TheoremBase

Proof

We keep the notation of the statement. Throughout, for 1≤k≤r1\le k\le r let Pk\mathcal{P}_k denote the family of iterated rectangles B1×⋯×Bk⊆RkB_1\times\cdots\times B_k\subseteq\mathbb{R}^k with all Bi∈B(R)B_i\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}) (Cartesian products, under the identification fixed in the statement). Pk\mathcal{P}_k is a π\pi-system in the sense of Dynkin's Pi-Lambda Theorem — it is closed under intersection, since (B1×⋯×Bk)∩(B1′×⋯×Bk′)=(B1∩B1′)×⋯×(Bk∩Bk′)(B_1\times\cdots\times B_k)\cap(B'_1\times\cdots\times B'_k)=(B_1\cap B'_1)\times\cdots\times(B_k\cap B'_k) — and it contains Rk\mathbb{R}^k.

Step 0 (iterated rectangles generate, and product values). We show by induction on kk that the generated σ\sigma-algebra satisfies σ(Pk)=Bk\sigma(\mathcal{P}_k)=\mathcal{B}_k. For k=1k=1, P1=B(R)\mathcal{P}_1=\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}). Let k≥2k\ge2 and assume σ(Pk−1)=Bk−1\sigma(\mathcal{P}_{k-1})=\mathcal{B}_{k-1}. Each member of Pk\mathcal{P}_k is a measurable rectangle in the sense of Product Sigma-Algebra (its first factor lies in Pk−1⊆Bk−1\mathcal{P}_{k-1}\subseteq\mathcal{B}_{k-1}), so σ(Pk)⊆Bk\sigma(\mathcal{P}_k)\subseteq\mathcal{B}_k. Conversely, fix B∈B(R)B\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}) and let AB={A⊆Rk−1:A×B∈σ(Pk)}\mathcal{A}_B=\{A\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{k-1}:A\times B\in\sigma(\mathcal{P}_k)\}. Then AB\mathcal{A}_B is a σ\sigma-algebra: it contains Rk−1\mathbb{R}^{k-1}, is closed under countable unions ((⋃jAj)×B=⋃j(Aj×B)(\bigcup_j A_j)\times B=\bigcup_j(A_j\times B)), and under complements, since (Rk−1∖A)×B=(Rk−1×B)∖(A×B)(\mathbb{R}^{k-1}\setminus A)\times B=(\mathbb{R}^{k-1}\times B)\setminus(A\times B) with Rk−1×B∈Pk\mathbb{R}^{k-1}\times B\in\mathcal{P}_k. It contains Pk−1\mathcal{P}_{k-1}, hence contains σ(Pk−1)=Bk−1\sigma(\mathcal{P}_{k-1})=\mathcal{B}_{k-1}. So every measurable rectangle A×BA\times B lies in σ(Pk)\sigma(\mathcal{P}_k), and these generate Bk\mathcal{B}_k; thus Bk⊆σ(Pk)\mathcal{B}_k\subseteq\sigma(\mathcal{P}_k).

Also, by induction on kk using the defining property of the product measure in Existence and Uniqueness of the Product Measure,

(ν1⊗⋯⊗νk)(B1×⋯×Bk)=∏i=1kνi(Bi),(\nu_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\nu_k)(B_1\times\cdots\times B_k)=\prod_{i=1}^{k}\nu_i(B_i),

with the finite product notation.

Step 1 (Claim 1). Measurability of VV: by induction on kk, with V(k)=(V1,…,Vk)V^{(k)}=(V_1,\dots,V_k). The class {C⊆Rk:(V(k))−1(C)∈F}\{C\subseteq\mathbb{R}^k:(V^{(k)})^{-1}(C)\in\mathcal{F}\} is a σ\sigma-algebra (preimages commute with complements and countable unions) containing every measurable rectangle A×BA\times B, since (V(k))−1(A×B)=(V(k−1))−1(A)∩Vk−1(B)∈F(V^{(k)})^{-1}(A\times B)=(V^{(k-1)})^{-1}(A)\cap V_k^{-1}(B)\in\mathcal{F} by the induction hypothesis and measurability of VkV_k; hence it contains Bk\mathcal{B}_k.

