Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

The finite-horizon linear-Gaussian Kalman filter is exact

Statement

Assume AC. Fix a finite-horizon model from Linear-Gaussian state-space models with independent noises with state and observation equations Xk=FkXk−1+qk,Yk=HkXk+rk(1≤k≤T), where X0∼Nd0(m0,P0), the centered Gaussian noises qk,rk are mutually independent across times and from X0, and P0,Qk,Rk are symmetric positive semidefinite. Let the parameters and observations be admissible for Exact linear-Gaussian Kalman filter, so the recursively formed innovation covariances Sk=HkPk∣k−1HkT+Rk are positive definite for every 1≤k≤T. Run that algorithm from m0∣0=m0 and P0∣0=P0. Then, for each 0≤k≤T, the map πk(y1:k,⋅)=Ndk(mk∣k(y1:k),Pk∣k) is an everywhere-defined filtering kernel for Xk given Y1:k in the sense of Filtering, predictive, and smoothing laws in a finite-horizon state-space model. The empty history at k=0 is a singleton, and π0=Nd0(m0,P0). In particular, these recursions give an exact Gaussian conditional-law version at every observation history; each Pk∣k is positive semidefinite. Singular initial, process, measurement, predicted-state, and filtered-state covariances are allowed. Equivalently, the covariance update can be written in Joseph form Pk∣k=(I−KkHk)Pk∣k−1(I−KkHk)T+KkRkKkT. Only the innovation matrices being solved must be positive definite. No pointwise uniqueness of a conditional-law version on null histories, observation-density assumption, or numerical-stability claim is made.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC and the finite-horizon linear-Gaussian model and positive innovation hypotheses in the Statement.

[A1]

AC is the Axiom of Choice used by the Gaussian and conditional-law suppliers. The Axiom of Choice.

[F1]

The linear-Gaussian model has the stated affine equations, mutually independent centered Gaussian process and measurement noises, and positive-semidefinite P0,Qk,Rk; its Gaussian laws permit singular covariances. Linear-Gaussian state-space models with independent noises.

[F2]

The finite interleaved state-observation path has a jointly Gaussian law, which may have singular covariance. The finite linear-Gaussian state-space path is jointly Gaussian.

[F3]

A filtering kernel is a probability kernel whose composition with the observation history is a regular conditional distribution; the empty-history filter is the initial law. Filtering, predictive, and smoothing laws in a finite-horizon state-space model.

[F4]

Under AC, a finite-horizon model on standard-Borel state and observation spaces has data-indexed filtering and predictive kernels. Filtering and finite-horizon smoothing laws exist.

[F5]

If a supplied conditional law is extended by independent noise, the product kernel is a conditional law of the pair; measurable pushforwards remain conditional laws. Independent noise extends and pushes forward a conditional law.

[F6]

For independent Gaussian U,q,r with positive-semidefinite covariances, linear prediction and observation give the joint Gaussian block and the exact one-step conditional update whenever S≻0. One-step Gaussian prediction and conditioning.

[F7]

A jointly Gaussian pair with positive-semidefinite block covariance and positive-definite observed covariance has, for every observation value, a conditional Gaussian law whose Schur-complement covariance is positive-semidefinite; the state block may be singular. Conditional law of a jointly Gaussian block with positive-definite observed covariance.

[F8]

A real symmetric positive-definite matrix has a unique Cholesky factor with positive diagonal. A matrix admits a Cholesky factorisation with positive diagonal exactly when it is Hermitian positive definite, and that factor is unique.

[F9]

Under AC, Nd(m,P) is defined for every symmetric positive-semidefinite P, including singular P. Multivariate normal law, including singular covariance.

[F10]

Integrating a nonnegative product-measurable function against a probability kernel gives a measurable evaluation. Measurability of integration against a kernel.

[F11]

Equality of finite measures on a generating pi-system extends to the generated sigma-algebra by the pi-lambda theorem. Dynkin's pi-lambda theorem.

[F12]

A finite-dimensional positive-semidefinite covariance operator has a positive-semidefinite square root. A non-negative operator has a unique non-negative square root.

