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.

Finite generator master equations and uniformization

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

This page uses column probability vectors: Qij is the rate from source j to destination i, off-diagonal entries are nonnegative, and columns sum to zero. The finite master equation has the exact matrix-exponential and Poisson-uniformization solutions. A budgeted implementation time-splits large Poisson parameters, uses a proved geometric tail bound, and reports any arithmetic error separately; a rounded subtraction from one is not a tail certificate.

For a countable pure-jump chain, finite-state projection is conditional on a given nonexplosive process. Killing at the first exit yields a subprobability on the finite set; adding an absorbing cemetery state retains escaped mass. The embedded killed-vector ℓ1 error is exactly that lost mass, and the cemetery lift gives a bounded-observable bound with the oscillation factor stated. A finite adaptive list may certify a projection or return inconclusive; no claim is made that some finite projection meets every tolerance.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

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

Finite column generator

Definition

Let S={0,1,…,n−1} with n≥1. Identify its real matrices with Mn(R), the finite matrix space with row and column indices in S from The vector space Mm×n(F):=F m×n of m by n matrices over a field, with entrywise operations, and use the matrix-product and identity conventions of Rectangular matrix multiplication and the identity matrix In, including zero-sized shapes. A finite column generator on S is a real matrix Q=(qij)∈Mn(R) satisfying

qij≥0(i≠j),∑i<nqij=0(j<n).

The column index j is the source state and the row index i is the destination state: for i≠j, qij is the transition rate from j to i. The exit rate from j is

rj:=−qjj=∑i≠jqij≥0.

A column probability vector is p∈Rn with pi≥0 for each i and ∑i<npi=1. A subprobability vector has the same coordinatewise nonnegativity and has coordinate sum at most one. These conventions are used throughout this page.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Finite matrix exponential series and its identities

Statement

For a finite real square matrix A, define

etA:=∑k=0∞tkAkk!.

This series converges absolutely and uniformly for t in every bounded interval. It is differentiable with ddtetA=AetA=etAA and e0A=I. If finite square matrices A and B commute, then eAeB=eA+B.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite real square matrix A, and, for the product identity, finite real square matrices A,B with AB=BA.

[F1]

For matrices of positive sizes, the induced matrix 1-norm is a norm (so is absolutely homogeneous and satisfies the triangle inequality) and is submultiplicative: ∥CD∥1≤∥C∥1∥D∥1. (The matrix norm induced by a published vector p-norm, Induced matrix norms are compatible with matrix-vector multiplication, submultiplicative, and satisfy ||I|| = 1)

[F2]

The scalar series ∑k≥0xk/k! converges absolutely for every real x and defines ex. (The real exponential function and the number e by a power series, The exponential series converges absolutely for every real argument)

[F3]

Matrix multiplication is associative and unital and distributes over matrix addition; it is compatible with scalar multiplication, including all zero-sized shapes. (Matrix multiplication is associative, unital, distributive, and compatible with scalar multiplication)

[F4]

Since Mn(R) is a monoid by [F3], its natural powers satisfy A0=In and Ak+1=AkA. (Powers gn: natural exponents in a monoid and integer exponents in a group, with g0=e)

[F5]

For n≥1, the induced matrix 1-norm is the maximum absolute column sum. In particular, ∣Cij∣≤∥C∥1 for each entry. (The induced 1-norm is the maximum column sum and the induced infinity-norm is the maximum row sum)

[F6]

Factorials satisfy 0!=1 and (k+1)!=(k+1)k! and are nonzero; their canonical real images, used for the scalar denominators below, are nonzero. (The factorial n! and the falling factorial nk‾, defined by recursion in N, The real exponential function and the number e by a power series)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenF3F4algebra

If A has size 0×0, the matrix space has one element, which is both 0 and I0; every partial sum in the definition is this same matrix. Thus etA=I0 for every t, its derivative is the zero matrix, and the derivative identities, initial value, and commuting-product identity all hold because every product and sum is the unique empty matrix. Hence assume below that A has size n×n with n≥1.

1.2givenF1F2F4F5inductionalgebra

Put M=∥A∥1. By induction using [F1] and [F4], ∥Ak∥1≤Mk for every k≥0. For ∣t∣≤T, [F5] then bounds each entry of tkAk/k! by (TM)k/k!. The scalar majorant converges by [F2], so each entry series converges absolutely and uniformly on [−T,T]; its entrywise sums define a matrix E(t). Each column has only n entries, so the maximum-column-sum formula [F5] bounds the norm of a matrix tail by n times the scalar majorant tail. Therefore the matrix series converges in induced 1-norm uniformly on [−T,T]. Since T was arbitrary, it converges locally uniformly and defines etA=E(t).

