Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
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.

✓ 5 results · all verified · 3 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 2 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Finite-Sample Point Estimation

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

This page defines bias, mean squared error and uniformly minimum-variance unbiased estimation, proves the bias–variance identity, and establishes the Rao–Blackwell and Lehmann–Scheffé theorems with finite-moment hypotheses. It keeps squared-error risk distinct from unbiasedness and states the common conditional-law, completeness and choice assumptions needed by the optimality results.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passOpen item page →

Integration against a Dirac measure evaluates at its point

Statement

Let A be a sigma-algebra on a set X, let x0∈X, and let δx0 be the Dirac probability measure on (X,A). For every nonnegative A-measurable f:X→[0,+∞], ∫Xf dδx0=f(x0).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A measurable space, a point x0 in it, its Dirac measure, and a nonnegative measurable function f.

[F1]

δx0(A)=1 if x0∈A and 0 otherwise, and this set function is a probability measure on (X,A). (The Dirac set function at a point, A Dirac set function is a probability measure)

[F2]

A nonnegative simple function has a finite representation by disjoint measurable sets, and its simple integral is the sum of its values times the set measures. (Nonnegative simple measurable functions, The integral of a nonnegative simple function, The nonnegative integral agrees with the simple integral on simple functions)

[F3]

Every nonnegative measurable function is the pointwise increasing limit of nonnegative simple functions. (Every nonnegative measurable function is the increasing limit of simple measurable functions)

[F4]

Increasing limits pass through the nonnegative Lebesgue integral. (Monotone convergence for the integral)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2

If s=∑j=1mcj1Aj is a nonnegative simple function with pairwise disjoint Aj∈A, then [F1] and [F2] give ∫s dδx0=∑jcjδx0(Aj)=∑jcj1Aj(x0)=s(x0).

2.1F3F4step 1.1choose∎

Choose the increasing simple approximation sn↑f from [F3]. By [F4] and step 1.1, ∫f dδx0=lim⁡n∫sn dδx0=lim⁡nsn(x0)=f(x0), including when the value is +∞.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

A statistic induces a deterministic probability kernel

Statement

Let T:(X,A)→(D,G) be a measurable statistic, where G is a sigma-algebra on the action set (Statistics and estimators). Then KT(x,B):=δT(x)(B)=1B(T(x)),x∈X, B∈G, is a probability kernel and therefore a deterministic randomized procedure.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A measurable statistic T from the data measurable space to the action measurable space.

[F1]

A statistic is a measurable map; hence T−1(B)∈A for every B∈G. (Statistics and estimators)

[F2]

For each point d∈D, the Dirac set function δd is a probability measure on (D,G). (The Dirac set function at a point, A Dirac set function is a probability measure)

[F3]

A probability kernel has probability-measure sections and measurable event evaluations. (Measure kernel and probability kernel)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenF2

For each x∈X, the section B↦KT(x,B)=δT(x)(B) is the probability measure δT(x) by [F2].

2.1F1F3step 1.1∎

For each B∈G, x↦KT(x,B)=1B(T(x))=1T−1(B)(x) is A-measurable by [F1]. Thus both clauses of the kernel definition [F3] hold, so KT is a probability kernel, hence a deterministic randomized procedure.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Bias and mean squared error

Definition

Let E=((X,A),Θ,(Pθ)θ∈Θ) be a statistical experiment: a measurable data space, a parameter-label set, and a family of probability measures on the data space. Let ψ:Θ→R be its real-valued target function (estimand). An estimator T:X→R is a measurable statistic with the real Borel target (Statistics and estimators). At a parameter θ for which T is integrable under Pθ, its bias is Bias⁡θ(T):=Eθ[T]−ψ(θ).

Its mean squared error (MSE) is the extended nonnegative number MSE⁡θ(T):=Eθ[(T−ψ(θ))2]∈[0,+∞]. This is the risk of the deterministic rule induced by T under squared-error loss L(θ,a)=(a−ψ(θ))2: its Dirac kernel is constructed in A statistic induces a deterministic probability kernel, and the risk supplier's integral formula reduces to the displayed expectation when the action is T(x) by Integration against a Dirac measure evaluates at its point (Loss functions and risk). For each fixed θ, this loss is Borel in the real action a; no measurable structure on Θ or measurability of ψ is required. The expectation convention is Expectation of a nonnegative or integrable random variable. If T is square-integrable under Pθ, then its variance is defined by Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space and this MSE is finite. Bias is not defined at parameters where T is not integrable.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Bias–variance decomposition

Statement

In a statistical experiment, let ψ:Θ→R and let T be a real estimator with Eθ[T2]<∞. For every θ, MSE⁡θ(T)=Var⁡θ(T)+Bias⁡θ(T)2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A statistical experiment, a real estimand ψ, and an estimator T that is square-integrable under each parameter law considered.

