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.
L² extension of the predictable counting-process integral
Statement
For every predictable on with , the limit in L² counting-process integral when the limit exists exists at each , is independent of the approximating step sequence, and defines a square-integrable martingale. It satisfies, for each ,
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The finite-horizon counting-process contract, a predictable real , and finite energy .
Bounded predictable step integrals are martingales and satisfy the elementary isometry. (Isometry for elementary predictable counting-process integrals)
Bounded predictable step processes are dense in the compensator norm. (Predictable step processes are dense for the compensator L² norm)
is complete for each measure space, including ; thus an -Cauchy sequence of -measurable classes has an -measurable limit. (Riesz-Fischer completeness of for )
Conditional expectation is an contraction. (Conditional lp contraction)
The integral notation denotes the limits of elementary integrals when those limits exist. (L² counting-process integral when the limit exists)
AC is inherited from the conditional-expectation and interfaces. (The Axiom of Choice)
Proof
By [F2], choose bounded predictable step processes with . For any , [F1] gives , so terminal integrals are Cauchy in ; the same estimate on gives the Cauchy property at every . [F3] gives a unique full-space limit and, since every is -measurable, also an -measurable limit at each fixed ; uniqueness makes these the same class.
If is another step sequence converging to , then . Applying [F1] to makes the terminal limits and each fixed-time limit equal in , so the limits in [F5] are independent of approximation.
Norm continuity and [F1] give, for every , . This proves square integrability and the isometry.
For , [F1] gives . By [F4], conditional expectations converge in to , while in by step 1.1; uniqueness of limits yields . Hence the extension is a square-integrable martingale, with no claim for predictable integrands of infinite compensator energy.
Source notes
Bass describes the completion for predictable jump-martingale integrands; Tian states the counting-process martingale and bracket results. The local density lemma and elementary isometry above provide the full completion proof for the finite-energy domain used here.
Depends on
- Simple counting-process intensity and compensator contract
- Elementary predictable integral against a counting-process martingale
- L² counting-process integral when the limit exists
- Isometry for elementary predictable counting-process integrals
- Predictable step processes are dense for the compensator L² norm
- Riesz-Fischer completeness of $L^p$ for $1 \le p \le \infty$
- Conditional lp contraction
- The Axiom of Choice
Used by
- Consistency of the weighted logrank variance estimate Lemma
- Cox score martingale representation and random-risk-mean replacement Lemma
- Pathwise identity for bounded predictable counting-process integrals Lemma
- Uniform Cox partial-likelihood Hessian convergence Lemma
- Weighted logrank score expansion under a common-hazard model Lemma
- Compensators, brackets, and jump-integral isometry for reaction counts Theorem
- Pointwise influence limit and Greenwood variance consistency Theorem
- Terminal normal limit for weighted logrank scores Theorem
Cited to discharge well-definedness by L² counting-process integral when the limit exists.
Dependency tree · two levels
36 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
- Richard F. Bass, SDEs with Jumps, Section 2.5, PDF p. 5 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Lu Tian, STAT331 Unit 10: Combining Martingales, Stochastic Integrals, and Applications, PDF p. 5 (standard reference, not scraped)