1.3givenF3F4F6inductionalgebra

Suppose A,B∈Mn(R) commute. For each r≥0 set Dr:=∑m=0rAmBr−m/(m!(r−m)!). Induction from AB=BA and [F3] gives BsA=ABs for every s≥0. Distributing Dr(A+B) and using this commutation, the coefficient of AjBr+1−j is 1/(j!(r−j)!)+1/((j−1)!(r+1−j)!) for 1≤j≤r, which equals (r+1)/(j!(r+1−j)!) by [F6]; for j=0 and j=r+1 the single endpoint coefficient has that same value by (r+1)!=(r+1)r!. Thus Dr(A+B)=(r+1)Dr+1. Since D0=In, induction, the recursive power law [F4], and the nonzero factorial images in [F6] give Dr=(A+B)r/r! for every r.

2.1givenF1F2F4F6step 1.2algebra

Fix c∈R and choose R>∣c∣. If ∣h∣<R−∣c∣, then ∣c∣,∣c+h∣<R; for k≥1, the factorization (c+h)k−ck=h∑j=0k−1(c+h)k−1−jcj bounds the norm of the kth matrix-series difference quotient by MkRk−1/(k−1)!, and the same bound holds for the kth proposed derivative term ck−1Ak/(k−1)!. The sum of these bounds is M∑j≥0(MR)j/j!<∞ by [F2]. For each finite partial sum, the factorization also shows that its difference quotient tends to the finite sum of the proposed derivative terms, using (k+1)!=(k+1)k! from [F6]. For each fixed nonzero h, the full difference quotient is the limit of those of the finite partial sums by [step 1.2]; the two uniform tail bounds let us first choose a large partial sum and then take h→0. Consequently E is differentiable at c and E′(c)=∑k≥1ck−1Ak/(k−1)!.

2.2givenstep 1.2step 1.3F1F2F3F4algebra

Apply the power bound and convergence argument of step 1.2 to B and A+B as well. Put am=∥A∥1m/m! and bn=∥B∥1n/n!; both scalar series converge by [F2]. The finite product EN(A)EN(B) expands by [F3] as the square sum over 0≤m,n≤N of AmBn/(m!n!), whose term norms are at most ambn by [F1] and [F4]. Its difference from the triangular sum over m+n≤N has norm at most (∑m>N/2am)(∑nbn)+(∑mam)(∑n>N/2bn), which tends to zero; every omitted pair has m>N/2 or n>N/2. By step 1.2, EN(A)EN(B)→eAeB (matrix multiplication is continuous by [F1]); by step 1.3 the triangular sum is ∑r=0N(A+B)r/r!, which converges to eA+B. Therefore eAeB=eA+B.

3.1step 1.2step 2.1F1F3F4inductionalgebra

From [F3] and the recursive power definition [F4], induction gives Ak=AAk−1=Ak−1A for every k≥1. Hence the derivative series in step 2.1 is the limit of both A∑j=0NcjAj/j! and (∑j=0NcjAj/j!)A as N→∞. Submultiplicativity [F1] makes multiplication by fixed A continuous, so these limits are AE(c) and E(c)A. At c=0, all positive-degree terms vanish and the constant term is A0=In. Thus E′(c)=AE(c)=E(c)A and E(0)=In.

4.1step 1.1step 1.2step 2.1step 3.1step 1.3step 2.2∎

Step 1.1 covers the zero-sized matrix case. For n≥1, steps 1.2 and 2.1 establish convergence and differentiation, step 3.1 gives the derivative identities and initial value, and steps 1.3 and 2.2 prove the commuting-product identity. Thus every claim in the Statement holds.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

A geometric upper bound for a Poisson right tail

Statement

For N∼Pois⁡(μ) with μ≥0 and integer K≥0, write τK(μ):=P(N>K). If μ=0, then τK(μ)=0. If μ>0 and μ<K+2, then

τK(μ)≤e−μμK+1(K+1)!(1−μ/(K+2)).

The right side is a geometric majorant computed from a Poisson mass, not a floating-point subtraction of a rounded partial sum from one.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite parameter μ≥0 and integer K≥0.