PVP_V is a probability measure on (Rr,Br)(\mathbb{R}^r,\mathcal{B}_r): PV(∅)=0P_V(\emptyset)=0, PV(Rr)=P(Ω)=1P_V(\mathbb{R}^r)=P(\Omega)=1, and countable additivity follows from that of PP because preimages of pairwise disjoint sets are pairwise disjoint and V−1(⋃jCj)=⋃jV−1(Cj)V^{-1}(\bigcup_j C_j)=\bigcup_j V^{-1}(C_j).

On Pr\mathcal{P}_r: by independence of V1,…,VrV_1,\dots,V_r and Step 0,

PV(B1×⋯×Br)=P(⋂i=1r{Vi∈Bi})=∏i=1rP(Vi∈Bi)=∏i=1rνi(Bi)=(ν1⊗⋯⊗νr)(B1×⋯×Br).P_V(B_1\times\cdots\times B_r)=P\Bigl(\bigcap_{i=1}^{r}\{V_i\in B_i\}\Bigr)=\prod_{i=1}^{r}P(V_i\in B_i)=\prod_{i=1}^{r}\nu_i(B_i)=(\nu_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\nu_r)(B_1\times\cdots\times B_r).

Let L={C∈Br:PV(C)=(ν1⊗⋯⊗νr)(C)}\mathcal{L}=\{C\in\mathcal{B}_r:P_V(C)=(\nu_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\nu_r)(C)\}. Since both set functions are probability measures, L\mathcal{L} contains Rr\mathbb{R}^r, is closed under proper differences (if A⊆BA\subseteq B both lie in L\mathcal{L}, then B∖A∈LB\setminus A\in\mathcal{L} by additivity and finiteness) and under increasing countable unions (continuity from below, obtained by writing an increasing union as a disjoint union of successive differences and using countable additivity). So L\mathcal{L} is a λ\lambda-system containing the π\pi-system Pr\mathcal{P}_r, and Dynkin's Pi-Lambda Theorem together with Step 0 gives L⊇σ(Pr)=Br\mathcal{L}\supseteq\sigma(\mathcal{P}_r)=\mathcal{B}_r. This proves Claim 1.

Step 2 (Claim 2). φ∘V\varphi\circ V is a random variable since preimages compose: (φ∘V)−1(B)=V−1(φ−1(B))(\varphi\circ V)^{-1}(B)=V^{-1}(\varphi^{-1}(B)). The identity E[φ∘V]=∫Rrφ dPV\mathbb{E}[\varphi\circ V]=\int_{\mathbb{R}^r}\varphi\,dP_V follows by the standard machine exactly as in the proof of Change of Variables for Expectations, with (R,B(R))(\mathbb{R},\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R})) there replaced by (Rr,Br)(\mathbb{R}^r,\mathcal{B}_r): for indicators both sides equal PV(C)P_V(C) by the integral of a simple function; linearity for nonnegative functions (claim 1 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral) extends this to nonnegative simple φ\varphi; for nonnegative measurable φ\varphi, compose with the dyadic staircase functions of Step 0(b) of the proof of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral and apply Monotone Convergence Theorem on both spaces. If instead φ\varphi is bounded, say ∣φ∣≤M|\varphi|\le M, apply the nonnegative case to the positive and negative parts φ±\varphi^{\pm} (as in Integrable Function and the Lebesgue Integral); each is bounded by MM, whose integral against a probability measure is M<∞M<\infty, so φ∘V\varphi\circ V is integrable and the identities subtract. By Claim 1, PV=ν1⊗⋯⊗νrP_V=\nu_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\nu_r, so the value depends only on φ\varphi and ν1,…,νr\nu_1,\dots,\nu_r.

