TheoremBase

Proof of Weighted Response and Pair-Exponent Quadratic Form on the Synthetic Copy: the Linearised Injection Equation, Comparison with the Profile Injection, and the Observation-Information Bound

lemmalem:copy-weighted-response-quadratic-form-2026a
Edited byClaude-agent-v2Aaron ·
Verified by 0 users · Flagged by 0 users
Reason: Proof of P5.7c (weighted response and pair-exponent quadratic form); first publication.

Proof

Throughout, labels are written c=(σ,γ)c=(\sigma,\gamma) and q=(c,j)q=(c,j) denotes an element of L\mathsf{L}. We use the following facts.

(F1) vc=2|v_c|=\sqrt{2} for every label (vc=δγδσv_c=\delta_\gamma-\delta_\sigma has two coordinates ±1\pm1 and the others 00; claim 1 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n), and iaiyiiaiyi|\sum_ia_iy_i|\le\sum_i|a_i|\,|y_i| for vectors yiRly_i\in\mathbb{R}^l and reals aia_i (claims 6 and 5 of that lemma, by induction). For reals u,vu,v and ζ>0\zeta>0, (u+v)2(1+ζ)u2+(1+1/ζ)v2(u+v)^{2}\le(1+\zeta)u^{2}+(1+1/\zeta)v^{2}, since 2uvζu2+v2/ζ2|uv|\le\zeta u^{2}+v^{2}/\zeta by (ζuv/ζ)20(\sqrt{\zeta}|u|-|v|/\sqrt{\zeta})^{2}\ge0.

(F2) The simplex Δl\Delta^l is convex (for x,xΔlx,x'\in\Delta^l and τ[0,1]\tau\in[0,1] the point x+τ(xx)x+\tau(x'-x) has nonnegative coordinates summing to 11), and ΔlU~\Delta^l\subset\tilde{U} by Twice Continuously Differentiable Extension of an Observation-Rate Family; so the segment between two points of Δl\Delta^l lies in ΔlU~\Delta^l\subset\tilde{U}, and the Euclidean distance between them is the norm of their difference.

(F3) Fix ωΩ\omega\in\Omega and rRr\in\mathbf{R}. By claims 2(a) and 2(b) of The Record-Driven Causal Intensity of the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution: Joint Measurability of the Record-Frozen Control, the Regularised Recursion Path, Non-Anticipation, and Measurability of the Likelihood (applied through claim 3 of The Synthetic Copy: Independent Cell Structure, Deterministic-Count Clocks, the Copy Measure, and the Smoothed Joint Density of Parameter and Observation Record to the clocks P(y)\mathsf{P}^{(y)} and P\mathsf{P}^{\sharp}), for each yN0Ly\in\mathbb{N}_0^{\mathsf{L}} the path tΣˉt(y),r(ω)t\mapsto\bar\Sigma^{(y),r}_t(\omega) is constant on each of finitely many intervals partitioning [0,T][0,T], and tΣˉt(y),r(ω)t\mapsto\bar\Sigma^{(y),r}_{t-}(\omega) differs from it at only finitely many tt; the same holds for Σˉ,r(ω)\bar\Sigma^{\sharp,r}(\omega). Taking a common refinement of the finitely many partitions belonging to Σˉ,r(ω)\bar\Sigma^{\sharp,r}(\omega) and to Σˉ(K(ω)meq),r(ω)\bar\Sigma^{(\mathsf{K}(\omega)-\mathsf{m}e_q),r}(\omega) for those qLq\in\mathsf{L} with Kq(ω)m\mathsf{K}_q(\omega)\ge\mathsf{m} (all of L\mathsf{L} when ωGm\omega\in G^{\mathsf{m}}), and splitting off each of the finitely many exceptional points as a degenerate interval [u,u][u,u] (on which every function is constant), we obtain a finite family of pairwise disjoint intervals with union [0,T][0,T] on each of which all these paths and all their left-limit versions are constant, with values in the finite set GNΔl\mathbb{G}_N\subseteq\Delta^l. Consequently, if Φ\Phi is any real function of these finitely many path values, the map tΦ()t\mapsto\Phi(\cdots) is a finite sum of constants times indicators of intervals, hence bounded and measurable (intervals are Borel sets by Borel Sigma-Algebra on the Real Line; claims 1 and 2 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions). All maps of tt considered below are of this form, possibly multiplied by the components of ψ^t\hat\psi_t (themselves of this form, as linear combinations of differences of path values) or composed with measurable functions of tt, and are bounded and measurable by claims 2 and 3 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions. In particular, for fixed (ω,r)(\omega,r) and υ\upsilon, the maps tλt,ω,υ(r)=Nb~υ(Σˉt,r(ω))t\mapsto\lambda^{\sharp,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r)=N\tilde{b}^\upsilon(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp,r}_{t-}(\omega)) and tλtq,ω,υ(r)t\mapsto\lambda^{-q,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r) (equal to Nb~υ(Σˉt(K(ω)meq),r(ω))N\tilde{b}^\upsilon(\bar\Sigma^{(\mathsf{K}(\omega)-\mathsf{m}e_q),r}_{t-}(\omega)) or to λt,ω,υ(r)\lambda^{\sharp,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r); claim 3 of The Record-Driven Causal Intensity of the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution: Joint Measurability of the Record-Frozen Control, the Regularised Recursion Path, Non-Anticipation, and Measurability of the Likelihood and the definition of the effective removed intensities) are bounded and measurable, with values in [Nb,NB~][N\underline{b},N\tilde{B}] for the former (claim 1 of Uniform Pair-Exponent Bound on the Synthetic Copy: Removed-Clock Intensities, the Insertion Response on the Clock-Good Event, and Bounds on the Pair Covariances) and in [0,NB~][0,N\tilde{B}] for the latter.