[F1]

For μ>0, P(N=k)=e−μμk/k!; at μ=0 the law is concentrated at zero. (The scalar Poisson count law)

[F2]

The masses in The scalar Poisson count law normalize to one, so P(N>K)=∑k>KP(N=k). (Normalization, moments, and generating function of the Poisson count law)

[F3]

Factorials satisfy (k+1)!=(k+1)k! for k≥0. (The factorial n! and the falling factorial nk‾, defined by recursion in N)

[F4]

For 0≤ρ<1, the geometric series satisfies ∑j≥0ρj=1/(1−ρ). (For ∣r∣<1, ∑k≥0rk=1/(1−r), and for ∣r∣≥1 the series diverges)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenF1F3algebra

If μ=0, [F1] gives N=0 almost surely and K≥0, so the tail is zero. Now suppose μ>0 and put wk=e−μμk/k! and ρ=μ/(K+2). The hypothesis gives 0<ρ<1, and [F1]–[F3] yield wk+1/wk=μ/(k+1)≤ρ for every k≥K+1.

2.1step 1.1induction

Iterating the ratio bound gives wK+1+j≤wK+1ρj for each integer j≥0.

3.1F2F4step 2.1algebra∎

By [F2] and step 2.1, τK(μ)=∑j≥0wK+1+j≤wK+1∑j≥0ρj=wK+1/(1−ρ) by [F4]; substituting the values of wK+1 and ρ proves the stated bound.

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

Given countable nonexplosive pure-jump chain with finite rates

Definition

Let S be a nonempty at most countable state space, and let q(x,y)≥0 be a finite transition rate for each pair x,y∈S with x≠y. For a nonnegative family indexed by an at most countable set, its sum is the supremum of its finite subsums, including the empty subsum 0; if these subsums are unbounded, the sum is +∞. Require the total exit rate

λ(x):=∑y≠xq(x,y)

to be finite for every x. The associated column rate matrix convention is Qyx=q(x,y) for y≠x and Qxx=−λ(x); thus the source state indexes the column. No finite-dimensional matrix is asserted for an infinite S.

A given time-homogeneous pure-jump Markov chain with rates q is a process X=(Xt)t≥0 with values in S whose conditional future law given its history depends only on its present state and elapsed time, and whose paths are constant between successive jumps. Its transition kernels Kt depend only on elapsed time, satisfy K0=I, and obey Ks+t=KsKt using the composition (KsKt)(x,A):=∫SKt(z,A) Ks(x,dz) of Composition of probability kernels. At state x with λ(x)>0, its holding time has survival e−λ(x)t and its next state is y≠x with probability q(x,y)/λ(x), independently of that holding time; at λ(x)=0 it stays at x. It is nonexplosive when almost surely it has only finitely many state changes on every bounded time interval.

The chain and nonexplosion are input hypotheses in this item and in the projection results below. This definition does not construct a chain from an arbitrary countable rate matrix and proves no general nonexplosion claim.

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

Countable-state l1 distance for mass functions

Definition

Let S be at most countable. For nonnegative functions a,b:S→[0,∞) with finite total masses, define

∥a−b∥ℓ1(S):=∑x∈S∣a(x)−b(x)∣.

For a nonnegative family, ∑x∈S means the supremum of its finite subsums; this agrees with the ordinary series under any enumeration of S. The distance is finite because ∣a(x)−b(x)∣≤a(x)+b(x) termwise, so ∥a−b∥ℓ1(S)≤∑xa(x)+∑xb(x). In particular it is defined for probability and subprobability mass functions.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

The finite uniformized matrix is column stochastic

Statement

Let Q be a finite column generator and let ν≥max⁡j<nrj. If ν>0, then

P:=I+Q/ν

has nonnegative entries and every column sums to one. If ν=0, then Q=0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite column generator Q=(qij)i,j<n, its exit rates rj, and ν≥max⁡jrj.

[F1]

Finite column generator: qij≥0 for i≠j, rj=−qjj=∑i≠jqij, and ∑iqij=0 for every column j.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenF1algebra

Suppose ν>0. For i≠j, Pij=qij/ν≥0 by [F1]. For a diagonal entry, Pjj=1−rj/ν≥0 because rj≤ν. Thus every entry is nonnegative.

2.1F1step 1.1algebra

For each source column j, [F1] gives ∑iPij=∑i(δij+qij/ν)=1+ν−1∑iqij=1. Hence P is column stochastic.

3.1givenF1algebra∎

If ν=0, the bound 0≤rj≤ν gives rj=0 for every j. Each finite sum rj=∑i≠jqij consists of nonnegative terms, so each off-diagonal entry in column j is zero; the column-sum condition then gives qjj=0. Therefore Q=0.

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

Killed finite-state projection and cemetery lift

Definition

Let X be a given nonexplosive chain as in Given countable nonexplosive pure-jump chain with finite rates, with initial law p0 on S, and let F⊆S be finite and nonempty. Its first exit time from F is

τF:=inf⁡{s≥0:Xs∉F},

with τF=0 when X0∉F. Adjoin a new state †∉S and define the killed projection Yt=Xt for t<τF and Yt=† for t≥τF. The killed mass vector is uF(t,x):=P(Yt=x) for x∈F, and the cemetery mass is cF(t):=P(Yt=†). Initially, uF(0,x)=p0(x) for x∈F and cF(0)=p0(S∖F).

