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.

Quantitative DLR uniqueness, concentration and spatial response

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, postulates, theorems and proofs

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Finite-spin Dobrushin influence matrix

Definition

Let d≥1, let S be a finite nonempty set, and put X=SZd with the σ-algebra generated by finite-coordinate cylinders. A specification on X is a family γ=(γΛ) of probability kernels indexed by finite Λ⊂Zd. It is proper when each kernel leaves every exterior-measurable event fixed, and consistent when γΛγΔ=γΛ for all finite Δ⊆Λ. For i∈Zd, write γi(⋅∣η) for its one-site conditional probability vector on S, where η∈SZd∖{i}. For probability vectors p,q on S, define their total-variation distance by ∥p−q∥TV:=12∑s∈S∣p(s)−q(s)∣. The influence coefficient of site j on the conditional law at site i is

cijγ:={0,i=j,sup⁡η,η′∈SZd∖{i}ηk=ηk′ for every k∉{i,j}∥γi(⋅∣η)−γi(⋅∣η′)∥TV,i≠j.

The matrix Cγ=(cijγ)i,j∈Zd is the Dobrushin influence matrix of γ. Its coefficients lie in [0,1]; a supremum need not be attained. The Dobrushin row constant is cγ:=sup⁡i∑jcijγ, with value +∞ allowed. A common uniform finite influence radius R means cijγ=0 whenever ∥i−j∥∞>R.

Remarks

The arrow j→i below means that changing spin j can change the conditional law at i; its weight is Cij. A length-n path from j to i contributes the product of its edge weights to (Cn)ij. The picture fixes this index convention only; proofs use the matrix definitions above.

jkiCkjCikCij
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Finite Gibbs response of an observable is β times its covariance with the field-coupled observable

Statement

Let E be a finite nonempty set, let H0,M,F:E→R, fix β>0, and for t∈R define Ht(x):=H0(x)−tM(x), Z(t):=∑x∈Ee−βHt(x), and γt(x):=Z(t)−1e−βHt(x). For functions F,M:E→R, define Cov⁡γt(F,M):=∑xγt(x)F(x)M(x)−(∑xγt(x)F(x))(∑xγt(x)M(x)). Then t↦∑xγt(x)F(x) is differentiable on R and

ddt∑x∈Eγt(x)F(x)=βCov⁡γt(F,M).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite nonempty set E, real-valued functions H0,M,F:E→R, and β>0.

[F1]

For every finite nonempty state set and finite real energy, the Gibbs partition sum is finite and strictly positive, and its normalized weights form a probability vector (Finite Gibbs relative entropy and free-energy minimum).

[F2]

The real exponential is differentiable with derivative exp⁡ (The exponential function is smooth and (exp⁡)′=exp⁡).

Proof

1.1givenF1algebra

For every t∈R, each e−βHt(x) is positive and finite, and E is finite nonempty, so 0<Z(t)<∞ by [F1]. Thus γt is a probability vector, and both Z(t) and NF(t):=∑xF(x)e−βHt(x) are finite sums with nonzero denominator Z(t).

2.1F2F3F4step 1.1

Since Ht(x)=H0(x)−tM(x), [F2] and [F4] give ddte−βHt(x)=βM(x)e−βHt(x). Differentiating the finite sums term by term with [F3] therefore gives Z′(t)=β∑xM(x)e−βHt(x) and NF′(t)=β∑xF(x)M(x)e−βHt(x).

3.1F3step 1.1step 2.1∎

The denominator Z(t) is nonzero by step 1.1. The quotient rule [F3] applied to NF(t)/Z(t)=∑xγt(x)F(x) yields β{γt(FM)−γt(F)γt(M)} after dividing numerator and denominator by Z(t); by the definition of covariance in the Statement this is βCov⁡γt(F,M).

