Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-28
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.

Vitali convergence theorem on finite and sigma-finite measure spaces

Statement

Let (X,A,μ) be a measure space, let fn:X→R be measurable with fn∈L1(μ) for every n, and let f:X→R be measurable.

  1. If μ(X)<+∞, then fn→f in L1(μ) if and only if fn→f in measure and the family {fn:n∈N} is uniformly integrable.
  2. If μ is sigma-finite and fn→f in measure, and the family {fn:n∈N} is uniformly integrable and tight, then f∈L1(μ) and fn→f in L1(μ).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Integrable real-valued functions fn∈L1(μ) and a measurable f:X→R.

[L1]

Convergence in measure means that for every real ε>0, μ({∣fn−f∣>ε})→0. (Convergence in measure)

[L2]

Convergence in L1(μ) means ∫∣fn−f∣ dμ→0. (Convergence in L^1(mu))

[L3]

On a finite measure space, uniform integrability is equivalent to L1-boundedness plus uniform absolute continuity. (On a finite measure space, uniform integrability is equivalent to L^1-boundedness plus uniform absolute continuity)

[L4]

Convergence in L1(μ) implies convergence in measure. (Convergence in L^1(mu) implies convergence in measure)

[L5]

Convergence in measure has a subsequence converging almost everywhere. (Riesz's subsequence theorem for convergence in measure)

[L6]

If g∈L1(μ) and ε>0, then there is δ>0 such that μ(E)<δ⇒∫E∣g∣ dμ<ε. (Absolute continuity of the integral)

[L7]

For nonnegative measurable functions un, ∫lim inf⁡nun dμ≤lim inf⁡n∫un dμ. (Fatou's lemma)

[L8]

A family is tight when for every ε>0 there is a measurable set E of finite measure such that sup⁡n∫X∖E∣fn∣ dμ<ε. (A tight family of integrable functions)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1L2L3L4algebra

Assume μ(X)<+∞ and fn→f in L1(μ). By [L4], the sequence converges to f in measure. To prove uniform integrability, it suffices by [L3] to show L1-boundedness and uniform absolute continuity. For L1-boundedness, choose N so that ∫∣fn−f∣ dμ<1 for n≥N. Then ∫∣fn∣ dμ≤∫∣f∣ dμ+1 for n≥N, and the finitely many initial terms may be absorbed into one larger bound.

1.2L3L5L7algebra

Still on a finite measure space, assume fn→f in measure and the family {fn} is uniformly integrable. By [L3], the family is L1-bounded and uniformly absolutely continuous on small sets. By [L5], some subsequence fnk converges to f almost everywhere. Fatou's lemma [L7] then gives ∫∣f∣ dμ≤lim inf⁡k→∞∫∣fnk∣ dμ<+∞, so f∈L1(μ).

2.1L2L3L6choosealgebra

Still under step 1.1, let ε>0. Choose N so that ∫∣fn−f∣ dμ<ε/2 for n≥N. Apply [L6] to f and to the finitely many functions f0,…,fN−1, and let δ be the minimum of the resulting positive numbers. Then μ(E)<δ implies ∫E∣fn∣ dμ<ε for every n<N, while for n≥N one has ∫E∣fn∣ dμ≤∫E∣f∣ dμ+∫∣fn−f∣ dμ<ε. So [L3] yields uniform integrability.

2.2step 1.2L1L2L3L6choosealgebra

Let ε>0. Choose δ>0 such that μ(E)<δ implies both sup⁡n∫E∣fn∣ dμ<ε/3 and ∫E∣f∣ dμ<ε/3; the first uses step 1.2 together with [L3], and the second uses [L6]. Choose η>0 with ημ(X)<ε/3. Since fn→f in measure, there is N such that μ(Bn)<δ for n≥N, where Bn:={∣fn−f∣>η}. Then for n≥N, ∫∣fn−f∣ dμ≤∫Bn∣fn∣ dμ+∫Bn∣f∣ dμ+∫X∖Bnη dμ<ε. So fn→f in L1(μ).

3.1step 2.2L5L7L8choosealgebra

Assume now that μ is sigma-finite, that fn→f in measure, and that the family {fn} is uniformly integrable and tight. Let ε>0. By [L8], choose a measurable set E with μ(E)<+∞ and sup⁡n∫X∖E∣fn∣ dμ<ε/4. Because fn→f in measure on X, the restricted sequence converges in measure on E as well, and uniform integrability persists on E. Therefore step 2.2 applied on the finite measure space E gives f∣E∈L1(μ) and ∫E∣fn−f∣ dμ→0. By [L5], after passing to a subsequence if necessary we may assume fnk→f almost everywhere on X. Applying [L7] to the nonnegative functions ∣fnk∣1X∖E gives ∫X∖E∣f∣ dμ≤lim inf⁡k→∞∫X∖E∣fnk∣ dμ≤ε/4. Hence f∈L1(μ). For all large n one has ∫E∣fn−f∣ dμ<ε/2, and then ∫∣fn−f∣ dμ≤∫E∣fn−f∣ dμ+∫X∖E∣fn∣ dμ+∫X∖E∣f∣ dμ<ε. So fn→f in L1(μ).

4.1step 1.1step 2.1step 1.2step 2.2step 3.1∎

Step 1.1 proves the forward finite implication, steps 1.2 and 2.2 prove the reverse finite implication, and step 3.1 proves the sigma-finite tight form.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

24 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