For x∈F let λ(x)=∑y≠xq(x,y). The killed principal subgenerator on F has entries (QF)yx=q(x,y) for y≠x in F and (QF)xx=−λ(x); its column sum is −∑y∉Fq(x,y). The cemetery lift is the finite matrix Q~F on F∪{†} with these same entries on F, with

Q~†x=λ(x)−∑y∈Fy≠xq(x,y)=∑y∉Fq(x,y)(x∈F),Q~x†=0(x∈F),Q~††=0.

Every column of Q~F sums to zero and its off-diagonal entries are nonnegative, so it is a finite column generator in the sense of Finite column generator. The cemetery state is absorbing; trajectories that return to F after their first exit remain at † in this projection.

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

Finite master equation and uniformization formula

Statement

Let Q be an n×n finite column generator, let p0 be a column probability vector, and let t≥0. The unique differentiable solution of

p′(t)=Qp(t),p(0)=p0,

is p(t)=etQp0. If ν>0 and ν≥max⁡jrj, put P=I+Q/ν; then

p(t)=∑k=0∞e−νt(νt)kk!Pkp0.

Each term Pkp0 is a probability vector, and the displayed Poisson mixture is a probability vector. If ν=0, then Q=0 and p(t)=p0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite column generator Q, a column probability vector p0, time t≥0, and an admissible uniformization rate ν≥0.

[F1]

Finite column generator: Q has nonnegative off-diagonal entries, zero column sums, and exit rates rj=−qjj.

[F2]

The finite uniformized matrix is column stochastic: if ν>0 dominates every exit rate, P=I+Q/ν is column stochastic; if ν=0, Q=0.

[F3]

The scalar Poisson count law: for λ≥0, the Poisson mass at k is e−λλk/k! when λ>0 and the law is concentrated at zero when λ=0.

[F4]

Normalization, moments, and generating function of the Poisson count law: the finite-parameter Poisson masses sum to one.

[F5]

Finite matrix exponential series and its identities: etQ has its locally convergent factorial series, derivative QetQ, and the commuting-matrix product identity.

[F6]

The mean value theorem, as the case g(x)=x of Cauchy's: for f continuous on [a,b] with a<b and differentiable on (a,b) there is c∈(a,b) with f(b)−f(a)=f′(c)(b−a): a real function continuous on a closed interval and differentiable on its interior has endpoint difference equal to its derivative at some interior point times the interval length.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenF1F2algebrainduction

Suppose ν>0. By [F2], P is nonnegative and column stochastic. If x is a column probability vector, then Px is nonnegative and ∑i(Px)i=∑j(∑iPij)xj=∑jxj=1. Induction gives that Pkp0 is a probability vector for every k≥0.

1.2F2F3F5algebra

By [F3] and the matrix series of [F5], the uniformization sum equals e−νteνtPp0. The power series gives e−νtI=e−νtI; since −νtI commutes with νtP, [F5] gives e−νtIeνtP=eνt(P−I)=etQ using Q=ν(P−I). This proves the displayed identity.

1.3givenF5algebra

By [F5], p(t)=etQp0 has derivative QetQp0=Qp(t) and initial value p0.

1.4givenF5F6F7algebra

Let u be any other differentiable solution with the same initial vector and put z(t)=e−tQu(t). The product rule [F7], the equation u′=Qu, and commutation of Q with e−tQ from [F5] give z′(t)=0. If t>0, [F6] applied to each coordinate of z on [0,t] gives z(t)=z(0)=p0; if t=0 this follows from the initial value directly. Multiplying by etQ and using [F5] gives u(t)=etQp0. Thus the solution is unique.

2.1givenF3F4step 1.1algebra

The weights in [F3] at parameter νt sum to one by [F4]. Hence the nonnegative weighted sum of the probability vectors from step 1.1 is itself a probability vector.

3.1givenF2step 1.4algebra∎

If ν=0, [F2] gives Q=0. The constant function p(t)=p0 solves the equation. The uniqueness argument in step 1.4 applied with Q=0 shows that every solution with this initial value equals it. This proves the zero-rate case.

