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.
BH independent FDR — Examples
1 · Prerequisites
- BH independent FDR
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Estimators and Randomized Procedures
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Independence Borel Cantelli and Zero One Laws
- limsup, liminf, and Subsequential Limits
- Measurable Functions and Simple Approximation
- Measures and Their Basic Properties
- Monotone Sequences, Bolzano-Weierstrass, and Cauchy Completeness
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Polynomial Rings, the Division Algorithm and Roots
- Probability Spaces Random Variables and Expectation
- Product Measures and the Fubini Tonelli Theorems
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Sequences and Limits
- Sigma Algebras and Borel Sets
- Simple Field Extensions and the Construction of the Complex Numbers
- Statistical Experiments, Models and Identifiability
- Suprema and Infima
- Tests, Neyman–Pearson and Valid P-values
- The Lebesgue Integral and the Convergence Theorems
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topological Spaces and Continuity
- Topology of ℝ
2 · Summary
A two-hypothesis family with one exact-uniform true-null p-value and one false-null p-value fixed at zero attains the BH FDR bound while separating FDR from FWER. Under the global null, the two rates agree because the false discovery proportion is exactly the indicator of at least one rejection.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
None yet.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
A two-test BH family distinguishes FDR from FWER
Example
Take two hypotheses and . Under the specified law, is true with , while is false with almost surely. The p-values are independent. The BH procedure has and , so its FDR bound is attained while FDR and FWER differ.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , , , and almost surely under the fixed law.
False discovery proportion, FDR, and FWER: if counts false rejections and counts all rejections, then , , and .
Benjamini–Hochberg step-up procedure: BH rejects ranks through the largest with .
Independent random elements: random elements on one probability space are independent when their generated sigma-algebras are independent.
Valid p-values: a p-value statistic takes values in and is valid under a null law when for every .
Benjamini–Hochberg FDR under independence: under mutual independence and exactly uniform true-null p-values, BH has FDR .
In this example, is a constant random element and hence is independent of ; is exactly uniform and therefore valid under .
For the global-null comparison in step 3.1, all hypotheses in the finite family are true, so .
Verification
For Borel sets , , so [F3] confirms independence; also for , so [F4] confirms true-null validity. The ordered values are : the first BH threshold is and always passes, while the second is and passes exactly when . Thus both hypotheses are rejected when , and only the false null is rejected otherwise.
If , then , , and FDP ; if , then , , and FDP . Since , [F1] gives and . Here , which attains the guarantee [F5].
Under [A2], pointwise; when , both and equal , and when both equal . Thus the FDP is pointwise, and evaluating its simple-function integral gives . By [F1], this gives under the global null.