Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-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.

Poisson-equation martingale decomposition and MCMC CLT

Statement

Assume AC. Let (Xk)k≥0 be a stationary time-homogeneous Markov chain with invariant probability π, natural filtration Fk, and ergodic canonical path shift. Let f be real Borel with π(f)=0 and f∈L2(π) (The space Lp(μ) as the quotient by null functions). Suppose there is a measurable g∈L2(π) such that f=g−Pg π-almost everywhere, where Pg(x)=∫g(y)P(x,dy). Put Dk+1:=g(Xk+1)−Pg(Xk) and τf2:=E[D12]. Then for every n≥1, ∑k=0n−1f(Xk)=g(X0)−g(Xn)+∑k=0n−1Dk+1, and 1n∑k=0n−1f(Xk)⇒N(0,τf2), including the degenerate case τf2=0. If additionally ∑k≥1∣Cov⁡π(f(X0),f(Xk))∣<∞, then τf2=π(f2)+2∑k=1∞Cov⁡π(f(X0),f(Xk)), so this CLT's variance equals the covariance long-run variance of Long-run variance for a stationary Markov chain.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC, a stationary Markov chain with invariant probability π, natural filtration Fk, ergodic canonical shift, centered real f∈L2(π), and a solution g∈L2(π) of f=g−Pg π-almost everywhere.

[A1]

AC is the choice principle for the conditional-expectation classes used below. (The Axiom of Choice)

[F1]

For g∈L2(π), Dk+1=g(Xk+1)−Pg(Xk) is square-integrable, has conditional mean zero, and conditional variance P(g2)(Xk)−(Pg(Xk))2. (Kernel conditional expectations for square-integrable Markov observables)

[F2]

For a stationary ergodic process Y, its averages converge almost surely to E[Y0]. (Birkhoff limit for a stationary integrable process)

[F3]

A square-integrable martingale-difference array with terminal conditional variance clock converging to 1 in probability and vanishing unconditional Lindeberg sums has terminal sum converging in distribution to N(0,1). (Martingale central limit theorem)

[F4]

For square-integrable real random variables, variance is the second centered moment and covariance is the centered product expectation. (Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space)

[F5]

When the covariance series is absolutely convergent and the CLT is established, the covariance long-run variance is the sum π(f2)+2∑k≥1Cov⁡π(f(X0),f(Xk)). (Long-run variance for a stationary Markov chain)

[F6]

A known measurable factor can be taken out of conditional expectation when products are integrable; Hölder bounds products of L2 variables by their L2 norms. (Taking out what is known, Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases)

[F7]

If Un⇒U and Vn→0 in probability, then Un+Vn⇒U. (Converging together lemma)

[F8]

Dominated convergence passes limits through the integrals used below. (Dominated convergence)

[F9]

Convergence to zero in L2 implies convergence to zero in probability. (Lp convergence implies convergence in probability)

[F10]

The canonical path law is shifted by the coordinate left shift; ergodic means the shift preserves the law and every invariant event has probability zero or one. (Canonical Markov chain on path space, Measure-preserving transformations and systems, Ergodicity relative to an invariant measure)

[F11]

A continuous scaling map sends weak convergence to the correspondingly scaled limiting law. (Continuous mapping theorem)

Proof

1.1A1F1given

By [F1], each Dk+1 is a square-integrable martingale difference, so E[Dk+1∣Fk]=0. Since f=g−Pg π-almost everywhere and each Xk has law π, the identity holds at every Xk simultaneously outside a countable union of null events. Therefore f(Xk)=g(Xk)−g(Xk+1)+Dk+1 almost surely.

