Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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.

Finite data processing for Rényi divergence

Statement

Let P,Q be probability vectors on a finite nonempty alphabet X and let K be a stochastic kernel from X to a finite nonempty alphabet Y. For every α∈(0,∞)∖{1}, Dα(PK∥QK)≤Dα(P∥Q), with Rényi divergence as defined in Finite Rényi divergence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: P,Q,K and α as in the Statement.

[F1]

Finite Rényi divergence: for α≠1, Dα(P∥Q)=log⁡Sα(P,Q)/(α−1); a positive P-mass at a zero Q-coordinate makes Sα=+∞ when α>1, while for 0<α<1 it contributes zero.

[F2]

Finite f-divergence with support conventions: a convex generator f defines the closed-perspective sum, with singular term f∞∑qx=0px.

[F3]

Finite stochastic kernels: PK and QK are the output laws under the same row-stochastic kernel.

[F4]

Finite data processing for f-divergences: Df(PK∥QK)≤Df(P∥Q) for every convex generator with its stated boundary convention.

[F5]

The finite Rényi generators are convex with stated boundary values: for α>1, tα−1 is convex with recession value +∞; for 0<α<1, 1−tα is convex with recession value 0.

Proof

1.1F1F2F3F5givenalgebra

Suppose α>1. If P≪̸Q, [F1] gives Dα(P∥Q)=+∞, so the claimed inequality holds. If P≪Q, then PK≪QK: whenever (QK)y=0, nonnegativity of the summands gives qxK(y∣x)=0 for every x, and px>0 implies qx>0 and hence K(y∣x)=0. For f(t)=tα−1, convexity holds, f∞=+∞ by [F5], and direct substitution into [F2] gives Df(P∥Q)=Sα(P,Q)−1 and the same identity for PK,QK.

1.2F1F2F3F5givenalgebra

Suppose 0<α<1 and take g(t)=1−tα. By [F5] it is convex, g(1)=0, g(0)=1, and g∞=0. Substitution into [F2] gives Dg(P∥Q)=1−Sα(P,Q), including when P has mass outside supp⁡Q; likewise Dg(PK∥QK)=1−Sα(PK,QK).

2.1F1F4step 1.1algebra

By [F4], Sα(PK,QK)−1≤Sα(P,Q)−1. The logarithm is increasing and α−1>0, so dividing the logarithms by α−1 preserves the inequality and proves the result for α>1.

3.1F1F4step 1.2algebra∎

By [F4], Sα(PK,QK)≥Sα(P,Q). If the input affinity is zero, [F1] gives Dα(P∥Q)=+∞ and the conclusion follows. Otherwise both affinities are positive; applying the increasing logarithm and then dividing by α−1<0 reverses the inequality. This proves the claim for 0<α<1.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

18 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