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

Finite-spin Dobrushin comparison and boundary response

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Let d≥1, let S be a finite nonempty set, and put X=SZd with its cylinder-generated Borel σ-algebra. Let γ and γ~ be proper consistent finite-range specifications on X, each with a uniform finite one-site influence radius. Finite range means that for every finite Δ and cylinder event A, each function η↦γΔ(1A∣η) and η↦γ~Δ(1A∣η) depends on only finitely many exterior coordinates, as in Lattice Gibbs kernels and DLR states. For each i,j∈Zd, let Cii=0 and let Cij≥0 dominate both Dobrushin coefficients cijγ and cijγ~ of Finite-spin Dobrushin influence matrix. Assume Cij=0 whenever ∥i−j∥∞>R for some finite integer R≥0 and assume

sup⁡i∈Zd∑j∈ZdCij≤c<1.

For each site i, define the one-site conditional discrepancy

bi:=sup⁡η∈SZd∖{i}∥γi(⋅∣η)−γ~i(⋅∣η)∥TV.

Write CΛ=(Cij)i,j∈Λ and DΛ:=∑n=0∞CΛn for finite Λ, with CΛ0 the identity matrix on Λ; also write Dij:=∑n=0∞(Cn)ij for the infinite-lattice resolvent entries. These sums are finite entrywise, because every row sum of Cn and CΛn is at most cn. A cylinder function is one depending only on the spins in some finite set. For a bounded real cylinder function f:X→R, define its oscillation by δi(f):=sup⁡σ,σ′: σk=σk′ (k≠i)∣f(σ)−f(σ′)∣; only finitely many δi(f) are nonzero.

For every nonempty finite Λ containing a finite coordinate set Kf on which f depends, and exterior configurations ξ,ζ∈SΛc, the corresponding finite-volume Gibbs distributions satisfy

∣γΛ(f∣ξ)−γ~Λ(f∣ζ)∣≤∑i∈Λδi(f)∑k∈ΛDikΛ(bk+∑j∉ΛCkj1{ξj≠ζj}).

Moreover, each specification has a unique DLR state, denoted μ and μ~, and every bounded real cylinder function satisfies

∣μ(f)−μ~(f)∣≤∑i∈Zdδi(f)∑j∈ZdDijbj.

In particular, when γ=γ~ the comparison bound is zero. The estimates are conditional mathematical consequences of the stated finite-spin specifications and strict row bound.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The finite-spin configuration space and DLR convention, two proper consistent finite-range specifications γ,γ~, a common finite-range matrix C dominating both influence matrices, the strict row bound c<1, and a bounded cylinder function f.

[A1]

Assume Countable Choice: every countable family of nonempty sets has a choice function (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)). This is used only through the DLR existence theorem in [F6].

[F1]

A specification on SZd is proper and consistent when its kernels leave exterior events fixed and satisfy γΛγΔ=γΛ for finite Δ⊆Λ; its DLR states are probability measures satisfying μγΛ=μ for every finite Λ. Finite range means that every finite-volume kernel on a cylinder event depends on finitely many exterior coordinates (Lattice Gibbs kernels and DLR states).

[F2]

The coefficient cijγ bounds the total-variation change in the one-site conditional law at i when only boundary spin j changes, with the same definition for γ~ (Finite-spin Dobrushin influence matrix).

[F3]

For probability vectors on a finite set, a maximal coupling exists whose probability of disagreement equals their half-total-variation distance (Finite maximal coupling and heat-bath stationary law).

[F4]

Every bounded real sequence has a convergent subsequence (Bolzano-Weierstrass: every bounded real sequence has a convergent subsequence).

[F5]

For 0≤c<1, ∑n=0∞cn=1/(1−c) and the tails tend to zero (For ∣r∣<1, ∑k≥0rk=1/(1−r), and for ∣r∣≥1 the series diverges).

[F6]

Under Countable Choice, a proper consistent finite-alphabet specification with a uniform finite influence radius and strict Dobrushin row constant below 1 has exactly one DLR state (Finite-range Dobrushin uniqueness and boundary influence).

Proof

1.1givenF1algebra

Fix finite Λ and exterior configurations ξ,ζ. Consistency in [F1] makes each finite-volume Gibbs distribution stationary under the random-scan heat-bath chain that chooses a site uniformly from Λ and resamples its spin from the corresponding one-site kernel; the uniform mixture of invariant single-site updates remains invariant.

