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

Gaussian squared-error rate-distortion function

Statement

Assume AC. Let X∼N(0,σ2), where σ2≥0, and let squared error d(x,y)=(x−y)2 be used in the standard-Borel information rate-distortion function General single-letter information rate-distortion function. For D≥0, if σ2>0, then

R(D)={+∞,D=0,12log⁡2+(σ2/D),D>0,

where log⁡2+(u)=max⁡(0,log⁡2u). If σ2=0, then R(D)=0 for every D≥0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC, X∼N(0,σ2), σ2≥0, and D≥0.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: AC is assumed by the KL and orthogonal-normal suppliers.

[F1]

General single-letter information rate-distortion function: R(D) is the infimum of Inat(X;Y)/ln⁡2 over joint laws with X-marginal fixed and E(X−Y)2≤D; an empty infimum is +∞.

[F2]

Gaussian reference-kernel mutual-information lower bound: if X∼N(0,σ2), 0<D<σ2, and E(X−Y)2≤D, then Inat(X;Y)≥12ln⁡(σ2/D), without a density assumption on Y.

[F3]

Orthogonal transformations preserve the standard normal product law: an orthogonal transform of independent standard normals again has independent standard-normal coordinates, under AC.

[F4]

A C^1 diffeomorphism satisfies the change-of-variables formula for nonnegative Lebesgue measurable functions: under Countable Choice, an invertible linear change of variables transforms a density by the absolute determinant of its inverse. The assumed AC in [A1] implies Countable Choice by restricting its choice function to a countable family.

[F5]

Kullback–Leibler divergence is nonnegative: KL divergence between probability laws is nonnegative.

[F6]

For sigma-finite factors, the product measure exists, has the rectangle formula, is sigma-finite, and is unique: the product of the probability laws used below exists and has the rectangle/product-density formula.

[F7]

Standard normal and normal laws: a nondegenerate normal law has its everywhere-positive affine Gaussian density, which is bounded.

[F8]

Continuity from above when one set has finite measure: a finite measure is continuous along a decreasing sequence of measurable sets.

Proof

Given: The hypotheses and suppliers [A1], [F1]–[F8].

1.1A1F1F2givenalgebra

Suppose σ2>0 and 0<D<σ2. By [F2], every feasible joint law has mutual information in nats at least 12ln⁡(σ2/D); division by ln⁡2>0 and taking the infimum in [F1] gives R(D)≥12log⁡2(σ2/D).

1.2A1F1F5given

If σ2>0 and D≥σ2, the constant reconstruction Y=0 has distortion σ2 and mutual information zero; [F5] makes zero the minimum, so R(D)=0.

1.3A1F1F6F7F8givenalgebra

Suppose σ2>0 and D=0. Every feasible coupling satisfies X=Y almost surely because the nonnegative random variable (X−Y)2 has expectation zero. The diagonal {(x,y):x=y} has joint probability one. By [F7] the normal density is bounded by (2πσ2)−1/2, so under the product law, for every h>0, the event ∣X−Y∣≤h has probability at most 2h(2πσ2)−1/2. For h=1/(n+1), n≥0, these measurable events decrease to the diagonal; [F8] therefore makes its product probability zero. Thus the joint law is not absolutely continuous with respect to the product of its marginals and its KL, hence its mutual information, is infinite. Every feasible coupling has this value, proving R(0)=+∞.

2.1A1F1F3F4F6F7step 1.1givenconstructalgebra

Put a=σ2−D>0, b=D>0, and let U,V be independent standard normals. Set Y=aU, X=aU+bV. The orthogonal matrix σ−1(ab−ba) and [F3] show X∼N(0,σ2); also E(X−Y)2=b2=D. By [F7], U,V have product density; the invertible map (u,v)↦(x,y)=(au+bv,au) has determinant −ab, so [F4] gives joint density (2πab)−1exp⁡[−y2/(2a2)−(x−y)2/(2b2)]. The product of the N(0,σ2) and N(0,a2) marginals has density (2πσa)−1exp⁡[−x2/(2σ2)−y2/(2a2)]. Their log-density ratio has expectation ln⁡(σ/b)−12+12=12ln⁡(σ2/D); [F1] therefore gives a feasible joint law attaining the lower bound in step 1.1.

3.1A1F1F5given∎

If σ2=0, then X=0 almost surely. The constant reconstruction Y=0 has zero distortion and zero mutual information, while [F5] gives a nonnegative lower bound for every feasible coupling. Therefore R(D)=0 for every D≥0. These branches prove the statement.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

77 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