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.

Pinsker’s inequality with event-supremum total variation

Statement

Assume AC. For probability measures P,Q on one measurable space, with ∥P−Q∥TV:=sup⁡A∣P(A)−Q(A)∣, the event-supremum convention without a factor 1/2, ∥P−Q∥TV≤12D(P∥Q). If P≪̸Q, the right side is +∞ by the definition of KL divergence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC and probability measures P,Q on the same measurable space.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: AC supplies the Radon–Nikodym construction used by the KL divergence.

[F1]

Kullback–Leibler divergence and Likelihood-ratio change of measure: if P≪̸Q, then D(P∥Q)=+∞; if P≪Q with r=dP/dQ, then P(B)=∫Br dQ for every measurable B, so ∫r dQ=1, and D(P∥Q)=∫rlog⁡r dQ with 0log⁡0=0 and finite negative part.

[F2]

Total variation distance for probability laws: ∥P−Q∥TV=sup⁡A∣P(A)−Q(A)∣∈[0,1]; this convention has no factor 1/2.

[F3]

Jensen's integral inequality for a probability measure: for a probability measure, an integrable real function f, and convex φ with φ∘f integrable, φ(∫f)≤∫φ(f).

[F4]

The natural logarithm as the inverse of the exponential function, Order, continuity, range, and the product, quotient, and reciprocal laws for the natural logarithm, Higher derivatives and the classes Ck and C∞, The integral logarithm satisfies L′(x)=1/x for x>0 and L(1)=0, The integral logarithm L is the published natural logarithm, Sums, scalar multiples, products and quotients: (f+g)′(c)=f′(c)+g′(c), (αf)′(c)=αf′(c), (fg)′(c)=f′(c)g(c)+f(c)g′(c), and (f/g)′(c)=(f′(c)g(c)−f(c)g′(c))/g(c)2 when g(c)≠0, The chain rule, in one line from Carathéodory: if g is differentiable at c and f is differentiable at g(c), then f∘g is differentiable at c with (f∘g)′(c)=f′(g(c)) g′(c), and The mean value theorem, as the case g(x)=x of Cauchy's: for f continuous on [a,b] with a<b and differentiable on (a,b) there is c∈(a,b) with f(b)−f(a)=f′(c)(b−a): the identity L=log⁡ transfers L′(x)=1/x to log⁡′(x)=1/x; products and compositions obey the derivative rules; and the mean value theorem applies on closed subintervals of (0,1). Also tlog⁡t→0 as t↓0: for s≥1, 0≤log⁡(s)/s≤2/s using log⁡s=∫1sdu/u and 1/u≤1/u.

Proof

1.1A1F1F3F4given

If P≪̸Q or D(P∥Q)=+∞, the inequality is immediate. Otherwise let r=dP/dQ and φ(t)=tlog⁡t for t>0, with φ(0)=0. By [F4] and the product rule, φ′′(t)=1/t>0 for t>0. The mean value theorem in [F4] makes φ′ increasing and hence φ convex on (0,∞). The limit in [F4] makes this extension continuous at zero, so φ is convex on [0,∞). Since D(P∥Q) is finite and its negative part is bounded by [F1], φ(r) is Q-integrable. Jensen [F3] and ∫r dQ=1 give D(P∥Q)=∫φ(r) dQ≥φ(1)=0.

2.1A1F1F3givenstep 1.1algebra

Fix a measurable event A, and put a=P(A), b=Q(A). If b∈{0,1}, absolute continuity gives a=b, so step 1.1 yields D(P∥Q)≥k(a,b)=0. If 0<b<1, normalize Q on A and on Ac. Their averages of r are a/b and (1−a)/(1−b). Applying [F3] on each normalized probability space and adding yields D(P∥Q)≥alog⁡ab+(1−a)log⁡1−a1−b=:k(a,b), with 0log⁡0=0 by continuity.

3.1F4step 2.1algebra

For fixed 0<b<1, define g(a)=k(a,b)−2(a−b)2 on [0,1]. Differentiating by [F4] gives g′′(a)=1a(1−a)−4=(2a−1)2a(1−a)≥0 on (0,1). For a,b∈(0,1) with a>b, the mean value theorem applied to g′ on [b,a] shows g′(a)≥g′(b)=0, and applied to g on [b,a] shows g(a)≥g(b)=0. For a,b∈(0,1) with a<b, the same two applications on [a,b] show g′(a)≤g′(b)=0 and g(a)≥g(b)=0. The limit in [F4] makes g continuous at a=0,1, so the inequality extends to those endpoints. If b=0 or b=1, absolute continuity gives a=b and equality. Thus k(a,b)≥2(a−b)2 in every case.

4.1F2step 2.1step 3.1algebra∎

Combining steps 2.1 and 3.1 gives D(P∥Q)≥2∣P(A)−Q(A)∣2 for every measurable A. Since the square is increasing on [0,1], its supremum is the square of the supremum; using [F2] yields D(P∥Q)≥2∥P−Q∥TV2, which is the claimed inequality.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

62 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