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.
Discrete strong Markov property
Statement
Assume Choice. Let be a -chain, let be a stopping time, and let be a bounded measurable path functional. Put and define the everywhere meaningful random variables Both are defined to be zero on . Then This is the precise meaning of the usual eventwise notation no value is used. If almost surely, the indicators can be omitted.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Choice, the chain, stopping time and bounded in the statement.
At deterministic time , , with measurable . (Markov property for bounded future path functionals)
If , then for every finite . (Sigma-algebra at a stopping time)
A stopped adapted random variable, set to a fixed value on , is -measurable. (A stopped random variable is measurable at the stopping time)
Dominated convergence passes the partial-sum limit through expectation. (Dominated convergence)
Proof
Since is measurable, is adapted. Applying [F3] with value [F1, F3] zero at infinity shows that is -measurable. Moreover , so both variables are integrable. This also covers , constant , and the event , where both variables vanish by definition.
Fix . For every finite , [F2] and [F1] give [F1, F2, F4, step 1.1] Sum from to . The partial sums on either side are bounded in absolute value by and converge pointwise to and . By [F4], letting gives . Together with step 1.1 this is the defining event test for the displayed conditional expectation. Empty , full , , and an almost-surely infinite require no separate argument.
If , the exceptional infinity event is null, so [step 2.1] and almost surely for any arbitrary values assigned there. This proves the finite form. Choice is used only by [F1] and the conditional expectation in the conclusion.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
28 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, Section 5.2 (standard reference, not scraped)