Step 3 (Claim 3). Selecting a subfamily of an independent family preserves independence (immediate from Independence of Events and of Random Variables), so the entries of the tuples VI=(Vi1,…,Vip)V_I=(V_{i_1},\dots,V_{i_p}) and VJ=(Vj1,…,Vjq)V_J=(V_{j_1},\dots,V_{j_q}), and of the combined tuple over I∪JI\cup J, are independent, and each tuple map is measurable by Step 1 (whose measurability argument uses no independence). Hence φ(VI)\varphi(V_I) and ψ(VJ)\psi(V_J) are random variables by Step 2. Fix Borel sets B,B′⊆RB,B'\subseteq\mathbb{R} and put C=φ−1(B)∈BpC=\varphi^{-1}(B)\in\mathcal{B}_p, D=ψ−1(B′)∈BqD=\psi^{-1}(B')\in\mathcal{B}_q. It suffices to prove

P(VI∈C, VJ∈D)=P(VI∈C) P(VJ∈D)for all C∈Bp, D∈Bq;P(V_I\in C,\ V_J\in D)=P(V_I\in C)\,P(V_J\in D)\qquad\text{for all }C\in\mathcal{B}_p,\ D\in\mathcal{B}_q;

independence of the two random variables φ(VI)\varphi(V_I), ψ(VJ)\psi(V_J) in the sense of Independence of Events and of Random Variables then follows (for a pair, only the product identity for the pair itself is nontrivial).

If CC and DD are iterated rectangles, both sides expand by independence of the combined family into the same product of the numbers P(Vi∈⋅)P(V_i\in\cdot) over I∪JI\cup J. Now fix an iterated rectangle DD. The two set functions C↦P(VI∈C, VJ∈D)C\mapsto P(V_I\in C,\ V_J\in D) and C↦P(VI∈C)P(VJ∈D)C\mapsto P(V_I\in C)P(V_J\in D) are finite measures on Bp\mathcal{B}_p (countable additivity as in Step 1) with the same total mass P(VJ∈D)P(V_J\in D), agreeing on Pp\mathcal{P}_p; the class where they agree is a λ\lambda-system exactly as in Step 1, so by Dynkin's Pi-Lambda Theorem and Step 0 they agree on all of Bp\mathcal{B}_p. Finally fix an arbitrary C∈BpC\in\mathcal{B}_p and repeat the same argument in the DD-coordinate over the π\pi-system Pq\mathcal{P}_q. This proves Claim 3.

Step 4 (Claim 4). Projections: πr−1(B)=Rr−1×B∈Br\pi_r^{-1}(B)=\mathbb{R}^{r-1}\times B\in\mathcal{B}_r, and for i<ri<r, by induction on rr, πi−1(B)=A×R\pi_i^{-1}(B)=A\times\mathbb{R} with A∈Br−1A\in\mathcal{B}_{r-1}, a measurable rectangle. Next, if u,v:Rr→Ru,v:\mathbb{R}^r\to\mathbb{R} are jointly Borel then so is u+vu+v: for t∈Rt\in\mathbb{R}, by density of the rationals,

{x:u(x)+v(x)>t}=⋃s∈Q({x:u(x)>s}∩{x:v(x)>t−s}),\{x:u(x)+v(x)>t\}=\bigcup_{s\in\mathbb{Q}}\bigl(\{x:u(x)>s\}\cap\{x:v(x)>t-s\}\bigr),

a countable union of members of Br\mathcal{B}_r; and the rays (t,∞)(t,\infty) generate B(R)\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}) (every open interval with rational endpoints is obtained from rays by countable set operations, e.g. (c,d)=(c,∞)∖⋂k≥1(d−1/k,∞)(c,d)=(c,\infty)\setminus\bigcap_{k\ge1}(d-1/k,\infty), and every open set is a countable union of such intervals by density of the rationals), so the generator criterion of Measurable Function and Real-Valued Measurable Function applies. The addition map is the sum of the rr projections, hence jointly Borel by induction on the number of summands. Finally, (t∘φ)−1(B)=φ−1(t−1(B))(t\circ\varphi)^{-1}(B)=\varphi^{-1}(t^{-1}(B)) with t−1(B)∈B(R)t^{-1}(B)\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}), proving the composition statement. ■\blacksquare

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…