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableOpen item page →

Budgeted uniformization accumulation with time splitting

Definition

Inputs. A finite column generator Q, a column probability vector p0, t≥0, an admissible rate ν≥max⁡jrj, a positive tail budget ε, a positive integer total-term cap B, and either exact real arithmetic or a validated arithmetic backend. In a rounded execution, the backend must certify the scalar control decisions defining m and μ, each finite tail-budget comparison, and an outward upper bound T≥mGK(μ); it must also return a certified ℓ1 error bound Ealg:=∥p^−Rμ,Kmp0∥1 for its computed vector. The vector bound includes any arithmetic error from the weights, time split, and matrix-free P actions. If any scalar or vector certificate is unavailable, return certificate-unavailable.

Outputs. Return (p0,0,0) when ν=0 or t=0. Otherwise return budget-exhausted or certificate-unavailable, or an approximate vector p^ and certified bounds (T,Ealg) for which ∥p(t)−p^∥1≤T+Ealg. Here T≥mGK(μ) is an outward-certified Poisson-tail upper bound and Ealg bounds the arithmetic/algebraic error relative to the exact truncated accumulation. In exact real arithmetic, T=mGK(μ) and Ealg=0.

Procedure. For νt>0, set m=⌈νt⌉ and μ=νt/m, so 0<μ≤1. A rounded backend must certify these values and inequalities; if it cannot, return certificate-unavailable. If m>B, return budget-exhausted. Set Kmax⁡=⌊B/m⌋−1. Search the finite list K=0,1,…,Kmax⁡ for a member satisfying

GK(μ):=e−μμK+1(K+1)!(1−μ/(K+2))≤ε/m.

In rounded arithmetic, accept a candidate only when a validated upper enclosure proves the displayed inequality, and set T=ε, copying the already certified accepted tail budget. This is an exact bound because the accepted comparison certifies mGK(μ)≤ε. If no candidate works, return budget-exhausted when the comparisons certify that every candidate fails, and certificate-unavailable when they do not decide the search. In exact arithmetic set T=mGK(μ). Set P=I+Q/ν and x0=p0. For each substep j=1,…,m, initialize v0=xj−1, w0=e−μ, and xj=w0v0. For k=0,…,K−1, update

vk+1=Pvk,wk+1=wkμk+1,xj←xj+wk+1vk+1.

These P actions use the exact operator-application interface of The matrix-free access model for Krylov methods: the routine supplies v↦Pv and vector additions and scalar multiples, without requiring stored matrix entries. No CSR representation, operation-count estimate, or convergence claim is part of this procedure. The exact term count is m(K+1)≤B and the certified tail bound satisfies T≤ε. Never replace a tail certificate by floating-point 1−∑k≤Kwk.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Uniformization truncation, mass loss, and arithmetic-error ledger

Statement

Let Q be a finite column generator, p0 a column probability vector, and ν>0 an admissible rate. For λ=νt and K≥0, the exact one-series partial sum

uK(t):=∑k=0Ke−λλkk!Pkp0

is nonnegative and substochastic, and its exact ℓ1 distance from p(t) is the scalar Poisson tail τK(λ)=P(Pois⁡(λ)>K). If νt>0, the budgeted algorithm sets m=⌈νt⌉ and μ=νt/m≤1, and uses Rμ,K=∑k=0Ke−μμkPk/k!. Then Rμ,Kmp0 is nonnegative and substochastic, and its exact transient ℓ1 error is

1−(∑k=0Ke−μμkk!)m≤mτK(μ)≤mGK(μ).

If a computed vector u^ has a separately certified accumulated arithmetic/algebraic error Ealg:=∥u^−Rμ,Kmp0∥1, then ∥p(t)−u^∥1≤mGK(μ)+Ealg. In rounded arithmetic, if T is a validated upper bound for mGK(μ), then ∥p(t)−u^∥1≤T+Ealg. The geometric tail certificate is not obtained by floating-point subtraction from one.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite column generator Q, a probability vector p0, an admissible ν>0, t≥0, and a finite truncation index K.

[F1]

The finite uniformized matrix is column stochastic: P=I+Q/ν is nonnegative and column stochastic.

[F2]

Finite master equation and uniformization formula: p(t)=etQp0 and etQ=∑k≥0e−νt(νt)kPk/k!.

[F3]

The scalar Poisson count law and Normalization, moments, and generating function of the Poisson count law: the weights wk(μ)=e−μμk/k! are nonnegative and sum to one.

[F4]

A geometric upper bound for a Poisson right tail: τK(μ)≤GK(μ) when μ<K+2.

[F5]

The p-norms ∥x∥p for rational p≥1, and ∥x∥∞: the vector 1-norm is ∥x∥1=∑i∣xi∣.

[F7]

Budgeted uniformization accumulation with time splitting: with m substeps, the exact truncated vector is Rμ,Kmp0, the term count is at most B, rounded output carries a validated tail upper bound T≥mGK(μ), and any approximate vector carries its separate Ealg bound.

