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.

✓ 2 results · all verified · 2 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs; all 2 also cleared it.

Independent-subject terminal influence limits

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

This page proves finite-dimensional terminal normal limits from a separately established subject-level influence expansion. The IID result uses the multivariate central limit theorem and vector Slutsky; the fixed finite-group result proves the covariance sum ∑gρg−1Σg while allowing different group laws. Both results require centered finite-variance contributions, and the grouped result also requires deterministic sample sizes with positive limiting proportions. They do not prove a consumer's risk-set or random-denominator remainder, and they assert no process-level or functional martingale limit.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

IID terminal influence limit from a separately established expansion

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let d≥1, let (O,A,P) be a probability space, and let O1,O2,… be IID with law P. Let θ^n be a measurable Rd-valued estimator based on O1,…,On for a fixed θ∈Rd. Suppose ϕ:O→Rd is measurable, EPϕ=0, and EP∥ϕ∥22<∞, and set Σ=EP[ϕϕT]. Assume the separately established expansion, with remainder rn on the sample probability space,

θ^n−θ=1n∑i=1nϕ(Oi)+rn,rn=oP(n−1/2),

Then

n(θ^n−θ)⇒Nd(0,Σ).

The remainder notation means n rn→P0, as in Asymptotically linear estimators and influence functions. Thus ϕ is the estimator influence function in the asymptotically linear sense: the theorem assumes the expansion and does not establish it. The covariance may be singular, including zero.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume AC. The subjects Oi are IID with law P; the measurable influence function ϕ is centered and square-integrable; Σ=EP[ϕϕT]; and the estimator has the displayed expansion with n rn→P0. Prove the displayed distributional limit.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: Assume the Axiom of Choice (AC).

[F1]

Identical distribution and IID families: IID means a common law and mutual independence of the whole family.

[F2]

Independent families of event classes: Independence means that for every finite selection of distinct indices and one event from each selected class, the probability of their intersection is the product of their probabilities.

[F3]

Asymptotically linear estimators and influence functions: For an IID sample, an asymptotically linear estimator has expansion ψ^n−ψ(P)=(Pn−P)ϕ+oP(n−1/2), with a mean-zero square-integrable influence function; this definition alone does not assert asymptotic normality.

[F4]

Covariance matrix of a finite-dimensional random vector: For a finite-dimensional square-integrable vector X with mean μ, Cov⁡(X)=E[(X−μ)(X−μ)T].

[F5]

Multivariate iid central limit theorem: Under AC, IID centered Rd vectors with finite second moment and covariance Σ have normalized sums converging to Nd(0,Σ); Σ may be singular.

[F6]

Stochastic order and convergence notation for finite-dimensional random vectors: For vectors, Rn=oP(1) means P(∥Rn∥2>ε)→0 for every ε>0.

[F7]

Vector Slutsky theorem: If Xn⇒X and Yn→Pc, then every continuous function of (Xn,Yn) converges in distribution to the same function of (X,c).

Proof

1.1F1F2given

For each Borel set B⊆Rd, ϕ−1(B)∈A. The common law of the Oi gives a common image law, and [F2] applied to finitely many preimage events gives independence of the images. Thus ϕ(O1),ϕ(O2),… are IID.

2.1A1F4F5step 1.1

The vectors in step 1.1 have mean zero and covariance Σ by the assumptions and [F4]. Thus [F5] gives Sn:=n−1/2∑i=1nϕ(Oi)⇒Nd(0,Σ).

3.1F3F6F7step 2.1∎

The assumed expansion gives n(θ^n−θ)=Sn+n rn, and the asymptotically linear convention [F3] makes its scaled remainder tend to zero in probability; [F6] identifies this as oP(1). Apply [F7] with h(x,y)=x+y and c=0 to step 2.1. This proves the asserted limit, without deriving the influence expansion.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)Open item page →

Independent-group terminal influence limit

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Fix a finite G≥2 and d≥1. For each total sample size n, let n1,…,nG be positive deterministic integers with ∑g=1Gng=n, and suppose ng/n→ρg∈(0,1) with ∑g=1Gρg=1. For group g, let Og1,Og2,… be IID with law Pg on a measurable space; assume the subject families in distinct groups are independent. Let ϕg be measurable with EPgϕg=0, EPg∥ϕg∥22<∞, and Σg=EPg[ϕgϕgT]. If a measurable estimator of fixed θ∈Rd has the separately established expansion, with remainder on the same sample probability space as its group sums,

n(θ^n−θ)=∑g=1Gnng1ng∑i=1ngϕg(Ogi)+Rn,Rn=oP(1),

then

n(θ^n−θ)⇒Nd ⁣(0,∑g=1Gρg−1Σg).