[F13]

The model's initial, process, and measurement Gaussian vectors are mutually independent, with each new noise independent of all preceding noises. Linear-Gaussian state-space models with independent noises.

[F14]

Forward and backward substitution produce the unique solutions of lower- and upper-triangular systems with nonzero diagonal, respectively; for a matrix right-hand side the result applies column by column. Forward and backward substitution are correct, unique, and quadratic in scalar operations.

Proof

Given: The hypotheses in the Statement.

1.1A1F1F2F3F4F8F9F12givenbase

The Euclidean state and observation spaces are standard Borel. By [F1], the finite path model uses Gaussian laws with the declared positive-semidefinite covariances; [F2] identifies its path law as jointly Gaussian, including when singular. The general existence result [F4] supplies the conditional-law setting, and [F3] fixes the initial filtering kernel as π0(∗)=Nd0(m0,P0) on the singleton empty history. This is a probability by [F9] and [F12], and is an RCD of X0 given the trivial history because its event integral is exactly the X0 marginal. The initial covariance is positive semidefinite by hypothesis. At every later step the algorithm is defined on its stated domain: Sk≻0 has the Cholesky factor required by [F8].

2.1F1F5F6F7F8F10F13F14givenstep 1.1ihalgebra

Fix k∈{1,…,T} and assume inductively that the algorithm's πk−1 is a filtering kernel with deterministic covariance Pk−1∣k−1⪰0. The vectors Xk−1 and Y1:k−1 are measurable functions of X0,q1,r1,…,qk−1,rk−1; by [F1,F13], the new pair (qk,rk) is independent of that past. Apply [F5] with this past conditional law and push forward by (x,q,r)↦(Fkx+q,Hk(Fkx+q)+r). For each history h, the resulting conditional law of (Xk,Yk) is the one-step Gaussian block in [F6] with m=mk−1∣k−1(h) and P=Pk−1∣k−1. Its predicted covariance is positive semidefinite because uTPk∣k−1u=(FkTu)TPk−1∣k−1(FkTu)+uTQku≥0. The positive-definite condition on Sk allows [F7] to condition this block, for every yk, with mean mk∣k−1+Pk∣k−1HkTSk−1vk and covariance Pk∣k−1−Pk∣k−1HkTSk−1HkPk∣k−1, exactly the algorithm's gain and update. The covariance is positive semidefinite by [F7]. To identify the computed gain, put Bk=HkPk∣k−1. The algorithm's two triangular solves, applied columnwise, give LkUk=Bk and LkTKkT=Uk. The diagonal entries of Lk and LkT are positive, so [F14] gives the unique solution of each column system. Therefore SkKkT=Lk(LkTKkT)=LkUk=Bk; since Sk≻0, this yields KkT=Sk−1Bk, the gain in [F6]. The updated mean is affine in (h,yk) and the covariance is deterministic, so [F10] makes the Gaussian sections a measurable probability kernel.

3.1F3F5F6F7F11step 2.1algebra

Let Jk(h,⋅) be the conditional law of (Xk,Yk) given the previous history constructed in step 2.1, and let Mk(h,⋅) be its observation marginal. The one-step conditional identity [F7] gives Jk(h,A×B)=∫Bπk(h,yk,A) Mk(h,dyk) for Borel state A and observation set B. Integrating this identity over any Borel set D of previous histories yields P(Xk∈A,Y1:k−1∈D,Yk∈B)=∫D∫Bπk(h,yk,A) Mk(h,dyk) PY1:k−1(dh). Since Mk is the observation marginal of Jk, the iterated kernel is the joint law of (Y1:k−1,Yk) integrated against πk. Thus this is the RCD identity on every rectangle D×B; these rectangles form a pi-system generating the product history sigma-algebra, so [F11] extends the identity to all Borel history events. Therefore πk is a filtering kernel by [F3].

4.1F3step 1.1step 2.1step 3.1discharge-induction∎

The base case is step 1.1, and steps 2.1–3.1 establish the induction step for every k, preserving positive semidefiniteness of the updated covariance. For T=0 only the base case applies. Hence the stated recursions give a conditional-law version at every history, with no inversion except of positive-definite innovation matrices. Different RCD versions may still differ on observation histories of probability zero.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

67 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