2.1F1F3F4step 1.1algebraconstruct

Couple the two finite-volume chains by choosing the same update site and using a maximal coupling from [F3] for the two one-site laws. Start the pair chain from the product of the two invariant marginals, so both marginals remain fixed at every time. The Cesàro averages of its distributions lie in a finite probability simplex; [F4] gives a convergent subsequence, and the limit is stationary because the difference between a Cesàro average and its one-step image is the initial-minus-final distribution divided by the averaging length. Its marginals are the two finite-volume Gibbs laws. Since a finite Λ and finite range leave only finitely many exterior coordinates in these transition kernels, choose one such stationary law for each of the finitely many boundary-pattern pairs; this gives a measurable family for integrating over exterior configurations.

3.1F2F3step 2.1algebra

Let qi be the stationary probability that the two configurations disagree at i∈Λ, and let ri be the mismatch probability if site i is selected for update. One random-scan step leaves coordinate i untouched with probability 1−∣Λ∣−1 and updates it with probability ∣Λ∣−1; stationarity therefore gives qi=(1−∣Λ∣−1)qi+∣Λ∣−1ri, hence qi=ri. The maximal-coupling property in [F3] makes ri the expected total-variation distance of the update laws. First change the kernel from γi to γ~i at the same boundary configuration, costing at most bi; then change the differing internal and exterior spins one at a time. By [F2] and the envelope C, the triangle inequality gives qi≤bi+∑j∈ΛCijqj+∑j∉ΛCij1{ξj≠ζj}. The last sum is finite by the common finite-range assumption.

4.1F5step 3.1algebra

Put ei=∑j∉ΛCij1{ξj≠ζj}. Iterating the vector inequality in step 3.1 gives q≤∑n=0N−1CΛn(b+e)+CΛN1. Since every row sum of CΛN is at most cN, [F5] makes the last term tend to zero, yielding q≤DΛ(b+e). Coordinatewise telescoping of f over its finite support then gives the stated finite-volume bound.

5.1F5step 4.1algebra

Let Λ exhaust Zd. For fixed i, each fixed-length path contributing to (CΛnb)i is eventually contained in Λ, and the omitted tail after length N is at most ∥b∥∞cN+1/(1−c) by [F5]. Thus ∑n(CΛnb)i→(Db)i. A path contributing to (CΛne)i must consist of n internal edges followed by one edge to Λc. Because each edge has length at most R, every such path has at least mΛ(i):=⌊dist⁡∞(i,Λc)/R⌋ edges when R>0; mΛ(i)→∞. The sum of weights of all paths of length at least mΛ(i) is at most ∑m≥mΛ(i)cm, which tends to zero by [F5]. If R=0, every off-diagonal coefficient is zero and the boundary term is identically zero.

6.1A1F1F6step 4.1step 5.1∎

The hypotheses of [F6] apply separately to γ and γ~, because their influence matrices are bounded entrywise by C and hence have row constants at most c<1. Their unique DLR states exist. For each finite Λ containing the support of f, integrate the finite-volume estimate from step 4.1 against the product of the two exterior marginals of μ and μ~. The DLR identities in [F1] identify the left side with ∣μ(f)−μ~(f)∣; then step 5.1 and the finite support of f give the asserted infinite-volume inequality. Setting b=0 gives equality of all cylinder expectations, hence equality of the two measures because cylinder events generate the Borel σ-algebra.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)Open item page →

High-temperature susceptibility, correlation summability, and spatial-average concentration

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice. Fix d≥1, a finite interaction radius R≥0, β>0, and symmetric translation-invariant couplings Jij=Jji∈R satisfying Jii=0, Ji+k,j+k=Jij for every i,j,k∈Zd, and Jij=0 whenever ∥i−j∥∞>R. Spins take dimensionless values {−1,+1}; use energy units for Jij and the field h, so β has inverse-energy units and λ=βh is dimensionless. For each dimensionless field parameter λ in an open interval I⊆R, use the finite-volume conditional energy

