN=N−1∑r=1N1{ϕ≥r/N} satisfy 0≤ϕ−ϕN≤1/N. By [F4], ∫ϕNdP−∫ϕNdQ≤∥P−Q∥TV, and the replacement error is at most 2/N. Letting N→∞ gives ∫ϕdP−∫ϕdQ≤∥P−Q∥TV. Applying the same result to 1−ϕ gives Pϕ+Q(1−ϕ)≥1−∥P−Q∥TV. For each coordinate, pair every hypercube vertex with bit i=0 to the unique neighbor with bit i=1. There are 2d−1 such pairs, and each pair's two testing errors in step 1.1 sum to at least 1−v. Averaging over all 2d vertices therefore gives average coordinate error at least (1−v)/2. This establishes the coordinate error bound.

3.1F5step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

Average the risk bound in step 1.1 over the 2d vertices. Step 2.1 shows that the average risk is at least a2d(1−v)/8. The supremum of finitely many risks is at least their arithmetic mean, so every K has maximum risk at least this amount. Taking the infimum over procedures using [F5] proves the minimax bound.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

19 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