Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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.

Pointwise influence limit and Greenwood variance consistency

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Fix t>0 and, for each positive integer sample size n, observe IID subject pairs (Ti,Ci), with Ti>0 almost surely, Ti independent of Ci, and Ti having an absolutely continuous law on [0,t] with density f. Write S(u)=P(Ti>u)>0, G(u)=P(Ci≥u)>0, and take a finite nonnegative Borel version of λ(u)=f(u)/S(u). Put s0(u)=E[Yi(u)]=P(Ui≥u)=S(u)G(u) for 0≤u≤t. Assume ∫0tλ(u)/s0(u) du<∞. In a common filtration, assume each Yi is predictable and each Mi=Ni−Ai, where Ai(v)=∫0vYi(u)λ(u) du, satisfies the finite-horizon square-integrable counting-process contract. This compensator is a model assumption; a displayed hazard alone is not an existence theorem. Put Λ(t)=∫0tλ(u) du=−log⁡S(t) and σ2(t)=∫0tλ(u)/s0(u) du. Then, with ϕiΛ(t)=∫0ts0(u)−1 dMi(u) and ϕiS(t)=−S(t)ϕiΛ(t), n{Λ^n(t)−Λ(t)}=n−1/2∑i=1nϕiΛ(t)+oP(1),n{S^n(t)−S(t)}=n−1/2∑i=1nϕiS(t)+oP(1). The terminal normal limit is n{S^n(t)−S(t)}⇒N(0,S(t)2σ2(t)). Let V^G∘(t) equal Greenwood's formula on its positive-denominator domain and 0 elsewhere; then nV^G∘(t)→PS(t)2σ2(t)=Var⁡(ϕiS(t)). The extension only defines the sequence on all samples for the convergence statement; it assigns no Greenwood variance interpretation outside the positive-denominator domain. These are fixed-time results; no process convergence or confidence-band conclusion is asserted. Greenwood is not an exact finite-sample variance identity.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses and definitions in the statement, the right-censoring observation scheme, the finite-horizon counting-process model contract, and the Nelson–Aalen, Kaplan–Meier, and Greenwood formulas. Prove the two influence expansions, the terminal normal limit, and Greenwood consistency.

[A1]

Assume the Axiom of Choice (AC), inherited through the counting-process integration and IID terminal-limit suppliers. (The Axiom of Choice)

[F1]

Right-censoring records Ui=min⁡(Ti,Ci) and δi=1{Ti≤Ci}; event ties are recorded as events. (Event-time observation, censoring, and truncation schemes)

[F2]

Yi(u)=1{Ui≥u}, Ni(u)=1{Ui≤u,δi=1}, Λ^n(t)=∫[0,t]1{Yn(u)>0}Yn(u) dNn, with the integrand set to zero when Yn(u)=0, S^n(t)=∏0≤u≤t:ΔNn(u)>0(1−ΔNn(u)/Yn(u)), and Greenwood's formula is defined only when its event denominators are positive. Since Ti>0 almost surely, there is no event at zero under these hypotheses. (Nelson–Aalen, Kaplan–Meier, and Greenwood estimators)

[F3]

The subject records are IID with a common law and mutual independence across subjects. (Identical distribution and IID families)

[F4]

Under the counting-process contract, Ai is continuous predictable with E[Ai(t)]<∞, and Mi=Ni−Ai is a square-integrable martingale; an intensity display alone supplies no existence theorem. (Simple counting-process intensity and compensator contract)

[F5]

For a compensated simple counting process, M2−A is a martingale and ⟨M⟩=A. (Brackets of a compensated simple counting process)

[F6]

The L² counting-process integral is defined by completion for predictable H with E∫0tH2 dA<∞. (L² counting-process integral when the limit exists)

[F7]

On this finite-energy domain the integral is a square-integrable martingale and satisfies E(∫0tH dM)2=E∫0tH2 dA. (L² extension of the predictable counting-process integral)

[F8]

Yˉn(u)=n−1∑i1{Ui≥u} converges uniformly in probability to s0(u) on [0,t], and its expected squared uniform error tends to zero. (Uniform convergence of the empirical right-censoring risk set)

[F9]

If IID subjects have a centered square-integrable measurable influence function and an already-proved oP(n−1/2) expansion remainder, the estimator has the corresponding terminal normal limit; the theorem assumes and does not prove the expansion. (IID terminal influence limit from a separately established expansion)