HΛ,λ(σΛ∣η)=−∑{i,j}:{i,j}∩Λ≠∅Jijσ^iσ^j−λβ∑i∈Λσi,

where Λ⊂Zd is finite, η∈{−1,+1}Λc, σ^i=σi on Λ and σ^i=ηi outside, and the pair sum runs over unordered pairs with Jij≠0 that meet Λ. Let γλ be the resulting proper consistent finite-range Gibbs specification on X={−1,+1}Zd, as in Finite-range lattice interaction and conditional energy and Lattice Gibbs kernels and DLR states. For its Dobrushin matrix C(λ) from Finite-spin Dobrushin influence matrix, assume the uniform strict row bound

0≤c∗:=sup⁡λ∈Isup⁡i∈Zd∑j∈ZdCij(λ)<1.

Assume also the common finite radius condition Cij(λ)=0 whenever ∥i−j∥∞>R. Let μλ be the unique DLR state, let σi(σ):=σi be the spin coordinate, and define

m(λ):=∫Xσ0 dμλ,Cov⁡μλ(σi,σj):=∫Xσiσj dμλ−(∫Xσi dμλ)(∫Xσj dμλ).

For bounded real F, write EμλF:=∫XF dμλ and Var⁡μλ(F):=Eμλ[(F−EμλF)2]. For finite Λ and exterior configuration η, let νΛ,λη:=γΛ,λ(⋅∣η); finite-volume expectations, covariance and variance are computed in this law by the same formulas.

Then the following conditional mathematical conclusions hold for every λ∈I.

  1. The correlations are absolutely summable and satisfy

∑j∈Zd∣Cov⁡μλ(σ0,σj)∣≤11−c∗.

For R≥1 and integer r≥1, their spatial tail satisfies

∑∥j∥∞≥r∣Cov⁡μλ(σ0,σj)∣≤c∗⌈r/R⌉1−c∗;

when R=0, all off-site covariances vanish.

  1. The limiting magnetization m is differentiable on I and

m′(λ)=∑j∈ZdCov⁡μλ(σ0,σj).

Here λ=βh if the energy is written with field term −h∑iσi; thus the derivative with respect to h is β times the displayed covariance sum. For a finite Λ and fixed exterior configuration η, write EΛ,λ, Cov⁡Λ,λ and Var⁡Λ,λ for expectation, covariance and variance in its finite-volume Gibbs law. The corresponding finite-volume identity is

ddλ EΛ,λ ⁣[∑i∈Λσi]=Var⁡Λ,λ ⁣(∑i∈Λσi)=∑i,j∈ΛCov⁡Λ,λ(σi,σj).

  1. For every finite nonempty Λ⊂Zd, the spatial average σ‾Λ:=∣Λ∣−1∑i∈Λσi obeys the variance and Chebyshev bounds

Var⁡μλ(σ‾Λ)≤1(1−c∗)∣Λ∣,μλ ⁣(∣σ‾Λ−Eμλσ‾Λ∣≥ε)≤1(1−c∗)∣Λ∣ε2(ε>0).

These are summable-correlation and variance concentration conclusions under the strict Dobrushin condition; no exponential concentration, analyticity, or coexistence conclusion is asserted.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice, the translation-invariant finite-range Ising interaction and finite-volume Gibbs convention stated above, the uniform Dobrushin row bound c∗<1 on I, and the finite spin space {−1,+1}.

[A1]

Assume Countable Choice, as required for the lattice product-measure extension in the DLR existence argument (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

[F1]

The interaction list, conditioned energy, finite-alphabet configuration space, specification, and DLR identity have the conventions in Finite-range lattice interaction and conditional energy and Lattice Gibbs kernels and DLR states.

[F2]

Under the stated finite-range interaction, the Gibbs kernels are proper, consistent, and finite-range (Conditional Gibbs kernel consistency).

[F3]

The influence matrix coefficient is the half-total-variation sensitivity of the one-site conditional law to one changed boundary spin (Finite-spin Dobrushin influence matrix).

[F4]

A proper consistent finite-range finite-alphabet specification satisfying Countable Choice and a strict Dobrushin row bound has a unique DLR state; its local finite-volume expectations become uniformly insensitive to exterior boundary conditions (Finite-range Dobrushin uniqueness and boundary influence).