[F8]

Finite matrix exponential series and its identities: esQetQ=e(s+t)Q for real s,t.

Proof

technique · compare the full stochastic operator with its substochastic partial sum
1.1F1F2F3algebra

For any μ>0, set Sμ=eμQ/ν=e−μeμP and Rμ,K=∑k=0Kwk(μ)Pk. By [F1], each Pk is nonnegative and column stochastic; [F2] and [F3] give Sμ=∑k≥0wk(μ)Pk with nonnegative weights summing to one. Thus Rμ,K is nonnegative with common column sum sK:=∑k=0Kwk(μ)≤1, and Sμ−Rμ,K is nonnegative with common column sum τK(μ).

2.1F1F2F3F5F6step 1.1

The induced norm formula [F6] gives ∥Sμ∥1=1, ∥Rμ,K∥1=sK, and ∥Sμ−Rμ,K∥1=τK(μ). If λ=νt=0, only the k=0 Poisson weight is nonzero, so p(t)=uK(t)=p0 and the omitted mass is zero. If λ>0, apply step 1.1 with μ=λ: (Sλ−Rλ,K)p0 is nonnegative and its coordinate sum is τK(λ); by [F5], the exact one-series ℓ1 omitted mass is therefore exactly the scalar Poisson tail.

3.1F4F5F6step 2.1algebra

In the time-split algorithm, 0<μ≤1 and K≥0, so μ<K+2 and [F4] gives τK(μ)≤GK(μ). For m substeps the telescoping identity Sμm−Rμ,Km=∑j=0m−1Sμm−1−j(Sμ−Rμ,K)Rμ,Kj, [F5]–[F6], and step 2.1 give ∥Sμm−Rμ,Km∥1≤mτK(μ)≤mGK(μ).

4.1F1F3F5F6step 3.1algebra

Every term in the telescoping identity is nonnegative, so the exact vector error on p0 is nonnegative. Each column sum of Sμm is one and each column sum of Rμ,Km is sKm; hence its ℓ1 mass is exactly 1−sKm=1−(1−τK(μ))m≤mτK(μ). This proves the exact time-split lost-mass identity and the preceding error bound.

5.1F2F5F7F8step 4.1algebra∎

Since mμ=νt, [F8] gives Sμm=etQ and [F2] gives Sμmp0=p(t), while [F7] identifies the exact truncated output as Rμ,Kmp0. The triangle inequality for the vector 1-norm [F5] therefore yields ∥p(t)−u^∥1≤∥p(t)−Rμ,Kmp0∥1+∥Rμ,Kmp0−u^∥1≤mGK(μ)+Ealg≤T+Ealg when the validated upper bound T is supplied. If νt=0, the algorithm returns p0 and both error terms are zero.

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

Finite-state killed projection has an exact lost-mass certificate

Statement

Let Xt be a given nonexplosive countable chain with rates q(x,y), initial law p0, and finite exit rates as in Given countable nonexplosive pure-jump chain with finite rates. For a finite nonempty F⊆S, let τF and Yt be the killed projection of Killed finite-state projection and cemetery lift. Write pt(x)=P(Xt=x) and uF(t,x)=P(Yt=x) for x∈F. Then

uF(t,x)=P(Xt=x,τF>t)≤pt(x),cF(t)=P(τF≤t).

If uˉF is uF extended by zero to S∖F, then

∥pt−uˉF(t)∥ℓ1(S)=cF(t).

For any bounded real observable f:S→R, put osc⁡(f):=sup⁡x∈Sf(x)−inf⁡x∈Sf(x) and extend it to the cemetery state by f(†):=(sup⁡f+inf⁡f)/2. The corresponding expectation error obeys

∣E[f(Xt)]−E[f(Yt)]∣≤12osc⁡(f)cF(t).

The finite cemetery lift Q~F in Killed finite-state projection and cemetery lift is a finite generator and L(Yt)=etQ~FL(Y0). A path that exits F and later returns contributes to the full marginal but remains at the cemetery state in the killed projection.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An already-given nonexplosive time-homogeneous pure-jump chain Xt on a countable set S, its finite transition rates, an initial probability law p0, and a finite nonempty subset F⊆S.

[F1]

Given countable nonexplosive pure-jump chain with finite rates: at state x, the holding time has rate λ(x)=∑y≠xq(x,y) and the next-state probability is q(x,y)/λ(x); the process is Markov and nonexplosive.

[F2]

Killed finite-state projection and cemetery lift: Yt=Xt before the first exit from F and Yt=† from that exit onward; its finite rate matrix is Q~F.