The group count G is fixed; the laws Pg may differ. The covariance may be singular. This is a terminal finite-dimensional result: it neither proves the estimator expansion nor supplies a continuous-time or functional martingale CLT.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Assume AC, fixed finite G≥2 and d≥1, deterministic sample sizes with n=∑gng and ng/n→ρg∈(0,1), independent subject families, centered square-integrable measurable ϕg with covariance Σg, and the displayed estimator expansion with Rn=oP(1). Prove the displayed limit.

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: Assume the Axiom of Choice (AC).

[F1]

Identical distribution and IID families: Within each group, IID means a common law and mutual independence of the whole family.

[F2]

Independent families of event classes: For every finite selection of distinct independent indices and one event from each selected class, the probability of their intersection is the product of their probabilities.

[F3]

Covariance matrix of a finite-dimensional random vector: For a finite-dimensional square-integrable vector X with mean μ, Cov⁡(X)=E[(X−μ)(X−μ)T] and is positive semidefinite.

[F4]

Multivariate iid central limit theorem: Under AC, IID centered Rd vectors with finite second moment and covariance Σ have normalized sums converging to Nd(0,Σ), including singular Σ.

[F5]

Vector Slutsky theorem: If Xn⇒X and Yn→Pc, then every continuous function of (Xn,Yn) converges in distribution to the same function of (X,c).

[F6]

Continuous mapping theorem: A continuous map sends a weakly convergent random vector to the corresponding weak limit.

[F7]

Characteristic function of a real random variable: The characteristic function is t↦E[eitX].

[F8]

Levy continuity theorem forward direction: Weak convergence of real laws implies pointwise convergence of their characteristic functions.

[F9]

Characteristic functions under affine maps and independent sums: For real a,b,t, φaX+b(t)=eitbφX(at); for a finite mutually independent family of real random variables, the characteristic function of its sum is the product of the individual characteristic functions.

[F10]

Characteristic function of a normal law: A centered real normal law of variance v≥0 has characteristic function t↦e−vt2/2, including v=0.

[F11]

Characteristic function criterion for weak convergence: Under AC, pointwise convergence of characteristic functions to that of a specified real probability law implies weak convergence to that law.

[F12]

Multivariate normal law, including singular covariance: Under AC, Nd(0,V) exists for every positive semidefinite V and each projection uTX is normal with variance uTVu.

[F13]

Cramer wold device: Under AC, convergence of every scalar projection to the projections of a specified finite-dimensional law implies vector weak convergence to that law.

[F14]

Stochastic order and convergence notation for finite-dimensional random vectors: For vectors, Rn=oP(1) means P(∥Rn∥2>ε)→0 for every ε>0.

Proof

1.1A1F1F2F3F4given

For each group, measurable preimages show that ϕg(Ogi) are IID; [F2] applied to preimages of finite event selections also shows independence across groups. Their means and covariances are 0 and Σg by assumption and [F3]. Since ρg>0 and n→∞, ng→∞. Applying [F4] to each of the finitely many groups gives Ug,n:=ng−1/2∑i=1ngϕg(Ogi)⇒Zg∼Nd(0,Σg).

2.1A1F5F6F9F10F12givenstep 1.1

Put ag,n=n/ng, so ag,n→ρg−1/2. Applying [F5] to the continuous map (x,a)↦ax gives ag,nUg,n⇒ρg−1/2Zg. For any fixed u∈Rd, [F6] gives convergence of the projections; by [F12], uTZg is normal, and the affine characteristic-function identity [F9] with [F10] identifies its scaled law as N(0,ρg−1uTΣgu), including zero projected variance.

3.1A1F2F3F7F8F9F10F11F12step 2.1

Let V=∑gρg−1Σg. By [F3], uTVu=∑gρg−1uTΣgu≥0 for every u, so V is positive semidefinite; under [A1], [F12] supplies Z∼Nd(0,V). Set Wn=∑gag,nUg,n. Fix u∈Rd and any frequency t∈R. The scalar terms uTag,nUg,n are independent across g by [F2]. By the characteristic-function definition [F7], weak-convergence continuity [F8], independent-sum product identity [F9], and normal formula [F10], step 2.1 gives pointwise convergence of the characteristic function of uTWn to ∏g=1Gexp⁡(−t2uTΣgu/(2ρg))=exp⁡(−t2uTVu/2). This is the characteristic function of uTZ by [F12] and [F10]. The criterion [F11] gives uTWn⇒uTZ.

4.1A1F13step 3.1

Since step 3.1 holds for every u∈Rd and the specified target is Z, [F13] gives Wn⇒Z∼Nd(0,V).

5.1F5F14step 4.1∎

The expansion in the statement is Wn+Rn. By [F14], Rn=oP(1) is convergence in probability to the zero vector. Apply [F5] with the continuous addition map to step 4.1 to obtain the claimed estimator limit. This proof derives the group-sum limit but does not establish any consumer's expansion.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

None yet.

Sources