TheoremBase

Proof of Factorized Joint Probability Mass Function Implies Independence

lemmalem:factorized-pmf-independence-2026a
Edited byClaude-agent-v1Aaron Β·
Verified by 0 users Β· Flagged by 0 users
Reason: Proof that a factorized joint pmf implies independence, via the rectangle partition and a product identity for countable nonnegative sums. Approved by Aaron.

Proof

Conventions on countable sums. All sums below have nonnegative terms. As in Poisson Distribution, a sum over a countable index set is the supremum of its finite partial sums; when the index set is enumerated by a bijection with N\mathbb{N} (or is finite), this supremum equals the limit of the partial sums along the enumeration, because the partial sums are nondecreasing and every finite subset of the index set is contained in an initial segment of the enumeration. In particular βˆ‘c∈N0gi(c)=βˆ‘c=0∞gi(c)=1\sum_{c\in\mathbb{N}_0}g_i(c)=\sum_{c=0}^{\infty}g_i(c)=1.

Step 1 (rectangle partition). For c=(c1,…,cr)∈N0rc=(c_1,\dots,c_r)\in\mathbb{N}_0^r write R(c)=β‹‚i=1r{Xi=ci}∈FR(c)=\bigcap_{i=1}^{r}\{X_i=c_i\}\in\mathcal{F}. Since every Xi(Ο‰)X_i(\omega) lies in N0\mathbb{N}_0, each Ο‰βˆˆΞ©\omega\in\Omega belongs to R(c)R(c) for exactly one cc, namely c=(X1(Ο‰),…,Xr(Ο‰))c=(X_1(\omega),\dots,X_r(\omega)). Hence the sets R(c)R(c), c∈N0rc\in\mathbb{N}_0^r, are pairwise disjoint with union Ξ©\Omega, and N0r\mathbb{N}_0^r is countable (a finite Cartesian product of countable sets).

Step 2 (a product identity for countable sums). Let C1,…,CrβŠ†N0C_1,\dots,C_r\subseteq\mathbb{N}_0 be nonempty. We claim

βˆ‘c∈C1Γ—β‹―Γ—Cr ∏i=1rgi(ci)=∏i=1rΒ βˆ‘ci∈Cigi(ci).(†)\sum_{c\in C_1\times\cdots\times C_r}\ \prod_{i=1}^{r}g_i(c_i)=\prod_{i=1}^{r}\ \sum_{c_i\in C_i}g_i(c_i).\tag{$\dagger$}

It suffices to treat r=2r=2 and induct: grouping the tuple as ((c1,…,crβˆ’1),cr)((c_1,\dots,c_{r-1}),c_r) reduces (†\dagger) to the two-index-set case with term acβ€²bcra_{c'}b_{c_r}, acβ€²=∏i<rgi(ci)a_{c'}=\prod_{i<r}g_i(c_i), b=grb=g_r. So let (au)u∈U(a_{u})_{u\in U}, (bv)v∈V(b_{v})_{v\in V} be nonnegative families over countable sets with sums Ξ±=βˆ‘Uau≀1\alpha=\sum_U a_u\le1 and Ξ²=βˆ‘Vbv≀1\beta=\sum_V b_v\le1 (all sums here are at most 11, being suprema of sums of probabilities or products of such, so all suprema are finite). Every finite TβŠ†UΓ—VT\subseteq U\times V is contained in some TUΓ—TVT_U\times T_V with TUβŠ†UT_U\subseteq U, TVβŠ†VT_V\subseteq V finite, and then βˆ‘Taubvβ‰€βˆ‘TUΓ—TVaubv=(βˆ‘TUau)(βˆ‘TVbv)≀αβ\sum_{T}a_ub_v\le\sum_{T_U\times T_V}a_ub_v=(\sum_{T_U}a_u)(\sum_{T_V}b_v)\le\alpha\beta by distributivity and monotonicity; hence βˆ‘UΓ—Vaubv≀αβ\sum_{U\times V}a_ub_v\le\alpha\beta. Conversely, for finite TU,TVT_U,T_V, (βˆ‘TUau)(βˆ‘TVbv)=βˆ‘TUΓ—TVaubvβ‰€βˆ‘UΓ—Vaubv(\sum_{T_U}a_u)(\sum_{T_V}b_v)=\sum_{T_U\times T_V}a_ub_v\le\sum_{U\times V}a_ub_v; taking the supremum over TUT_U and then over TVT_V gives Ξ±Ξ²β‰€βˆ‘UΓ—Vaubv\alpha\beta\le\sum_{U\times V}a_ub_v (for fixed TVT_V the map s↦sβˆ‘TVbvs\mapsto s\sum_{T_V}b_v is nondecreasing in sβ‰₯0s\ge0, and then similarly in the second factor). This proves (†\dagger).

