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.
Countable additivity and continuity of finitely additive set functions
Statement
Let be a finitely additive nonnegative set function on a sigma-algebra. The following are equivalent:
- is countably additive, and hence is a measure;
- whenever , one has .
If in addition , these conditions are also equivalent to:
- whenever , one has .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A finitely additive nonnegative set function on a sigma-algebra over .
Finite additivity means and for disjoint measurable (Finitely additive nonnegative set functions).
Countable additivity together with the empty-set condition is exactly the definition of a measure (Measures on sigma-algebras).
A nonnegative extended series is the supremum of its finite partial sums (Series in the nonnegative extended real line).
Proof
For the implication from countable additivity to continuity from below, let and define , ; the are disjoint, their union is , and their first terms have union .
For the implication from continuity from below to countable additivity, let be disjoint and put ; then and finite additivity gives .
For the finite-total-mass implications, assume ; then every value of is finite by finite additivity and nonnegativity.
Under countable additivity, [L2] and the decomposition in step 1.1 give , proving condition 1 implies condition 2.
Under condition 2, step 1.2 and [L3] give , proving condition 2 implies condition 1.
For condition 2 implies condition 3 under finite total mass, if then ; finite additivity and condition 2 give , hence the infimum is .
For condition 3 implies condition 2 under finite total mass, if then ; finite additivity and condition 3 give .
Steps 2.1 and 2.2 prove the first equivalence, while steps 2.3 and 2.4 separately prove both directions involving condition 3 under the stated finite-total-mass hypothesis.
Depends on
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · two levels
7 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
- G. Folland, Real Analysis, 2nd ed., §1.3, Exercise 11 (standard reference, not scraped)