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.
Diameter of undersmoothed multiscale credible bands
Statement
Assume all hypotheses of CDF and multiscale credible-band calibration from weak BvM limits at a fixed credibility level , , and use its credible ball and scaled radius . Let , assume the compactly supported wavelets have uniformly bounded overlap and , and define Suppose . Choose integers with and let . Intersect the credible ball with the coefficient smoothness ball: Then , and its diameter satisfies
Facts & Assumptions
Given: All hypotheses, the credible ball and radius of CDF and multiscale credible-band calibration from weak BvM limits, the coefficient smoothness norm and wavelet assumptions in the Statement, , and .
Little-o multiscale coefficient space M0(w): the multiscale ball bounds each level- coefficient by times its radius.
CDF and multiscale credible-band calibration from weak BvM limits: has frequentist coverage tending to , and its scaled radius converges in probability to a finite quantile, hence is .
The Statement defines by the displayed coefficient norm .
Proof
Since and , [L1] implies the truth belongs to the coefficient smoothness ball for all sufficiently large . For those , , so the asserted coverage follows from [F2].
Let . For , [F1] gives . For , [L1] and membership in the coefficient smoothness ball give . At each point, only a uniformly bounded number of level- wavelets are nonzero, each bounded by . Therefore the low-frequency contribution to is at most , and the high-frequency contribution is at most . These series also give uniformly convergent representatives because .
Since is nondecreasing, by summing a geometric series. Also . The first bound in step 1.2 is thus at most .
The relation implies both and . Combining the low- and high-frequency bounds in steps 1.2 and 2.1 and using from [F2] yields the stated diameter bound.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
14 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
- Castillo and Nickl, On the Bernstein–von Mises phenomenon for nonparametric Bayes procedures, Theorem 5, Proposition 5, and proof of §5.4 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Giné and Nickl, Mathematical Foundations of Infinite-Dimensional Statistical Models, Corollary 7.3.24 and proof (standard reference, not scraped)