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.
Prokhorov tightness theorem on polish spaces
Statement
Assume AC. A family of Borel probabilities on a Polish space S is tight if and only if it is relatively sequentially compact for weak convergence.
Facts & Assumptions
Every separable metrizable space embeds in the Hilbert cube : Every separable metrizable space is homeomorphic to a subspace of the Hilbert cube .
The standard weighted metric on a countable product of bounded complete metric spaces is complete: Let be complete metric spaces with . On , the formula defines a complete metric inducing the product topology. The empty product is the one-point space.
A complete, totally bounded metric space is compact, proved from countable choice used exactly once: Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice (def-countable-choice). Let be a metric space (def-metric-space) that is complete (def-complete-metric-space) and totally bounded (def-totally-bounded). Then is compact (def-metric-compactness).
Where the axiom is spent, and why the weaker principle suffices. is used exactly once, at step 3.1, to fix one finite -net together with a listing of it for every at once. The family of sets being chosen from is written down before any selection is made and does not depend on the earlier selections, which is precisely the situation countable choice covers and dependent choice (def-dependent-choice) is not needed for. Everything after step 3.1 is canonical: at each stage the construction takes the least admissible index in the listing already fixed.
As always on this page, the claim is an upper bound on the cost of the proof given here, not an assertion that is necessary for the theorem.
Probability laws on a compact metric space have weakly convergent subsequences: Assume AC. Every sequence of Borel probability laws on a compact metric K has a subsequence converging weakly to a Borel probability on K.
Portmanteau theorem: For Borel probabilities on a metric space S, the following are equivalent: (i) ; (ii) integrals converge for all bounded uniformly continuous real tests; (iii) for every closed F; (iv) for every open G; (v) for every Borel A with .
Continuity from below for measures: Let be an increasing sequence of measurable sets for a measure , so . Then
No finiteness hypothesis is required.
Finite and countable subadditivity of measures: Let be a measure and let be measurable. Then
For every one also has
including , where both sides are .
Proof
Given: The objects, hypotheses and definitions in the statement. Its conclusions are to be established below.
The empty family satisfies both definitions vacuously. Otherwise fix a compatible complete metric on S. By F1 there is a homeomorphic embedding e into . H has complete metric by F2. It is totally bounded: choose an integer with tail and a finite mesh in coordinates with weighted error below /2, putting zero in later coordinates. AC restricted to countable nonempty families gives the countable choice required by F3, which makes H compact.
Assume tightness and take any sequence in the family. Push it forward by e. F4 gives a subsequence on H. For every integer , choose compact in S with all ()>1-1/m. Their images are compact and closed in H, so F5 gives . Hence the Borel set has mass one.
For Borel B in S, e(B) is Borel relative to e(S). Since E is ambient Borel and contained in e(S), is Borel in H. Define ; disjoint unions are preserved and (S)=(E)=1. For closed F in S there is a closed Z in H with , by the relative topology. Then and . The closed bound from F5 gives , hence weak convergence on S. This proves tightness implies relative sequential compactness without assuming e(S) is Borel.
For the reverse, let be any countable open cover of S. Fix >0. If no finite initial union works uniformly, AC selects in the family with . Relative sequential compactness gives a weakly convergent subsequence with probability limit . For any fixed r, eventually >=r, so for the fixed open set one has eventually. The open bound in F5 yields . F6 as r tends to infinity would give (S)<=1-, a contradiction. Thus a uniform finite initial union exists.
Apply step 1.4 to the dense-center ball cover of radius and loss at each . Let be the corresponding finite union of closed balls and . F7 bounds every (S\K) by . K is closed in the complete S and is totally bounded: for any choose m with and select one point of K from each of the finitely many balls meeting it. These form an -net. F3 makes K compact, proving tightness.
Depends on
- Tight family of probability measures
- Relative sequential compactness for weak convergence
- Every borel probability on a polish space is tight
- Probability laws on a compact metric space have weakly convergent subsequences
- Portmanteau theorem
- Every separable metrizable space embeds in the Hilbert cube $[0,1]^{\mathbb N}$
- A complete, totally bounded metric space is compact, proved from countable choice used exactly once
- Finite and countable subadditivity of measures
- Continuity from below for measures
- The Axiom of Choice
- The standard weighted metric on a countable product of bounded complete metric spaces is complete
Used by
- Tightness extracts a weakly convergent subsequence Corollary
- Weakly convergent sequences are tight Corollary
- Cramer wold device Theorem
- Levy continuity theorem converse Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
53 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
- van Gaans, Theorem 5.2, Proposition 5.3, Lemma 5.4, pp. 14–18 (standard reference, not scraped)