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.
Cesaro convergence for irreducible positive-recurrent chains
Statement
Assume AC (The Axiom of Choice). Let be an irreducible positive-recurrent transition matrix on a countable state space with invariant probability . Then for every ,
No aperiodicity hypothesis is required, and the time-zero term is included in the average.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC, an irreducible positive-recurrent on countable with invariant probability , and states .
Every family of nonempty sets has a choice function; AC is assumed and is used through the ergodic theorem supplier [F1], whose statement assumes it. (The Axiom of Choice)
Assume AC. For an irreducible positive-recurrent countable -chain with invariant probability and with , almost surely under for every starting state . (Ergodic theorem for an irreducible positive-recurrent Markov chain)
If measurable functions on a finite measure space are bounded by one constant and converge almost everywhere to , then . (Bounded convergence on a finite measure space)
Assume Choice. For a Markov chain with kernel and bounded measurable , almost surely; in particular, for , with . (Chapman-Kolmogorov equations)
The transition entries are for . (Transition matrices and n-step probabilities)
Proof
Given: AC, an irreducible positive-recurrent on countable with invariant probability , and fixed .
Proof technique: apply the chain ergodic theorem to the indicator of the target state and pass to expectations by bounded convergence, identifying each expectation with an -step transition probability.
Let . It is bounded with , and , so [F1] applies: almost surely under , for the fixed starting state .
For each , : the second equality is the case of the Chapman–Kolmogorov identity [F3] applied to the indicator of the singleton, and the third is the definition of the -step entries [F4].
Each average satisfies for every , and almost surely by step 1.1; since is a probability measure, the bounded convergence corollary [F2] applied to the constant limit gives .
By linearity of expectation, ; combining with step 2.1 gives . Since were arbitrary, the theorem follows.
The average is formed for and includes . For the periodic two-state alternation it equals or , according to , and tends to ; thus no aperiodicity is needed. The bounded indicator satisfies the integrability hypothesis, and AC [A1] is used through [F1] and [F3].
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
20 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
- Durrett, Probability: Theory and Examples, fifth edition, §5.6, Cesàro averages of transition probabilities (standard reference, not scraped)
- Aldous–Chewi, Probability Theory, Lectures 13–15 (standard reference, not scraped)