[F3]

Finite master equation and uniformization formula: for a finite column generator and initial probability vector, the unique master-equation solution is its matrix exponential.

[F4]

Countable-state l1 distance for mass functions: for a probability mass p and subprobability mass u, ∥p−u∥ℓ1(S)=∑x∈S∣p(x)−u(x)∣ is finite.

[F6]

The real exponential function and the number e by a power series and The exponential series converges absolutely for every real argument: ex=∑k≥0xk/k! and this series converges absolutely for every real x.

Proof

technique · identify the finite killed chain, then compare it pathwise with the full chain
1.1F1F2givenalgebra

For each source state x∈F, the off-diagonal entries of Q~F are the internal rates q(x,y) and the exit rate to † is ∑y∉Fq(x,y). Their sum is λ(x), so the diagonal −λ(x) makes the column sum zero. The cemetery column is zero. Therefore Q~F is a finite column generator.

1.2F1F2given

By the definition of Y, for each x∈F the event {Yt=x} is exactly {Xt=x,τF>t}; the complementary event {Yt=†} is {τF≤t}. Therefore uF(t,x)=P(Xt=x,τF>t)≤pt(x) and cF(t)=P(τF≤t). Returning paths are included in pt but excluded from uF by the strict first-exit condition.

2.1F1F2F5F6step 1.1algebra

Let MF=max⁡x∈Fλ(x), finite because F is finite. For 0≤h≤1, [F6] bounds the exponential series remainder by ∣e−λ(x)h−(1−λ(x)h)∣≤h2∑k≥2λ(x)k/k!, so no-jump probability is 1−λ(x)h+o(h) uniformly on finite F. If λ(x)>0, the first-jump probability 1−e−λ(x)h=λ(x)h+o(h) multiplied by the destination probability q(x,y)/λ(x) from [F1] gives rate q(x,y)h+o(h) for each y≠x; if λ(x)=0, all rates from x are zero and these probabilities are zero. For the aggregate exit event, its conditional destination probability is ax/λ(x) when λ(x)>0, so its probability is axh+o(h); when λ(x)=0, ax=0 and this probability is zero. Here ax=λ(x)−∑y∈F,y≠xq(x,y)≥0. After reaching † there are no further changes. By [F5] applied to −u, 1−e−u≤u for u≥0, so the probability of a first change within h is at most MFh; conditional on a first change that stays in F, a second change within the remaining time has probability at most MFh. Hence the probability of two or more changes is at most MF2h2. Thus the finite transition matrix of Y is I+hQ~F+o(h) as h↓0, uniformly over its finite state space.

2.2F2F4step 1.2algebra

Extend uF by zero outside F. For x∈F, pt(x)−uF(t,x)≥0 by step 1.2; for x∉F, the difference is pt(x)≥0. Summing these nonnegative differences over S gives 1−∑x∈FuF(t,x)=1−P(τF>t)=cF(t). By [F4], this sum is exactly ∥pt−uˉF(t)∥ℓ1(S).

3.1F1F2F3step 2.1algebra

The process Y is Markov: before killing this follows from the Markov property of X, and after killing its state † is absorbing. Hence its finite column transition matrix TY(h) satisfies TY(h)=I+hQ~F+o(h) entrywise by step 2.1, and its law satisfies p~(t+h)=TY(h)p~(t). This gives the right derivative Q~Fp~(t). For t>0, p~(t)=TY(h)p~(t−h). Since the state space has finitely many coordinates, the entrywise expansion and ∑jp~j(t−h)=1 imply each coordinate of p~(t)−p~(t−h) is O(h); hence p~(t−h)→p~(t). Dividing the identity by h and using the entrywise limit (TY(h)−I)/h→Q~F gives the left derivative Q~Fp~(t) as well, because every coordinate is a finite sum. Thus p~′=Q~Fp~ with initial law p~(0). By [F3], p~(t)=etQ~Fp~(0).

4.1F2step 1.2step 2.2algebra∎

Let a=inf⁡f, b=sup⁡f, and c=(a+b)/2=f(†). The coupling uses the same path X: on {τF>t}, Yt=Xt, and on {τF≤t}, Yt=†. Thus ∣Ef(Xt)−Ef(Yt)∣=∣E[1{τF≤t}(f(Xt)−c)]∣≤12(b−a)P(τF≤t)=12osc⁡(f)cF(t), as asserted.

AlgorithmAlgorithm: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableOpen item page →

Finite-budget adaptive finite-state projection

Definition

Inputs. A given nonexplosive chain X and initial law p0; a finite positive integer N and an explicitly supplied nested list of nonempty finite sets F1⊆⋯⊆FN; for each Fi, its exact finite cemetery-lift generator Q~Fi and lifted initial vector from Killed finite-state projection and cemetery lift; final time T≥0; tolerance ε>0; a positive integer per-projection term cap B; and an arithmetic mode that is either exact real arithmetic or a validated arithmetic backend satisfying the requirements below and of Budgeted uniformization accumulation with time splitting.