[F1]

Bias is Eθ[T]−ψ(θ) and MSE is Eθ[(T−ψ(θ))2]. (Bias and mean squared error)

[F2]

For square-integrable real T, Var⁡θ(T)=Eθ[(T−EθT)2]. (Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space)

[F3]

The Lebesgue integral is linear on finite linear combinations of integrable functions. (The Lebesgue integral is linear on L1(μ))

[F4]

Cauchy–Schwarz gives ∫∣fg∣ dμ≤∥f∥2∥g∥2 for square-integrable f,g. (Cauchy-Schwarz inequality for L2)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenF1F4

Fix θ. Since Pθ is a probability measure, the constant 1 has L2(Pθ) norm 1. Applying [F4] to T and 1 gives Eθ∣T∣≤(Eθ[T2])1/2<∞. Put μ=Eθ[T] and b=μ−ψ(θ). Then [F1] gives b=Bias⁡θ(T) and T−ψ(θ)=(T−μ)+b.

2.1step 1.1F1F2F3algebra∎

Since T,μ∈L1(Pθ) by step 1.1 and Pθ(X)=1, [F3] gives Eθ[T−μ]=Eθ[T]−μEθ[1]=0. For every finite c, (T−c)2≤2T2+2c2, so the centered square and squared error are integrable. Expanding (T−ψ(θ))2=((T−μ)+b)2 now gives MSE⁡θ(T)=Eθ[(T−μ)2]+b2=Var⁡θ(T)+Bias⁡θ(T)2 by [F1] and [F2].

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Unbiased estimators and UMVU estimators

Definition

Let T be an estimator of a real estimand ψ in a statistical experiment. It is unbiased if it is integrable under every Pθ and Eθ[T]=ψ(θ)for every θ∈Θ. Equivalently, its bias from Bias and mean squared error is zero at every parameter. It is a finite-variance unbiased estimator if it is unbiased and square-integrable under every Pθ.

A finite-variance unbiased estimator T is uniformly minimum-variance unbiased (UMVU) for ψ if, for every θ∈Θ and every other finite-variance unbiased estimator U of the same estimand, Var⁡θ(T)≤Var⁡θ(U). The same estimator must satisfy these inequalities throughout the parameter space; the definition asserts no existence of a UMVU estimator. Variance has the meaning in Moments, variance, and covariance on a probability space.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Rao–Blackwell theorem for scalar finite-variance estimators

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice as in the library conditional-expectation convention. Let E=((X,A),Θ,(Pθ)) have standard-Borel data space, let S be standard Borel, and let S:X→S be a sufficient statistic. Here sufficiency uses a supplied common kernel K(s,⋅) that is a regular conditional law of the data given S=s under every Pθ and does not depend on θ (Sufficient statistics). For Borel B⊆S, write PθS(B):=Pθ(S−1(B)) for the pushforward law of S. Let ψ:Θ→R and let U be a measurable real estimator with Eθ[U]=ψ(θ) and Eθ[U2]<∞ for every θ.

There is a single Borel function g:S→R, independent of θ, such that g(S) is a version of Eθ[U∣σ(S)] for every θ. It is unbiased, finite-variance, and Var⁡θ(g(S))≤Var⁡θ(U)(θ∈Θ). For each θ, equality holds exactly when U is σ(S)-measurable Pθ-almost surely.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A standard-Borel experiment and statistic space, a sufficient statistic with the supplied common regular conditional kernel described in the Statement, AC, and an unbiased estimator U with finite second moment under every Pθ.

