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.
SSEP martingale for time-dependent test functions
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let , , , and let be the SSEP from the diffusive-model definition. Let be smooth up to the time endpoints, meaning all time and space derivatives used below extend continuously to . Define
Then
is a square-integrable martingale, and
is a continuous predictable increasing process with a martingale. In particular,
Statement references
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Choice, the finite SSEP rate matrix and its uniformized realization, a smooth time-dependent periodic test function , and a finite horizon .
Assume the Axiom of Choice, meaning every family of nonempty sets has a choice function, as required by the finite-chain realization and martingale suppliers (The Axiom of Choice).
Symmetric exclusion process under diffusive scaling: the state space is finite, each allowed bond swap has rate , and .
Uniformization constructs every finite-state rate matrix chain: for a finite rate matrix, uniformization has a finite dominating event rate and conditional transition matrices .
Martingale and predictable bracket for a finite-state chain: a fixed bounded state function has a generator martingale with compensated squared-jump rate .
Progressively measurable and predictable processes: the predictable sigma-algebra is generated by rectangles with and time-zero sets; a continuous adapted process is predictable by its left-step approximations.
Proof
For fixed , reindexing the bond sum as in the model generator gives ; also . Hence the compensating drift in the Statement is exactly .
Fix and a state . By [F2], on an interval of length , two or more potential uniformization events have probability , one actual transition has probability , and no state change has probability , with . Taylor expansion is uniform over the finite state set and . If no state change occurs, then and the compensating integral is , so the increment of is . A single transition gives increment ; summing its conditional mean over gives , which cancels the no-transition term. Paths with at least two potential events contribute because has bounded increments for fixed . Therefore . In the conditional second moment, no transition contributes , one transition contributes , and two or more potential events contribute .
If , the only time is and . For , fix and partition into equal intervals of length . Applying the conditional-mean estimate from step 2.1 on every subinterval, then the tower property, bounds by . Thus is an all-pairs martingale. For fixed its paths are bounded on because the state space is finite, and its time derivative are bounded, and the compensating integrand is bounded; hence it is square-integrable.
Set and . If , both processes are zero. For , the second-moment expansion in step 2.1 and continuity of in imply : without a state change the integrand differs from by , and a state change has probability and changes the bounded integrand over an interval of length . Hence . For fixed , partition into equal intervals and write , . Since is a martingale, by the tower property. Expanding the square, conditioning each remainder first on , and using the bound just proved gives an absolute conditional expectation at most . Therefore is an all-pairs martingale.
The integrand is nonnegative, so is increasing; it is continuous and adapted. If , the zero process is predictable. Otherwise, for each nested deterministic partition, the process equal to at the left endpoint on each interval and zero at time zero is predictable by [F4]; these processes converge pointwise to by continuity. Thus is predictable. At a bond , the test-function jump is . Multiplying its square by the rate and summing over all bonds yields the displayed formula for . The fundamental theorem of calculus gives ; using and bonds per coordinate gives the stated bound for .