[F5]

For a finite Gibbs family with energy Ht=H0−tM, ddtlog⁡Z=β EtM and d2dt2log⁡Z=β2Var⁡t(M) (Finite Gibbs response and covariance identities).

[F6]

For any finite Gibbs family with field-coupled observable M and finite observable F, ddtEtF=βCov⁡t(F,M) (Finite Gibbs response of an observable is β times its covariance with the field-coupled observable).

[F7]

The finite-volume and infinite-volume Dobrushin comparison estimates hold with resolvent ∑n≥0Cn for a finite-range influence envelope with row sum below 1 (Finite-spin Dobrushin comparison and boundary response).

[F8]

If G is continuous on a closed interval, differentiable in its interior, and its interior derivative has a Riemann-integrable extension, then the integral of that extension equals the endpoint increment (Newton–Leibniz needs only continuity on [a,b], differentiability on (a,b), and a Riemann-integrable extension of the interior derivative).

[F9]

For 0≤c∗<1, the geometric tails satisfy ∑n≥0c∗n=1/(1−c∗) and ∑n≥kc∗n=c∗k/(1−c∗) (For ∣r∣<1, ∑k≥0rk=1/(1−r), and for ∣r∣≥1 the series diverges).

Proof

1.1A1F1F2F4given

For each λ∈I, [F1]–[F2] give a proper consistent finite-range Ising specification. Its Dobrushin row constant is at most c∗<1, so [A1] and [F4] give a unique DLR state μλ. A lattice translation of μλ is another DLR state for the same translation-invariant kernels; uniqueness therefore makes μλ translation invariant.

1.2F2F3F7algebra

Fix finite Λ containing distinct sites i,j and an exterior configuration η, and write νΛ,λ:=γΛ,λ(⋅∣η). Every finite Gibbs weight is positive, so the finite-volume probabilities of σj=±1 are positive. Conditional on either value, consistency [F2] identifies the law on Λ∖{j} with the corresponding finite-volume Gibbs kernel, with the same exterior spins away from j and the spin at j fixed to the selected sign. Apply the finite-volume comparison bound [F7] with the same specification and b=0 to these two boundary conditions. For f=σi, δi(f)=2 and all other oscillations vanish; the bound is 2∑k∈Λ∖{j}DikΛ∖{j}Ckj(λ). Each term is a sum of weights of paths from the boundary site j to i whose intermediate vertices avoid j, so it is at most 2∑n≥1C(λ)ijn.

2.1F4F7F9step 1.1algebra

Let Λn=[−n,n]d and let νn,λ:=γΛn,λ(⋅∣η+), where ηi+=+1 for all exterior sites. For any fixed cylinder function g, choose a finite coordinate set K on which it depends (take any nonempty finite K if g is constant). By the DLR identity, μλ(g)=∫γΛn,λ(g∣η) dμλ(η) whenever K⊆Λn. The finite-volume comparison estimate [F7] with the same specification, b=0, and arbitrary boundary conditions bounds the difference between γΛn,λ(g∣η+) and every integrand by ∑i∈Kδi(g) times the total influence-path weight from i to Λnc. If R≥1, each such path has at least qn:=⌊dist⁡∞(K,Λnc)/R⌋ edges, and its total weight is at most ∑k≥qnc∗k=c∗qn/(1−c∗) by [F9]; qn→∞. If R=0, the boundary term is zero. Thus νn,λ(g)→μλ(g) locally uniformly on I.

3.1F1step 2.1step 1.2algebra

Put p=νΛ,λ(σj=+1) and let m±=EνΛ,λ[σi∣σj=±1]. Finite Gibbs weights are strictly positive by [F1], so 0<p<1. Expanding the two-point expectation by the events σj=±1 gives Cov⁡νΛ,λ(σi,σj)=2p(1−p)(m+−m−). Since 2p(1−p)≤12, step 1.2 gives ∣Cov⁡νΛ,λ(σi,σj)∣≤∑n≥1C(λ)ijn. For i=j, Var⁡νΛ,λ(σi)=1−(Eσi)2≤1. By step 2.1, for fixed i,j the finite-volume expectations of σi, σj, and σiσj converge to those under μλ as the cubes exhaust the lattice. Passing this finite covariance bound to the limit proves it for μλ as well.

