Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedPipeline-generatedprecheck passverified 2026-10-22 (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

Independent connected-set envelopes and a greedy lattice-animal bound

Statement

Let (Ω,F,P) be a given probability space. For each y∈Z2, let Sy be a measurable random finite nearest-neighbor-connected vertex set containing y, with the discrete sigma-algebra on the countable collection of such sets. Assume the sets Sy−y are independent and identically distributed and that E∣S0∣r<∞ for every real r>0. A lattice animal is a finite nearest-neighbor-connected vertex set containing 0. Define the extended measurable envelope Mz=sup⁡{∣Sy∣:y∈Z2, z∈Sy}. Almost surely every Mz is a finite maximum, and there is a deterministic finite constant K0 such that, almost surely, every sufficiently large lattice animal Γ satisfies ∑z∈ΓMz≤K0∣Γ∣. More generally, for any given independent identically distributed field Xy≥1 with finite moments of every positive order, there is a deterministic finite K such that almost surely ∑y∈ΓXy≤K∣Γ∣ for every sufficiently large lattice animal. The random cutoff may depend on the realization. This result assumes the stated random family on a probability space; it does not construct an infinite product law or require a choice axiom to supply that law.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The stated probability space and random families, with independence meaning factorization for every finite list of distinct sites.

[F1]

Nonnegative integrals and their monotonicity are those of Measure space and integral.

[F2]

Integrals commute with increasing nonnegative limits, so expectations of nonnegative countable sums are the sums of their expectations (Monotone convergence for the measure integral).

Proof

1.1F1F2givenalgebra

Every supremum defining Mz is measurable because the roots are countable and each Sy has countably many possible finite values. Translation of the common set law and [F2] give ∑yP(z∈Sy,∣Sy∣>u)=E[∣S0∣1{∣S0∣>u}]. This tail tends to zero: for example it is at most u−1E∣S0∣2. The union bound therefore shows P(Mz>u)→0, hence Mz<∞ almost surely. At least Sz contains z, and every size is a positive integer, so a finite supremum is attained. Taking the countable union of the null exceptional events proves this simultaneously for all z. No independence of the Mz is asserted.

1.2givenconstructalgebra

We first prove the assertion for the independent field X. Suppose sites are independently marked with probability r. If an animal of size at most m contains k distinct marked sites, a depth-first traversal of a spanning tree of that animal, rooted at 0, visits them in some order using at most 2m steps. The successive displacement vectors v1,…,vk∈Z2, starting at 0, have total ℓ1 length at most 2m. There are at most 22k(2m+2k2k)≤(Cm/k)2k such ordered lists for 1≤k≤m: choose signs of their two coordinates and distribute at most 2m units among 2k nonnegative coordinate magnitudes. Repeated sites and zero coordinates only cause overcounting. For a list of distinct visited sites, all its sites are marked with probability rk. Thus P(some animal of size at most m has k marked sites)≤(C′rm2/k2)k. This counts marked-site lists rather than all animals and is uniform over all their shapes.

2.1F1step 1.2choosealgebra

Put m=2l, rj=P(X0≥2j) and fix ϵ=1/4. Choose a deterministic a such that C′/a2≤e−2, and a fixed B≥2. For 0≤j≤⌊ϵlog⁡2m⌋ set kj=⌈max⁡{amrj,Blog⁡m}⌉. If kj>m the corresponding forbidden event is empty; otherwise step 1.2 bounds its probability by e−2kj≤m−2B. The union over these O(log⁡m) values of j is summable along dyadic m. For a moment order Q>2/ϵ, the elementary inequality P(X0>v)≤v−QEX0Q and the fact that every size-at-most-m animal lies in Λm=[−m,m]2∩Z2 give P(max⁡ΛmXy>mϵ)≤(2m+1)2EX0Qm−ϵQ, also summable in l.

3.1F1step 2.1algebra

If events El have summable probabilities, then P(⋃l≥LEl)≤∑l≥LP(El)→0; countable additivity implies that only finitely many El occur almost surely. Apply this elementary argument to the failures in step 2.1. Almost surely, for every sufficiently large dyadic m, all weights in Λm are at most mϵ, and every size-at-most-m animal has fewer than kj sites with Xy≥2j at each relevant level. The pointwise layer bound Xy≤1+∑j≥02j+11{Xy≥2j} then gives, for every animal with m/2<∣Γ∣≤m, ∣Γ∣−1∑y∈ΓXy≤1+4a∑j≥02jrj+O(mϵ−1log⁡m). Levels above ϵlog⁡2m contribute zero; the error comes from the additive Blog⁡m+1 in kj. The constants are deterministic.

4.1F1step 3.1choosealgebra

A fixed moment order Q>2 gives rj≤(EX0Q)1/22−Qj/2, so the series in step 3.1 converges. Its value is deterministic, and the error tends to zero. Choose K larger than 2+4a∑j≥02jrj. Every sufficiently large animal belongs to one of the dyadic size ranges in step 3.1. Thus almost surely its average X-weight is at most this same K, proving the general independent-field assertion.

5.1step 1.1step 4.1constructalgebra

Apply step 4.1 to Xy=∣Sy∣2, which is an independent identically distributed field with all moments. Work on the probability-one event where its large-animal bound holds and all Mz are finite. Let Γ be any sufficiently large animal, m=∣Γ∣, A=∑z∈ΓMz, and t=A/(2m)>0. For each of the finitely many z∈Γ with Mz>t, choose a root y(z) attaining its maximum; to avoid even a selection convention take the first such root in a fixed enumeration of Z2. Let Y be the distinct chosen roots, sy=∣Sy∣, U=∑y∈Ysy2, and V=∑y∈Ysy. Low-weight sites contribute at most A/2, and at most sy sites can be assigned to a given Sy. Hence U≥A/2=mt. Since sy>t for chosen roots, V≤U/t.

6.1step 4.1step 5.1algebra∎

The set Δ=Γ∪⋃y∈YSy is a finite connected animal containing every root in Y, because every chosen set meets Γ and is connected. Its size is at least m and at most m+V. Therefore the same large-animal bound gives U≤∑y∈Δ∣Sy∣2≤K∣Δ∣≤K(m+U/t). If t>2K, this would imply U<2Km while step 5.1 gives U≥mt>2Km, a contradiction. Thus t≤2K and A≤4Km. Taking the deterministic constant K0=4K proves the envelope assertion uniformly over every sufficiently large animal. Only the given probability laws and countable additivity were used, without constructing any new infinite family.

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources