Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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.

The covariance of the linearization is AΣAT

Statement

Let m,d≥1, let U⊆Rm be open, let μ∈U, and let h:U→Rd be Borel measurable and totally differentiable at μ with total derivative A:=Dh(μ):Rm→Rd (The total (Fréchet) derivative Df(a) as the linear first-order approximation with o(∥h∥2) remainder, A measurable function between measurable spaces); for instance this holds when h is C1 on U, since continuous maps have Borel preimages of Borel sets (A continuous map has Borel preimages of Borel sets). Let X:Ω→Rm be a random element with values in U, square-integrable with mean vector E[X]=μ and covariance matrix Σ (Mean vector and covariance matrix of a square-integrable random vector), and define the linearization T:U⟶Rd,T(x):=h(μ)+A(x−μ). Then T∘X is a random element of Rd, its mean vector is E[T(X)]=h(μ), and its covariance matrix is Cov⁡(T(X))=AΣAT, where, in the one-based statistical coordinate notation of Mean vector and covariance matrix of a square-integrable random vector, Aij:=∂j−1hi−1(μ),1≤i≤d,1≤j≤m, and AΣAT is the matrix product of Matrix multiplication is associative, unital, distributive, and compatible with scalar multiplication in the matrix space of The vector space Mm×n(F):=F m×n of m by n matrices over a field, with entrywise operations.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Objects and hypotheses as in the Statement, with A=(aij) the Jacobian matrix of h at μ, so (Av)i=∑j=1maijvj for v∈Rm.

[L1]

The coordinates Xj satisfy E[Xj2]<+∞, the differences Xj−μj are square-integrable and integrable, and Σkl=Cov⁡(Xk,Xl)=E[(Xk−μk)(Xl−μl)] is a finite real number. (Mean vector and covariance matrix of a square-integrable random vector)

[L2]

For integrable random variables U,V and scalars a,b, E[aU+bV]=aE[U]+bE[V]; if U≤V almost surely then E[U]≤E[V]; and ∣E[U]∣≤E[∣U∣]. In particular Cov⁡(U,V)=E[UV]−E[U]E[V] for square-integrable U,V. (Linearity, monotonicity, and the modulus bound for expectation, Variance and covariance identities for random variables)

[L3]

Covariance is symmetric and bilinear on finite linear combinations of square-integrable real random variables: for finite families (Ui), (Vj) and real scalars, Cov⁡(∑iaiUi,∑jbjVj)=∑i,jaibjCov⁡(Ui,Vj), and covariance with a constant is zero. (Variance and covariance identities for random variables)

[L4]

Each coordinate projection on U⊆Rm is continuous, hence has Borel preimages of Borel sets; finite sums and scalar multiples of measurable real-valued functions are measurable, and a map into Rd is measurable exactly when its coordinates are. (A continuous map has Borel preimages of Borel sets, Closure properties of measurable functions used by the integral, A map into Rn is measurable exactly when its coordinates are measurable)

[L6]

For vectors u,v in a real inner-product space, ∣⟨u,v⟩∣≤∥u∥ ∥v∥. (Cauchy–Schwarz: ∣⟨x,y⟩∣≤∥x∥ ∥y∥, with equality exactly for dependent pairs)

Proof

technique · direct coordinatewise computation
1.1givenL1L4L6algebra

For each i, the coordinate projections on U are continuous, so the affine function x↦hi(μ)+∑j=1maij(xj−μj) is Borel by [L4]; composition with X makes Ti(X) measurable, and coordinatewise measurability gives that T∘X is a random element of Rd. By [L1] and [L6], E[(∑j=1maij(Xj−μj))2]≤(∑j=1maij2)(∑j=1mE[(Xj−μj)2])<+∞, so the linear part is square-integrable; since (u+v)2≤2u2+2v2, adding the finite constant hi(μ) shows Ti(X) is square-integrable as well.

2.1step 1.1L2algebra

For each i, [L2] and E[Xj]=μj give E[Ti(X)]=hi(μ)+∑j=1maijE[Xj−μj]=hi(μ)+∑j=1maij⋅0=hi(μ), so E[T(X)]=h(μ).

3.1step 2.1L1L2L3algebra

Fix i,j. By step 2.1, Ti(X)−E[Ti(X)]=∑k=1maik(Xk−μk) and likewise with j in place of i. The identity Cov⁡(U,V)=E[UV]−E[U]E[V] of [L2] and the finite linearity of expectation give Cov⁡(Ti(X),Tj(X))=∑k=1m∑l=1maikajl E[(Xk−μk)(Xl−μl)]=∑k,l=1maikajlΣkl, the expectations being finite by [L1]; equivalently, covariance is bilinear on the finite combinations by [L3].

4.1step 2.1step 3.1L5∎

By [L5], ∑k,l=1maikajlΣkl=(AΣAT)ij for every i,j; with steps 2.1 and 3.1 this proves E[T(X)]=h(μ) and Cov⁡(T(X))=AΣAT.

Remarks

The formula is exact for the affine map T; it is a statement about T∘X, not about h∘X, unless a remainder hypothesis controls the difference (Mean, mean-square and covariance bounds for second-order linearization error).

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources