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.
Empirical-law bootstrap draws are conditionally IID
Statement
Fix , write , let be a measurable unit space, and fix an observed tuple . Let be its empirical probability measure. For the bootstrap algorithm Size-n bootstrap from the empirical law, equip the conditional index vector with the finite uniform law on and set . For every , Thus, conditional on the fixed observed tuple, are independent random elements with common law (Identical distribution and IID families).
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , a measurable space , a fixed tuple , and the size- bootstrap procedure.
Size-n bootstrap from the empirical law: each replicate selects independently and uniformly from and sets .
Finite probability spaces, outcome weights, events, and event probabilities: a finite outcome set with nonnegative weights summing to defines a probability on every subset of outcomes.
The set of functions between finite sets is finite, with : for finite sets , there are functions .
The product rule: , and : the cardinality of a finite product of finite sets is the product of their cardinalities.
Random elements and real random variables: a random element is a measurable map from a probability space to a measurable space.
Law or distribution of a random element: the law of a random element assigns to each target event the probability of its preimage.
Independent random elements and Independent sigma-algebras and independent events: a family of random elements is independent when their generated sigma-algebras are independent; event independence is characterized by factorization of probabilities of all finite intersections.
Identical distribution and IID families: random elements with the same target are IID when their laws agree and the family is mutually independent.
The cardinality of a finite set: a set is finite when it is bijective with a von Neumann natural.
The cardinality of a finite set: every von Neumann natural has cardinality .
The cardinality of a finite set: a bijection transports finiteness and cardinality.
A subset of a finite set is finite, with , and equality holds if and only if : every subset of a finite set is finite.
Proof
The shift is a bijection from to the von Neumann natural . By [F10]–[F12], is finite with cardinality . Let , the set of index vectors. By [F4], . Assign weight to each . The weights are nonnegative and sum to , so [F2] gives a finite probability space whose event sigma-algebra contains every subset. Each coordinate map and record map is measurable, because every preimage is a subset of ; hence each is a random element of by [F6].
For , put . Each is a subset of the finite set , so [F13] makes it finite. The event consists of the functions with for every . The shift , , from step 1.1 has inverse , ; thus is a bijection from this event's index functions onto . By [F5] this set has cardinality , which is the same product as under that reindexing. Its probability under the uniform weights is therefore . Taking all events except the th to be gives by [F3] and [F7]. Hence the joint event probability is the product of its marginal probabilities.
The one-coordinate case of step 2.1 gives each law . To check independence for any finite subfamily indexed by , take arbitrary for and set for every omitted coordinate. Since and , step 2.1 then gives . This is the finite-intersection factorization in [F8], so the coordinate random elements are independent. They have a common measurable target and the same law, hence they are IID by [F9].
Depends on
- Size-n bootstrap from the empirical law
- Empirical measure of observed units
- The empirical measure is a probability measure
- Identical distribution and IID families
- Law or distribution of a random element
- Random elements and real random variables
- Independent random elements
- Independent sigma-algebras and independent events
- Finite probability spaces, outcome weights, events, and event probabilities
- The cardinality $\lvert A\rvert$ of a finite set
- The set $A^{B}$ of functions $B \to A$ between finite sets is finite, with $\lvert A^{B}\rvert = \lvert A\rvert^{\lvert B\rvert}$
- A subset of a finite set is finite, with $\lvert B\rvert \le \lvert A\rvert$, and equality holds if and only if $B = A$
- The product rule: $\lvert A \times B\rvert = \lvert A\rvert\,\lvert B\rvert$, and $\big\lvert\prod_{i<m} A_i\big\rvert = \prod_{i<m}\lvert A_i\rvert$
Used by
- Pointwise bootstrap need not preserve pair dependence Counterexample
- Assignment randomization and bootstrap are different laws Example
- Resampling complete cluster records Example
- Sampling and finite-bootstrap errors for a Bernoulli mean Example
- The bootstrap law of a two-point sample mean Example
Cited to discharge well-definedness by Size-n bootstrap from the empirical law.
Dependency tree · two levels
46 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
- Bradley Efron and Robert Tibshirani, The Bootstrap Method for Assessing Statistical Accuracy, Behaviormetrika 12 (1985), §2, printed pp. 3–5 (standard reference, not scraped)
- B. Efron and R. Tibshirani, The Bootstrap Method for Assessing Statistical Accuracy, Stanford LCS Technical Report 19 / BIO 101 (October 1985; full-text report copy) (standard reference, not scraped)
- P.J. Bickel, F. Götze and W.R. van Zwet, Resampling Fewer Than n Observations, Statistica Sinica 7 (1997), §3, printed pp. 8–11 (standard reference, not scraped)
- P.B. Stark, Statistics 240 Lecture Notes, Part 8: Resampling Methods, §1.1, PDF pp. 2–3 (standard reference, not scraped)