Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: 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.

Midpoint bit discretization has bounded coupling and CDF error

Statement

Assume Countable Choice and Dependent Choice as in Disjoint streams of independent fair bits produce independent uniform variables. Let U=∑j≥1Bj2−j be the uniform variable from an independent fair-bit stream. For b≥1, put Kb=∑j=1bBj2b−j,Ub=(Kb+1/2)2−b,δb=2−b−1. Then Kb is uniform on {0,…,2b−1}, ∣U−Ub∣≤δb pointwise, the 1-Wasserstein and Kolmogorov distances between their laws are at most δb, and their total-variation distance is exactly 1. We use W1(μ,ν)=inf⁡E∣X−Y∣ over couplings, dK(μ,ν)=sup⁡x∣Fμ(x)−Fν(x)∣, and dTV(μ,ν)=sup⁡A∣μ(A)−ν(A)∣.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An independent fair-bit stream, a bit budget b≥1, and the definitions in the Statement.

[F1]

The bit-stream sum U is uniform on [0,1], and every finite bit prefix is uniform. Disjoint streams of independent fair bits produce independent uniform variables

[F2]

For probability laws, total variation here is the supremum of absolute event-probability differences. Total variation distance for probability laws

[F3]

Every half-open or closed interval has Lebesgue measure equal to its length, including degenerate intervals. A box in Rn with parameters ai≤bi is Lebesgue measurable of measure ∏i<n(bi−ai), whichever of its faces are included

[A1]

The uniform law in [F1] is Lebesgue measure on [0,1]; its CDF and strict CDF are both the clipped identity x↦min⁡(1,max⁡(0,x)) by [F3]. Countable Choice is the assumption of [F3]. The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)

Proof

1.1givenF1A2algebra

The first b independent fair bits give each of the 2b binary prefixes probability 2−b, so Kb is uniform on the stated integer set. Write the remaining binary tail as Tb=∑j≥1Bb+j2−j∈[0,1]. Then U=Kb2−b+2−bTb, while Ub=Kb2−b+2−b−1, hence ∣U−Ub∣=2−b∣Tb−1/2∣≤2−b−1.

2.1step 1.1F1F3A1algebra

The displayed coupling gives W1(L(U),L(Ub))≤E∣U−Ub∣≤δb by the infimum definition of W1. For non-strict CDFs, {U≤x−δb}⊆{Ub≤x}⊆{U≤x+δb}; for strict CDFs, {U<x−δb}⊆{Ub<x}⊆{U<x+δb}. Since both uniform CDFs equal the clipped identity by [A1], these inclusions bound each absolute discrepancy by δb.

3.1F1F2step 1.1∎

The law of Ub is supported on its finite midpoint grid, which has probability 1 under Ub and probability 0 under the continuous uniform law of U. By [F2], this event gives dTV(L(U),L(Ub))=1, the maximal possible value.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

42 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