[F10]

If n(Tn−θ)⇒Z and g is differentiable at θ, then n{g(Tn)−g(θ)}⇒g′(θ)Z in the scalar case. (First- and second-order delta method for random vectors)

[F11]

Predictability is measurability for the predictable sigma-algebra; Borel transformations of predictable processes and deterministic Borel time functions remain predictable. (Progressively measurable and predictable processes)

[F12]

For a nonnegative product-measurable function on a sigma-finite product, Tonelli permits integration in either order. (Tonelli's theorem for nonnegative measurable functions on a sigma-finite product)

[F13]

Pointwise convergence under an integrable majorant gives convergence of integrals. (Dominated convergence)

Proof

1.1givenalgebra

Independence within a subject gives s0(u)=P(Ti≥u,Ci≥u)=S(u)G(u). On [0,t], s0(u)≥c:=S(t)G(t)>0. Since S is absolutely continuous and S′(u)=−f(u)=−λ(u)S(u) almost everywhere, integration of (log⁡S)′=−λ gives Λ(t)=−log⁡S(t). The assumed integral makes σ2(t) finite and also gives ∫0tλ(u) du<∞.

1.2A1F1F2F3F4F5F11givenalgebra

For each finite n, event times have no ties in (0,t] almost surely: for i≠j, subject independence and the absolutely continuous law on [0,t] give P(Ti=Tj≤t)=0, and there are finitely many pairs. Thus Nn=∑iNi is a simple counting process. Set Yn=∑iYi, An=∑iAi=∫0⋅Yn(u)λ(u) du, and Mn=∑iMi=Nn−An. Finite sums preserve the martingale property and square integrability; [F4] gives E[An(t)]=∑iE[Ai(t)]<∞. The process Jn=1{Yn>0} is predictable, and so is ηn=Ynλ by [F11]; both meet [F4]'s domain, with An=∫0⋅Jn(u)ηn(u) du. Hence the pooled process also satisfies the finite-horizon contract. By [F5], its predictable bracket is An.

2.1F1F2F4F6F7F11F13step 1.1step 1.2construct

We will identify the completed integrals with pathwise finite-variation integrals for every bounded predictable integrand H used below. The paths of Yi and Yˉn are left-continuous on (0,t], and s0(u)=P(Ui≥u) is left-continuous there by continuity of probabilities along decreasing events. Consequently s0−1, the floored reciprocal bn, its difference Hn, and the floored product reciprocal qn below all have bounded left-continuous paths, with a deterministic bound for each fixed n. On deterministic partitions with mesh tending to zero, take the left-step approximants H(m)(u)=H(tj) on (tj,tj+1] and set their time-zero value to zero. They are elementary predictable integrands, converge pointwise to H at every u>0, and retain the bound. For any subject or pooled contract, [F13] for the finite compensator measure E dA gives E∫0t∣H(m)−H∣2dA→0, and [F7] gives convergence of their elementary integrals to the completed integral in L2(P). The paths of M=N−A have finite variation; [F13] applied pathwise to its finite variation measure gives convergence of the same elementary sums to ∫(0,t]H dN−∫0tH dA. Uniqueness of limits in probability identifies these two limits almost surely at the fixed time. The time-zero convention is immaterial because N0=A0=0 and A is continuous. This proves the pathwise identities needed below without assuming a general semimartingale integration theorem.

2.2F2F4F8F11step 1.1algebra

Write Yˉn=Yn/n. By [F8], E[sup⁡u≤t∣Yˉn(u)−s0(u)∣2]→0. Let bn(u)=1/max⁡(Yˉn(u),c/2) and Hn(u)=bn(u)−1/s0(u). These are bounded predictable processes: Yˉn is predictable by [F4], and Borel transformations preserve predictability by [F11]. The reciprocal map with floor c/2 is 4/c2-Lipschitz, so E[sup⁡u≤t∣Hn(u)∣2]→0.