[F1]

A finite-variance unbiased estimator is integrable, has expectation ψ(θ) at every parameter, and has the variance convention stated in the UMVU definition. (Unbiased estimators and UMVU estimators)

[L1]

Sufficiency supplies one probability kernel K from the standard-Borel statistic space to the standard-Borel data space such that, for every parameter θ, data event A, and statistic event B, Pθ(A∩S−1(B))=∫BK(s,A)PθS(ds). The same kernel is fixed independently of θ. (Sufficient statistics)

[F2]

For a probability kernel, integrating a nonnegative measurable function gives a measurable function of the input, with the corresponding iterated-integral identity. (A randomized procedure has a measurable action law)

[F3]

Positive/negative parts, absolute values, and the finite piecewise combinations used to define g preserve measurability. (Closure properties of measurable functions used by the integral)

[F4]

Nonnegative measurable functions admit increasing simple approximations. (Every nonnegative measurable function is the increasing limit of simple measurable functions)

[F5]

The RCD identity for indicators extends to nonnegative increasing limits by monotone convergence and finite linearity on L1. (Monotone convergence for the integral, The Lebesgue integral is linear on L1(μ))

[F6]

The nonnegative integral is monotone, so ∫u±dK≤∫∣u∣dK. (Monotonicity and nonnegative homogeneity of the nonnegative integral)

[F7]

Every event in σ(S) is S−1(B) for a Borel statistic-space event B. (The sigma-algebra generated by a function)

[F8]

A conditional-expectation version is measurable, integrable, and has the same event integrals on the conditioning sigma-algebra. (Conditional expectation given a sigma algebra)

[F9]

Under AC, versions with the same event integrals determine one almost-sure class. (Conditional expectation as an ae class)

[F10]

Conditional expectation maps L2 into L2. (Conditional lp contraction)

[F11]

Conditional expectation preserves ordinary expectation. (Basic algebra and order properties of conditional expectation)

[F12]

Under AC, the conditional-expectation class of an L2 input is its orthogonal projection onto the L2 conditioning subspace. (Conditional expectation is the l2 orthogonal projection)

[F13]

The Axiom of Choice is required by the cited conditional-expectation and L2 projection interfaces. (The Axiom of Choice)

[F14]

A nonnegative integrable function with zero integral is zero almost everywhere. (A nonnegative measurable function has integral 0 exactly when it vanishes almost everywhere)

[F15]

A randomized procedure is a parameter-independent probability kernel from an experiment's data space to its measurable action space. (Randomized procedures as probability kernels)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenL1F2F3F6F15construct

Write u for the measurable function defining U. For each θ, PθS is a probability measure: preimages under the measurable map S preserve the empty set, disjoint countable unions, and the whole space. By [L1], K is a parameter-independent probability kernel from the statistic space to the data space, so it is a randomized procedure for the pushforward experiment by [F15]. Thus [F2] and [F3] show that h+(s)=∫u+dK(s,⋅), h−(s)=∫u−dK(s,⋅), and r(s)=∫∣u∣dK(s,⋅) are Borel. Let g=h+−h− where r<∞ and g=0 elsewhere; [F6] makes both terms finite on this Borel set, and [F3] makes g Borel.

2.1givenL1F1F4F5F6F7F8F9F13step 1.1

Fix θ and a Borel statistic event B. For nonnegative simple functions of the data, [L1] and finite linearity give ∫B∫s(x)K(t,dx)PθS(dt)=Eθ[1{S∈B}s(X)]. Approximate u+ and u− increasingly by simple functions using [F4]; [F5] passes each equality to the limit. Applying the same identity to ∣u∣ with B=S gives Eθr(S)=Eθ∣U∣<∞. If N={r(S)=+∞} had positive probability, then m1N≤r(S) for every positive integer m, so [F6] would give mPθ(N)≤Eθr(S) for all m, a contradiction; thus r(S)<∞ almost surely. By [F6], h+(S),h−(S)≤r(S), so ∣g(S)∣≤2r(S) and g(S) is integrable. The two finite event-integral identities may therefore be subtracted, giving Eθ[1{S∈B}g(S)]=Eθ[1{S∈B}U]. By [F7], [F8], and [F9], g(S) is a version of Eθ[U∣σ(S)] as an almost-sure class for every θ.

3.1F1F10F11F13step 2.1

By [F10], g(S) is square-integrable under each Pθ. By [F11], Eθ[g(S)]=Eθ[U]=ψ(θ); hence it is an unbiased finite-variance estimator.