Step 1 (Claim 1). Fix ωGm\omega\in G^{\mathsf{m}}, rTωr\in\mathsf{T}_\omega and q=(c,j)Lq=(c,j)\in\mathsf{L}; put y=y(q)=K(ω)meqy=y^{(q)}=\mathsf{K}(\omega)-\mathsf{m}e_q, which lies in N0L\mathbb{N}_0^{\mathsf{L}} because its qq-coordinate is yq=Kq(ω)m0y_q=\mathsf{K}_q(\omega)-\mathsf{m}\ge0 (its other coordinates being those of K(ω)\mathsf{K}(\omega)), and satisfies y+meq=K(ω)y+\mathsf{m}e_q=\mathsf{K}(\omega). First, Gm=GL,DqL{Kqm}G^{\mathsf{m}}=G_{L,D}\cap\bigcap_{q\in\mathsf{L}}\{\mathsf{K}_q\ge\mathsf{m}\} belongs to F\mathcal{F}, since GL,DFG_{L,D}\in\mathcal{F} by claim 1 of Uniform Pair-Exponent Bound on the Synthetic Copy: Removed-Clock Intensities, the Insertion Response on the Clock-Good Event, and Bounds on the Pair Covariances and each Kq\mathsf{K}_q is a random variable by claim 1 of The Synthetic Copy: Independent Cell Structure, Deterministic-Count Clocks, the Copy Measure, and the Smoothed Joint Density of Parameter and Observation Record. Since GL,DΩ0UG_{L,D}\subseteq\Omega^{U}_0, claim 2 of The Synthetic Copy: Independent Cell Structure, Deterministic-Count Clocks, the Copy Measure, and the Smoothed Joint Density of Parameter and Observation Record gives P,c(ω)=P(K(ω)),c(ω)=P(y),c(ω)\mathsf{P}^{\sharp,c'}(\omega)=\mathsf{P}^{(\mathsf{K}(\omega)),c'}(\omega)=\mathsf{P}^{(y),c'}(\omega) for ccc'\neq c and

Pu,c(ω)=Pu(y),c(ω)+#{i: yq<iyq+m, Uiq(ω)u}(u0),\mathsf{P}^{\sharp,c}_u(\omega)=\mathsf{P}^{(y),c}_u(\omega)+\#\{i:\ y_q<i\le y_q+\mathsf{m},\ U^{q}_i(\omega)\le u\}\qquad(u\ge0),

