Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge 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 conditional particle Gibbs sweep is a Gibbs update

Statement

Under Particle Gibbs extended target and Conditional particle filter for particle Gibbs, for φN-almost every extended state the conditional law of the terminal index K given (θ,U) is Categorical(WT1:N). For posterior-almost every retained parameter-trajectory-lineage value, the remaining particles and ancestor indices have exactly the conditional-particle-filter law in Conditional particle filter for particle Gibbs. In a joint sweep, the parameter draw from its posterior full conditional given the selected path, followed by regeneration of the remaining particles and ancestors from the conditional-particle-filter law, is the joint conditional-block update of those variables given the retained selected path and lineage. The terminal index is then drawn from its categorical conditional given the particle system. These two updates preserve the extended target; the measurable exceptional-state identity fallback specified by the algorithm is included. The selected marginal is the exact joint parameter-path posterior. This invariance does not assert fast mixing.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite-horizon Feynman–Kac target, proposal path support, the multinomial SIR particle system with ancestor labels in sampled order, N≥2, and the extended target φN.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: AC is assumed through the Radon–Nikodym weight versions and the standard-Borel disintegration supplying conditional versions.

[F1]

Particle Gibbs extended target: φN=C−1π0(dθ)ψθ(du)Z^T(u)WTK(u); the selected trajectory is the ancestry-traced path of K.

[F2]

Sequential importance resampling for Feynman–Kac path targets: the SIR forward law draws initial particles from ν0, resamples each next ancestor from Wt−1, propagates from the proposal kernel, and uses incremental weights Gt,dMt/dRt.

[F3]

Conditional particle filter for particle Gibbs: it fixes the reference path and lineage, samples every other particle and ancestor by those same SIR conditionals, and fixes each reference ancestor to the preceding reference index.

[F4]

Feynman–Kac path Radon–Nikodym weight: the initial and transition proposal ratios convert ν0 and Rt factors into the Feynman–Kac path measure under the stated support hypotheses.

[F5]

The particle Gibbs extended target has the exact smoothing marginal: φN is a probability measure with the exact joint parameter-smoothing posterior as selected marginal.

[F6]

Disintegration of a joint law on standard borel spaces: under AC a probability on a product of standard-Borel spaces has conditional probability kernels unique outside a single measurable marginal-null set.

Proof

Given: [A1] and the hypotheses in the Statement.

1.1F1F2given

Since the only K-dependent factor in [F1] is WTK, and the final normalized weights sum to one, φN(K=k∣θ,U)=WTk.

2.1A1F1F2step 1.1algebra

Fix a selected index K and trace its lineage b0,…,bT. On the positive-mass support of [F1], write wˉt=N−1∑iwti, so Z^TWTK=(∏t=0T−1wˉt)wTbT/N. In the forward density [F2], the selected lineage contributes ∏t=1TWt−1bt−1Rt(xt−1bt−1,dxtbt) and its initial proposal ν0(dx0b0). Substituting Wt−1bt−1=wt−1bt−1/(Nwˉt−1) cancels each wˉt−1, leaving the selected path factor N−(T+1)ν0(dx0b0)w0b0∏t=1TRt(xt−1bt−1,dxtbt)wtbt. If any average weight is zero, [F1] assigns the configuration zero extended-target mass, so its conditional law need not be specified there.

3.1A1F1F2F3F4step 2.1algebra

By the initial and transition Radon–Nikodym weight identities in [F4], the selected path factor in step 2.1 equals N−(T+1)γθ,T(dx0:Tb). All remaining factors are exactly the conditional SIR laws for the non-reference particles and ancestors in [F3]. Thus, conditional on the selected path and lineage, the remaining particle variables have the stated conditional-particle-filter law; the same factorization makes the lineage indices uniform given the selected path.

4.1A1F1F3F5F6step 3.1construct

By [F5], the extended target is a probability on a standard-Borel product. Apply [F6] to the particle system conditional on its retained parameter-path-lineage variables. The normalized factorization in step 3.1 identifies its conditional kernel outside a single measurable marginal-null set; pull their exceptional events back to the common extended-state space and take the finite union over lineages and update blocks. This union has target mass zero. Its conditional probability given the retained parameter-path-lineage is therefore zero outside a measurable marginal-null set, by the defining integral identity in [F6]; remove that set to obtain D in [F3]. The same restriction excludes infinite or zero denominators on the positive extended-target support. On the exceptional set the algorithm uses the identity transition on the retained state, so it remains an everywhere measurable probability kernel without claiming pointwise Radon–Nikodym identities at null reference values.

4.2F1F3F5step 3.1

In the coordinates consisting of the selected path xb, its lineage b, and the remaining particle variables U−b, the factorization in step 3.1 gives the conditional law of (θ,U−b) given (xb,b). Its leading factor is π0(dθ)γθ,T(dxb)/(CNT+1); the factor N−(T+1) makes b uniform given xb and independent of θ, while the conditional law of U−b given (θ,xb,b) is exactly the conditional-particle-filter law in [F3]. Thus the posterior draw of θ given xb, followed by regeneration of U−b with that filter, samples the joint conditional law of (θ,U−b) given (xb,b). This is a conditional-block update; the parameter draw alone is not asserted to be conditional on the old full particle system.

5.1F1F5step 1.1step 3.1step 4.1step 4.2algebra∎

The block in step 4.2 is the conditional law of (θ,U−b) given the retained (xb,b), so replacing that block preserves φN by the defining conditional-probability identity. By step 1.1, the subsequent draw of K given the regenerated particle system is its conditional law Categorical(WT1:N) and also preserves φN. The exceptional-state identity modification changes the target integral only on a target-null set by step 4.1. Therefore their composition preserves φN, whose selected marginal is the exact posterior by [F5].

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

31 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