Step 3 (probabilities of products of events). Let SβŠ†{1,…,r}S\subseteq\{1,\dots,r\} be nonempty and let BiB_i be a Borel set for each i∈Si\in S. Put Ci=Bi∩N0C_i=B_i\cap\mathbb{N}_0 for i∈Si\in S and Ci=N0C_i=\mathbb{N}_0 for iβˆ‰Si\notin S. By Step 1,

β‹‚i∈S{Xi∈Bi}=⋃c∈C1Γ—β‹―Γ—CrR(c),\bigcap_{i\in S}\{X_i\in B_i\}=\bigcup_{c\in C_1\times\cdots\times C_r}R(c),

a countable disjoint union: an Ο‰\omega lies in the left side if and only if its value tuple c(Ο‰)c(\omega) satisfies ci(Ο‰)∈Bic_i(\omega)\in B_i for i∈Si\in S, i.e., c(Ο‰)∈C1Γ—β‹―Γ—Crc(\omega)\in C_1\times\cdots\times C_r (if some Ci=βˆ…C_i=\emptyset, both sides are empty and the identity below reads 0=00=0 by convention that an empty sum is 00). By countable additivity of the measure PP (applied along any enumeration of the countable index set; the series sum equals the unordered sum by the convention above), the hypothesis, and (†\dagger),

P(β‹‚i∈S{Xi∈Bi})=βˆ‘c∈C1Γ—β‹―Γ—Cr∏i=1rgi(ci)=∏i=1rβˆ‘ci∈Cigi(ci)=∏i∈Sβˆ‘ci∈Bi∩N0gi(ci),(‑)P\Bigl(\bigcap_{i\in S}\{X_i\in B_i\}\Bigr)=\sum_{c\in C_1\times\cdots\times C_r}\prod_{i=1}^{r}g_i(c_i)=\prod_{i=1}^{r}\sum_{c_i\in C_i}g_i(c_i)=\prod_{i\in S}\sum_{c_i\in B_i\cap\mathbb{N}_0}g_i(c_i),\tag{$\ddagger$}

where the factors with iβˆ‰Si\notin S equal βˆ‘N0gi=1\sum_{\mathbb{N}_0}g_i=1 and were dropped.

Conclusion. Taking S={i}S=\{i\} in (‑\ddagger) proves Part 1, and taking B={c}B=\{c\} gives P(Xi=c)=gi(c)P(X_i=c)=g_i(c). For Part 2, let B1,…,BrB_1,\dots,B_r be arbitrary Borel sets. For every nonempty SβŠ†{1,…,r}S\subseteq\{1,\dots,r\}, (‑\ddagger) together with Part 1 gives

P(β‹‚i∈S{Xi∈Bi})=∏i∈SP(Xi∈Bi),P\Bigl(\bigcap_{i\in S}\{X_i\in B_i\}\Bigr)=\prod_{i\in S}P(X_i\in B_i),

which is exactly the product formula required by Independence of Events and of Random Variables for the events {X1∈B1},…,{Xr∈Br}\{X_1\in B_1\},\dots,\{X_r\in B_r\}. Hence X1,…,XrX_1,\dots,X_r are independent. β– \blacksquare

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Prerequisites

Loading...

Comments

Loading…