1.2F1F2F10given

Set q(x)=P(g2)(x)−(Pg(x))2 on the π-full set where these terms are finite, and set q=0 elsewhere. By [F1], q(Xk) is the conditional variance of Dk+1, is nonnegative, and π(q)=E[D12]=τf2. Thus q∈L1(π). The process (q(Xk))k≥0 is a measurable factor of the stationary ergodic path process (Xk): the inverse image of any shift-invariant event for q(X) is shift-invariant for X. Hence it too is stationary and ergodic by [F10], and [F2] gives n−1∑k=0n−1q(Xk)→τf2 almost surely.

1.3F9givenalgebra

Stationarity and g∈L2(π) give E[(g(X0)−g(Xn))2/n]≤4π(g2)/n→0. The L2-norm of the endpoint divided by n therefore tends to zero, so [F9] gives convergence to zero in probability.

2.1step 1.1algebra

Summing step 1.1 for k=0,…,n−1 cancels the intermediate g(Xk) terms and yields Sn:=∑k=0n−1f(Xk)=g(X0)−g(Xn)+Mn, where Mn:=∑k=0n−1Dk+1.

2.2A1F1F3F8F11step 1.1step 1.2givenconstruct

Suppose τf2>0. For row n, set Zn,j=Dj/nτf2 for 1≤j≤n, set Zn,j=0 for j>n, and use Fn,j=Fmin⁡(j,n) for every j≥0. These are square-integrable martingale-difference rows by step 1.1. Their terminal variance clock is Γn,∞=(nτf2)−1∑k=0n−1q(Xk)→1 almost surely by step 1.2. For every ε>0, stationarity of the transition pairs (Xj−1,Xj) gives ∑j=1nE[Zn,j21{∣Zn,j∣>ε}]=τf−2E[D121{∣D1∣>εnτf2}]→0 by [F8], since D12 is integrable. Extending each row by zeros makes it an infinite array with the same terminal sum and clock. Therefore [F3] gives Mn/nτf2⇒N(0,1); scaling by τf using [F11] yields Mn/n⇒N(0,τf2).

3.1F1F7step 1.3step 2.1given

If τf2=0, stationarity and [F1] imply E[Dk+12]=0, so Dk+1=0 almost surely and hence Mn=0. By step 2.1, Sn=g(X0)−g(Xn). Step 1.3 shows Sn/n→0 in probability; [F7] then gives convergence to the point mass N(0,0).

3.2F7step 1.3step 2.1step 2.2algebra

If τf2>0, step 2.2 gives Mn/n⇒N(0,τf2). Combining this with step 1.3, the decomposition in step 2.1, and [F7] gives Sn/n⇒N(0,τf2).

4.1F1F4F5F6F8step 2.1step 3.1step 3.2algebragiven∎

Assume additionally that the covariance series is absolutely convergent. Stationarity and expansion of the finite square give n−1Var⁡(Sn)=γ0+2∑k=1n−1(1−k/n)γk→γ0+2∑k=1∞γk, where γk=Cov⁡π(f(X0),f(Xk)); [F8] applies to the series because ∣γk∣ is summable. On the other hand, step 2.1 writes Sn=Rn+Mn with Rn=g(X0)−g(Xn). For i<j, Di+1 is Fj-measurable and E[Dj+1∣Fj]=0, so [F1, F6] give E[Di+1Dj+1]=0. Stationarity gives Var⁡(Mn)=∑j=0n−1E[Dj+12]=nτf2. Also Var⁡(Rn)≤4π(g2) and [F6] gives ∣Cov⁡(Rn,Mn)∣≤Var⁡(Rn)Var⁡(Mn)=O(n). Dividing Var⁡(Sn)=Var⁡(Rn)+Var⁡(Mn)+2Cov⁡(Rn,Mn) by n therefore shows that its limit is τf2. Steps 3.1 and 3.2 give the CLT, so [F5] identifies its variance with the displayed covariance sum.

Source notes

The decomposition is proved directly by telescoping. The CLT uses the conditional-variance ergodic theorem and the stated martingale-array CLT; finite variance of f alone is not used as a CLT criterion. The covariance formula is proved only in the stated Poisson-equation case.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

77 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