3.1F2F6F7F8F11step 1.1step 1.2step 2.1step 2.2algebra

The energy of Hn for Mn is finite because Hn is bounded and E[An(t)]<∞. Applying [F7] to the pooled contract gives E∣n−1/2∫0tHn dMn∣2=n−1E∫0tHn2 dAn=E∫0tHn2Yˉnλ du≤(∫0tλ du)E[sup⁡u≤t∣Hn(u)∣2]→0. Thus this stochastic-integral remainder is oP(1). On the event En={sup⁡u≤t∣Yˉn(u)−s0(u)∣<c/2}, whose probability tends to one by [F8], Yn(u)>0 throughout and bn=1/Yˉn. By the pathwise identification in step 2.1, dNˉn=Yˉnλ du+dMˉn gives there n(Λ^n−Λ)=n−1/2∫0tbn dMn. For each bounded predictable step integrand, the finite-sum definition in [F6] makes the integral against Mn=∑iMi equal to the sum of the subject integrals. Approximate s0−1 in the pooled compensator energy by such steps; [F7] gives L² convergence, and dAi≤dAn lets the same approximants converge for each of the finitely many subjects. Since s0−1 is a deterministic Borel time function, it is predictable by [F11]. Passing the finite-sum identity to these L² limits yields n(Λ^n−Λ)=n−1/2∑i=1n∫0ts0−1 dMi+oP(1).

4.1A1F1F2F3F4F7F9F11F12step 2.1step 3.1algebra

For one subject, step 2.1 identifies the integral in step 3.1 as ϕiΛ(t)=1{δi=1,Ui≤t}/s0(Ui)−∫0Ui∧tλ(u)/s0(u) du, so it is a measurable function of (Ti,Ci). It has mean zero by the martingale property and, by [F7] and Tonelli [F12], variance E∫0ts0(u)−2 dAi(u)=∫0ts0(u)−2E[Yi(u)]λ(u) du=∫0tλ(u)/s0(u) du=σ2(t). The integrand is nonnegative and product-measurable because Yi is predictable and s0−2λ is a deterministic Borel function. Hence these influence variables are IID and square-integrable. The normalized IID sum is bounded in probability by its fixed second moment, so step 3.1 gives a separately established expansion with oP(n−1/2) remainder. Applying [F9] proves n(Λ^n−Λ)⇒N(0,σ2(t)).

5.1F2F10step 3.1step 4.1algebra

On En, for all sufficiently large n, every event jump has size x=1/Yn(u)≤2/(nc)≤1/2. For 0≤x≤1/2, the power series for −log⁡(1−x)−x gives ∣log⁡(1−x)+x∣≤x2. There are at most n event jumps, so ∣log⁡S^n(t)+Λ^n(t)∣≤4/(nc2). Consequently n{S^n−e−Λ^n}→P0. Step 4.1 also gives Λ^n−Λ=OP(n−1/2); Taylor's formula for e−x on [0,∞) then yields n(S^n−S)=−S(t)n−1/2∑iϕiΛ(t)+oP(1). Taking g(x)=e−x and derivative g′(Λ)=−S(t) in [F10] transfers the terminal normal limit, giving N(0,S(t)2σ2(t)).

6.1F2F3F4F7F8F11step 1.1step 1.2step 2.1step 4.1step 5.1algebra∎

For sufficiently large n, define the bounded predictable qn(u)=[max⁡(Yˉn(u),c/2)max⁡(Yˉn(u)−1/n,c/4)]−1. On En, ΔNn(u)=1 at event times and qn(u)=1/[Yˉn(u)(Yˉn(u)−1/n)], so n∑u≤tΔNn(u)/[Yn(u)(Yn(u)−ΔNn(u))]=∫0tqn dNˉn. The uniform convergence in [F8] implies qnYˉn→1/s0 uniformly in probability, while qn is uniformly bounded. Using step 2.1, decompose ∫qn dNˉn=∫qnYˉnλ du+n−1∫qn dMn. The first term tends to σ2(t) by boundedness and ∫λ<∞; by [F3]–[F4] the second has second moment at most n−1(8/c2)2E[A1(t)], which tends to zero. Therefore the scaled Greenwood sum tends to σ2(t), and S^n(t)2→PS(t)2 by step 5.1. Since P(En)→1 and Greenwood's formula is defined on En for large n, the zero extension agrees with the formula on an event whose probability tends to one. It follows that nV^G∘(t)→PS(t)2σ2(t), which equals Var⁡(ϕiS(t)) by step 4.1. This is a first-order variance estimate, not a finite-sample identity.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

65 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