4.1F3F9step 3.1algebra

For every n≥0, nonnegativity and the row bound give ∑jC(λ)ijn+1=∑kC(λ)ikn∑jCkj(λ)≤c∗∑kC(λ)ikn; induction from C0=I yields ∑jC(λ)ijn≤c∗n. Summing the off-site bound from step 3.1 and using [F9] gives ∑j≠i∣Cov⁡(σi,σj)∣≤∑n≥1∑jC(λ)ijn≤c∗/(1−c∗). Adding the diagonal variance, at most 1, proves the absolute covariance sum bound. If R≥1 and ∥j−i∥∞≥r, then C(λ)ijn=0 for n<⌈r/R⌉, because an n-step path moves at most nR in the ℓ∞ metric. Summing the remaining row tails with [F9] proves the stated spatial-tail bound. If R=0, the zero diagonal and range condition make every off-site coefficient zero, so step 3.1 gives zero off-site covariance.

5.1step 2.1step 1.2step 3.1step 4.1

For each fixed finite set of sites, step 2.1 gives locally uniform convergence of its one-point and two-point expectations under νn,λ to those under μλ, hence locally uniform convergence of each covariance. For i≠j in Λn, steps 1.2 and 3.1 give ∣Cov⁡νn,λ(σi,σj)∣≤∑k≥1C(λ)ijk; the diagonal variance is at most 1. The same path-tail argument as in step 4.1 therefore bounds, uniformly in n and λ, the sum of absolute covariances over sites outside any fixed box by a quantity tending to zero as the box grows. Splitting the covariance sum into that finite box and its uniformly small complement proves that the finite sums Sn(λ):=∑j∈ΛnCov⁡νn,λ(σ0,σj) converge locally uniformly on I to S(λ):=∑j∈ZdCov⁡μλ(σ0,σj).

6.1F5F6step 5.1algebra

For mn(λ):=Eνn,λσ0, write H0,n for the interaction part of the stated finite-volume energy and put Mn=∑j∈Λnσj; the field energy is H0,n−(λ/β)Mn. [F6] and the chain rule d/dλ=(1/β)d/dt give mn′(λ)=∑j∈ΛnCov⁡νn,λ(σ0,σj)=Sn(λ). For the aggregate finite-volume identity, [F5] gives d(log⁡Z)/dt=βEtMn and d2(log⁡Z)/dt2=β2Var⁡t(Mn). Since t=λ/β, the chain rule gives d2(log⁡Z)/dλ2=Var⁡νn,λ(Mn); differentiating d(log⁡Z)/dλ=Eνn,λMn therefore gives ddλEνn,λMn=Var⁡νn,λ(Mn). Expanding the square in the variance gives the displayed finite double covariance sum.

7.1F8step 2.1step 5.1step 6.1algebra

Step 2.1 with g=σ0 gives mn→m locally uniformly, while step 5.1 gives mn′=Sn→S locally uniformly. Each Sn is continuous because it is a finite sum of finite Gibbs expectations, each a finite ratio of exponentials; hence S is continuous as a locally uniform limit. On any closed subinterval of I, [F8] applied to G=mn and derivative Sn gives mn(λ)−mn(λ0)=∫λ0λSn(u) du. Passing to the locally uniform limits yields m(λ)−m(λ0)=∫λ0λS(u) du, so m′(λ)=S(λ). Since λ=βh, the chain rule gives dm/dh=βS(βh).

8.1step 4.1algebra∎

For finite nonempty Λ, expand the variance of σ‾Λ as ∣Λ∣−2∑i,j∈ΛCov⁡(σi,σj). By the uniform row bound proved in step 4.1, the sum of the absolute values in each row is at most 1/(1−c∗), so the variance is at most 1/((1−c∗)∣Λ∣). Pointwise, 1{∣X−EX∣≥ε}≤∣X−EX∣2/ε2; taking expectations with X=σ‾Λ proves the Chebyshev bound.

5 · Examples, experiments and counterexamples

None yet.

Sources