4.1F1F12F13step 3.1algebra

Fix θ. The residual U−g(S) is orthogonal in L2(Pθ) to every square-integrable σ(S)-measurable function by [F12]. By step 3.1 and ψ(θ)∈R, g(S)−ψ(θ) is such a function. Expanding the centered square gives Var⁡θ(U)=Eθ[(U−g(S))2]+Var⁡θ(g(S)). The first term is nonnegative, proving the variance inequality.

5.1step 4.1F12F14∎

By [F14], equality in step 4.1 holds exactly when U=g(S) Pθ-almost surely. Since g(S) is σ(S)-measurable, this is precisely almost-sure σ(S)-measurability: if U has such a representative, its L2 class lies in the projection subspace and [F12] fixes it.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passOpen item page →

Lehmann–Scheffé theorem

Statement

Assume AC as in the library conditional-expectation convention. Let E=((X,A),Θ,(Pθ)θ∈Θ) be a statistical experiment with standard-Borel data space. Let S:(X,A)→(S,B) be a statistic with standard-Borel target, sufficient under the common conditional-law interface of Sufficient statistics and complete under Complete statistics. Let ψ:Θ→R be a real-valued estimand and let g:S→R be Borel, with g(S) unbiased for ψ and of finite variance under every Pθ. Then g(S) is the unique UMVU estimator of ψ: for every finite-variance unbiased estimator U, Var⁡θ(g(S))≤Var⁡θ(U)(θ∈Θ), and any other UMVU estimator equals g(S) Pθ-almost surely for each θ.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC, a standard-Borel experiment, a complete sufficient statistic S, and a finite-variance unbiased estimator g(S) of a real estimand ψ.

[F1]

UMVU compares the variances of unbiased finite-variance estimators at every parameter. (Unbiased estimators and UMVU estimators)

[F2]

For any unbiased finite-variance estimator U, Rao–Blackwellization by S is an unbiased finite-variance function of S, has no larger variance, and equality at θ holds exactly when U is σ(S)-measurable Pθ-almost surely. (Rao–Blackwell theorem for scalar finite-variance estimators)

[L1]

Sufficiency supplies one probability kernel K from the standard-Borel statistic space to the standard-Borel data space such that, for every parameter θ, data event A, and statistic event B, Pθ(A∩S−1(B))=∫BK(s,A)PθS(ds). The same kernel is fixed independently of θ. (Sufficient statistics)

[L2]

Completeness says that for every measurable real-valued h(S) integrable under every Pθ, if Eθh(S)=0 for every θ, then h(S)=0 Pθ-almost surely for every θ. (Complete statistics)

[F3]

The conditional-expectation results used by Rao–Blackwell assume AC, which is stated in that theorem and carried here. (The Axiom of Choice)

[F4]

An integrable G-measurable function is its own conditional-expectation version given G. An integrable function equal to it almost surely has the same conditional-expectation class, and versions determine one almost-sure class. (Conditional expectation given a sigma algebra, Conditional expectation as an ae class)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2L1F3

Let U be any finite-variance unbiased estimator of ψ. The sufficient-statistic hypothesis [L1] permits applying [F2]. Under the stated AC branch [F3], there is one Borel function uS:S→R, independent of θ, such that uS(S) is a version of Eθ[U∣σ(S)] for every θ. Rao–Blackwell [F2] makes it unbiased and finite-variance and gives Var⁡θ(uS(S))≤Var⁡θ(U) for every θ.

2.1F1F2L2step 1.1

The difference uS(S)−g(S) is integrable, is a function of S, and has expectation zero for every θ. Completeness [L2] therefore gives uS(S)=g(S) Pθ-almost surely for every θ. Substitution into step 1.1 proves Var⁡θ(g(S))≤Var⁡θ(U) for every θ, so g(S) is UMVU.

3.1F1F2F4step 1.1step 2.1∎

If V is another UMVU estimator, applying steps 1.1 and 2.1 to V gives its Rao–Blackwellized function vS(S)=g(S) almost surely for each θ. Since both V and g(S) are UMVU, their variances agree at each θ. The equality condition in [F2] makes V σ(S)-measurable Pθ-almost surely; by [F4], such a representative is its own conditional expectation, so uniqueness gives V=vS(S)=g(S) almost surely.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

None yet.

Sources