Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
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.

An integrable stationary sequence has an L1 Cesaro limit

Statement

Let (Xn)n≥1 be a real-valued strictly stationary sequence with E∣X1∣<∞. Here strictly stationary means that every finite-dimensional law is unchanged by every nonnegative integer shift. Then there is an integrable random variable Y such that

1n∑j=1nXj⟶Yin L1,

that is, E∣n−1∑j=1nXj−Y∣→0. No independence or ergodicity is assumed, and the proof uses no choice axiom.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A real strictly stationary sequence (Xn)n≥1 with E∣X1∣<∞.

[A1]

Strict stationarity means invariance of all finite-dimensional laws under every nonnegative integer shift; the canonical path shift preserves the stationary path law. (Stationary process and canonical path shift)

[F1]

Pointwise limsup and liminf of measurable real sequences are measurable. (Sequential suprema, infima, limsup, liminf, and pointwise limits of measurable functions are measurable)

[F2]

On a probability space, dominated pointwise convergence under one integrable majorant implies convergence of the integrals of absolute differences. (Dominated convergence)

[F3]

Increasing limits pass through the nonnegative integral. (Monotone convergence for the integral)

[F4]

Expectation of an integrable real random variable is its Lebesgue integral. (Expectation of a nonnegative or integrable random variable)

Proof

Given: A real strictly stationary sequence (Xn)n≥1 with E∣X1∣<∞.

1.1givenF1construct

First suppose EX1=0 and ∣Xn∣≤1 almost surely for each n. Put An=n−1∑j=1nXj and L=lim sup⁡nAn. Then −1≤L≤1, and for every fixed p≥1 the averages m−1∑j=pp+m−1Xj have the same limsup L: their difference from Am is at most 2(p−1)/m, which tends to zero.

2.1step 1.1A1F1construct

Fix 0<ϵ<1/4. For each p≥1 let Tp be the least positive integer m for which m−1∑j=pp+m−1Xj>L−ϵ. Such an m exists by the definition of limsup; [F1] and shift invariance show that the Tp all have the same distribution. Choose an integer k so that P(T1>k)<ϵ, and set Xp∗=Xp+21{Tp>k}.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1algebra

For every p, Xp∗≥−1 and EXp∗=2P(T1>k)<2ϵ. Define Tp∗ as the first m≥1 for which the average of Xp∗,…,Xp+m−1∗ exceeds L−ϵ. If Tp≤k, the same average of the larger sequence Xj∗ at length Tp exceeds L−ϵ; if Tp>k, then Xp∗=Xp+2≥1>L−ϵ. Thus 1≤Tp∗≤k in either case.

4.1step 3.1constructalgebra

Starting from M0=0, recursively set Mq+1=Mq+TMq+1∗. Each increment is between 1 and k, and the average of Xj∗ on each block (Mq,Mq+1] exceeds L−ϵ. Therefore SMq∗:=∑j=1MqXj∗>(L−ϵ)Mq.

5.1step 4.1step 3.1algebra

For n≥k, take the last Mq≤n; then 0≤n−Mq<k. The remaining terms are at least −1, so Sn∗>SMq∗−k>(L−ϵ)Mq−k≥(L−ϵ)n−2k, using L−ϵ≤1. Hence n−1Sn∗>L−ϵ−2k/n.

6.1step 2.1step 5.1F2F4algebra

Stationarity gives E[n−1Sn∗]=EX1∗<2ϵ. Taking expectations in step 5.1 and then letting n→∞ gives EL≤3ϵ. Since this holds for every such ϵ, EL≤0. Applying the same argument to (−Xn) shows E[lim inf⁡nAn]≥0. The bounded nonnegative difference lim sup⁡nAn−lim inf⁡nAn therefore has expectation at most zero, so it vanishes almost surely. Thus An converges almost surely; [F2] gives convergence in L1.

7.1step 6.1F4algebra

If instead ∣Xn∣≤C<∞ without centering, the case C=0 is immediate; for C>0 apply the preceding result to (Xn−EX1)/(2C), whose terms are centered and have absolute value at most 1. Rescaling and adding EX1 proves the bounded case.

8.1step 7.1F1F4construct

Suppose Xn≥0 and is integrable but not necessarily bounded. For r≥1 set Xn,r=Xn∧r and An,r=n−1∑j=1nXj,r. Define the limit canonically by Yr:=lim sup⁡n→∞An,r; it is measurable by [F1]. By step 7.1, the averages converge almost surely and in L1 to this integrable Yr. On the common probability-one event for these countably many convergences, Yr≤Yr+1; also Yr≥0 and EYr=EX1,r.

9.1step 8.1F3algebra

Let Y=lim⁡r→∞Yr. By [F3], Y is integrable and EY=EX1. Given ϵ>0, choose r with E(X1−X1,r)<ϵ; then also E(Y−Yr)<ϵ. For this fixed r, stationarity and nonnegativity give E∣An−An,r∣=E(X1−X1,r)<ϵ, while E∣An,r−Yr∣→0. The triangle inequality proves lim sup⁡nE∣An−Y∣≤2ϵ, and arbitrariness of ϵ gives L1 convergence.

10.1givenstep 8.1step 9.1algebra∎

For a signed integrable stationary sequence, apply the nonnegative case in steps 8.1–9.1 separately to Xn+=max⁡(Xn,0) and Xn−=max⁡(−Xn,0). Both are stationary nonnegative integrable sequences, and subtracting their L1 limits gives an integrable L1 limit for the averages of Xn. The entire argument used no choice principle.

Sources

Last and Penrose, Appendix B.2, Theorem B.11 and complete proof; Walkden's Birkhoff treatment is stronger and is not used as a choice-bearing shortcut.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

31 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