TheoremBase

Induction on the number of points: split off the last point, apply the two-point convexity inequality, then the induction hypothesis to the renormalised remaining weights.

Proof

We prove by induction on N∈NN\in\mathbb{N} that the inequality of (i) holds for all x1,…,xN∈Cx_{1},\dots,x_{N}\in C and all tβˆˆΞ”Nt\in\Delta_{N}. Throughout, a sum over [N+1][N+1] splits as the sum over [N][N] plus its last term, and a one-term sum is its term, by Iterated Operations: Finite Sums and Finite Products (i) and Iterating a Binary Operation along a Finite List (i).

For N=1N=1, Convex Combinations: Small Cases, Splitting Off the Last Point, Dropping a Zero Weight, Joining Two Combinations, and Membership in Convex Sets (i) gives t1=1t_{1}=1 and βˆ‘k=11tkxk=x1\sum_{k=1}^{1}t_{k}x_{k}=x_{1}, while βˆ‘k=11tkf(xk)=f(x1)\sum_{k=1}^{1}t_{k}f(x_{k})=f(x_{1}); so the inequality holds with equality.

Now assume the claim for some NN, and let x1,…,xN+1∈Cx_{1},\dots,x_{N+1}\in C and tβˆˆΞ”N+1t\in\Delta_{N+1}. Put

z=βˆ‘k=1N+1tkxk.z=\sum_{k=1}^{N+1}t_{k}x_{k}.

By Convex Combinations: Small Cases, Splitting Off the Last Point, Dropping a Zero Weight, Joining Two Combinations, and Membership in Convex Sets (iii), 0≀tN+1≀10\le t_{N+1}\le1, and we treat the cases tN+1=1t_{N+1}=1 and tN+1<1t_{N+1}<1 separately.

If tN+1=1t_{N+1}=1, then z=xN+1z=x_{N+1} by Convex Combinations: Small Cases, Splitting Off the Last Point, Dropping a Zero Weight, Joining Two Combinations, and Membership in Convex Sets (iii). Since βˆ‘k=1N+1tk=1\sum_{k=1}^{N+1}t_{k}=1 (Convex Weights, the Standard Simplex, and Convex Combinations in Rn\mathbb{R}^n (i)), the sum βˆ‘k=1Ntk\sum_{k=1}^{N}t_{k} is 00, and each of its nonnegative terms lies between 00 and this sum by Finite Sums in a Commutative Ring and in an Ordered Field: Distributivity, Differences, Telescoping, Constant Terms, Comparison and the Triangle Inequality (vi). Hence tk=0t_{k}=0 for every k∈[N]k\in[N], and βˆ‘k=1Ntkf(xk)=βˆ‘k=1N0=0\sum_{k=1}^{N}t_{k}f(x_{k})=\sum_{k=1}^{N}0=0 by Finite Sums in a Commutative Ring and in an Ordered Field: Distributivity, Differences, Telescoping, Constant Terms, Comparison and the Triangle Inequality (iv). Therefore

βˆ‘k=1N+1tkf(xk)=f(xN+1)=f(z).\sum_{k=1}^{N+1}t_{k}f(x_{k})=f(x_{N+1})=f(z).

If tN+1<1t_{N+1}<1, then Convex Combinations: Small Cases, Splitting Off the Last Point, Dropping a Zero Weight, Joining Two Combinations, and Membership in Convex Sets (iii) gives s=1βˆ’tN+1>0s=1-t_{N+1}>0 and convex weights Ο„=(t1/s,…,tN/s)βˆˆΞ”N\tau=(t_{1}/s,\dots,t_{N}/s)\in\Delta_{N} such that, with y=βˆ‘k=1NΟ„kxky=\sum_{k=1}^{N}\tau_{k}x_{k},

z=(1βˆ’tN+1) y+tN+1 xN+1.z=(1-t_{N+1})\,y+t_{N+1}\,x_{N+1}.

The point yy lies in CC by Convex Combinations: Small Cases, Splitting Off the Last Point, Dropping a Zero Weight, Joining Two Combinations, and Membership in Convex Sets (vi). We now apply, in turn, the convexity inequality of Convex Function on a Convex Subset of Rn\mathbb{R}^n (i), the induction hypothesis for x1,…,xNx_{1},\dots,x_{N} and Ο„\tau (multiplied by s>0s>0), and Finite Sums in a Commutative Ring and in an Ordered Field: Distributivity, Differences, Telescoping, Constant Terms, Comparison and the Triangle Inequality (i) with sΟ„k=tks\tau_{k}=t_{k}:

f(z)≀s f(y)+tN+1f(xN+1)≀sβˆ‘k=1NΟ„kf(xk)+tN+1f(xN+1)=βˆ‘k=1N+1tkf(xk).f(z)\le s\,f(y)+t_{N+1}f(x_{N+1})\le s\sum_{k=1}^{N}\tau_{k}f(x_{k})+t_{N+1}f(x_{N+1})=\sum_{k=1}^{N+1}t_{k}f(x_{k}).

This completes the induction.

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…