The supplied lift data must be the exact rates and initial masses of the given chain. An implementation may obtain the cemetery rate from the exact exit rate minus the finite sum of within-Fi rates. A validated backend must certify the lift-rate calculation and its admissibility, the solver's scalar and vector certificates, and an outward enclosure of each computed cemetery coordinate, including the certified arithmetic/algebraic error required by Uniformization truncation, mass loss, and arithmetic-error ledger; if any required certificate is unavailable, the corresponding projection is uncertified.

Procedure. For i=1,…,N in order:

  1. Let ri,z:=−(Q~Fi)zz for z∈Fi∪{†} and set νi:=max⁡z∈Fi∪{†}ri,z=max⁡x∈Fiλ(x); this includes the cemetery state's zero exit rate. If a validated backend cannot certify νi and its admissibility, treat the solver status as certificate-unavailable. Otherwise apply Budgeted uniformization accumulation with time splitting to (Q~Fi,p~Fi,0,T) with admissible rate νi, positive tail budget ε, term cap B, and the supplied arithmetic mode. If νi=0, use the solver's zero-rate branch. If the status is budget-exhausted or certificate-unavailable, or the exact lift data are unavailable, return inconclusive with the statuses and all completed projection records; do not skip an uncertified projection.
  2. Let c^i be the computed cemetery coordinate. If the solver returns tail and arithmetic/algebraic error bounds Ti and Ealg,i, put δi:=Ti+Ealg,i, the total certified ℓ1 error bound. Form the outward-certified interval Li=max⁡(0,c^i−δi),Ui=min⁡(1,c^i+δi). Record Fi, νi, the computed vector, c^i, [Li,Ui], its tail bound Ti, and its arithmetic/algebraic error Ealg,i.
  3. If exact comparison or validated interval arithmetic certifies Ui≤ε, return certified with this projection and its record.

If all N projections have valid records but none passes the tolerance, return inconclusive with every record. The algorithm uses at most N projections and NB uniformization terms. It makes no claim that some finite projection outside this supplied list meets ε.

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

Adaptive projection certificates are sound and finite-budgeted

Statement

Under the input conditions of Finite-budget adaptive finite-state projection, the algorithm terminates after at most N projection attempts and at most NB uniformization terms. If it returns certified for Fi, then the true killed loss cFi(T) is at most ε, the embedded killed-vector ℓ1 error is at most ε, and every bounded observable with oscillation osc⁡(f) has cemetery-lift error at most 12osc⁡(f)ε. An inconclusive return makes no claim that any finite projection meets the tolerance.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite nested candidate list F1⊆⋯⊆FN, a finite term cap B, a tolerance ε>0, and valid projection-rate and arithmetic certificates as required by the algorithm.

[F1]

Finite-budget adaptive finite-state projection: each candidate is attempted at most once, solver terms are capped by B, and certified is returned only when a validated upper endpoint Ui satisfies Ui≤ε.

[F2]

Finite-state killed projection has an exact lost-mass certificate: for each actual projection, its cemetery mass is the exit probability, the embedded killed-vector ℓ1 error equals that mass, and the bounded-observable error is at most half the oscillation times that mass.

[F3]

Uniformization truncation, mass loss, and arithmetic-error ledger: a computed finite cemetery vector with certified total error δi has each coordinate within δi of the exact coordinate.

Proof

technique · verify the finite loop bound and the interval certificate
1.1givenF1algebra

The procedure iterates over only the supplied finite list F1,…,FN, and for each Fi the uniformization solver uses at most B terms by [F1]. It either returns during one of these calls or after the last candidate, so it terminates after at most N projections and NB terms.

1.2F1F3algebra

Suppose the algorithm returns certified at index i. By [F3], ∣c^i−cFi(T)∣≤δi. Since 0≤cFi(T)≤1, the interval endpoints in [F1] enclose cFi(T); hence cFi(T)≤Ui≤ε.

2.1F2step 1.2algebra

Apply [F2] to this actual Fi: the embedded killed-vector error equals cFi(T) and the observable error is at most 12osc⁡(f)cFi(T). Step 1.2 gives the asserted ε bounds.

3.1F1given∎

If no candidate passes, or a finite solver returns an unavailable certificate, [F1] specifies inconclusive; the procedure has examined only the supplied finite list and therefore establishes no existence claim for a projection outside that list.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

None yet.

Sources