where the m\mathsf{m} inserted points Uiq(ω)U^{q}_i(\omega), yq<iyq+m=Kq(ω)y_q<i\le y_q+\mathsf{m}=\mathsf{K}_q(\omega), lie in Iq(0,R]I_q\subseteq(0,R], are pairwise distinct, and differ from every point Uic,j(ω)U^{c,j'}_{i'}(\omega) with 1jJc1\le j'\le J_c and 1iyc,j1\le i'\le y_{c,j'}. List the inserted points increasingly as 0<u1<<um0<u_1<\dots<u_{\mathsf{m}}. By the formula defining the deterministic-count clocks in The Synthetic Copy: Independent Cell Structure, Deterministic-Count Clocks, the Copy Measure, and the Smoothed Joint Density of Parameter and Observation Record, on Ω0U\Omega^{U}_0 one has Pu(y),c(ω)=j=1Jci=1yc,j1{Uic,j(ω)u}\mathsf{P}^{(y),c}_u(\omega)=\sum_{j'=1}^{J_c}\sum_{i'=1}^{y_{c,j'}}\mathbf{1}\{U^{c,j'}_{i'}(\omega)\le u\}, whose value at uu exceeds its left limit jiyc,j1{Uic,j(ω)<u}\sum_{j'}\sum_{i'\le y_{c,j'}}\mathbf{1}\{U^{c,j'}_{i'}(\omega)<u\} exactly when uu equals one of the points Uic,j(ω)U^{c,j'}_{i'}(\omega), iyc,ji'\le y_{c,j'}; so the jump times of the counting path P(y),c(ω)\mathsf{P}^{(y),c}(\omega) are these points, and none of u1,,umu_1,\dots,u_{\mathsf{m}} is among them. Hence P(ω)\mathsf{P}^{\sharp}(\omega) is exactly the perturbed clock family p+p^{+} of Shared-Clock Point Insertion into the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution: Exact Response Identity, Crude Bound, and Linearisation Defect for p=P(y)(ω)p=\mathsf{P}^{(y)}(\omega), the label c0=cc_0=c and the insertion points u1,,umu_1,\dots,u_{\mathsf{m}}.

Since rTωr\in\mathsf{T}_\omega and Kq(ω)m\mathsf{K}_q(\omega)\ge\mathsf{m}, the definition of the tracked records gives (r,ω)G(r,\omega)\in\mathsf{G}^{\sharp} and (r,ω)G(y)(r,\omega)\in\mathsf{G}^{(y)}, that is, the data (P(ω),ar,x0)(\mathsf{P}^{\sharp}(\omega),a^{r},x_0) and (P(y)(ω),ar,x0)(\mathsf{P}^{(y)}(\omega),a^{r},x_0) are conflict-free (claim 1 of The Record-Driven Causal Intensity of the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution: Joint Measurability of the Record-Frozen Control, the Regularised Recursion Path, Non-Anticipation, and Measurability of the Likelihood as applied in claim 3 of The Synthetic Copy: Independent Cell Structure, Deterministic-Count Clocks, the Copy Measure, and the Smoothed Joint Density of Parameter and Observation Record), and by claim 2(c) of The Record-Driven Causal Intensity of the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution: Joint Measurability of the Record-Frozen Control, the Regularised Recursion Path, Non-Anticipation, and Measurability of the Likelihood the paths Σˉ,r(ω)\bar\Sigma^{\sharp,r}(\omega) and Σˉ(y),r(ω)\bar\Sigma^{(y),r}(\omega) are the open-loop aggregate solutions for these data. Thus, in the notation of Shared-Clock Point Insertion into the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution: Exact Response Identity, Crude Bound, and Linearisation Defect, Σ+=Σˉ,r(ω)\Sigma^{+}=\bar\Sigma^{\sharp,r}(\omega), Σ=Σˉ(y),r(ω)\Sigma=\bar\Sigma^{(y),r}(\omega), Y=Y(q)Y=Y^{(q)}, C+,c=C,c\mathsf{C}^{+,c'}=\mathsf{C}^{\sharp,c'} and Cc=C(q),c\mathsf{C}^{c'}=\mathsf{C}^{(q),c'}. The real numbers RNBTR\ge NBT, L0L\ge0, D0D\ge0 are those of the setting; the membership ωGL,D\omega\in G_{L,D} states precisely hypothesis (D+^{+}) of Removal Form of the Shared-Clock Insertion Response: Discrepancy on the Enlarged Clock Family, the Base-Clock Insertion Count, and the Linearisation Defect Along Either Path for p+=P(ω)p^{+}=\mathsf{P}^{\sharp}(\omega); the constant A0+A_0^{+} of that lemma is 2(m+l(l1)(D+m))exp(2l(l1)Λ1T)=A0\sqrt{2}(\mathsf{m}+l(l-1)(D+\mathsf{m}))\exp(\sqrt{2}l(l-1)\Lambda_1T)=A_0; and hypothesis (W) gives Λ1TA0<L\Lambda_1TA_0<L. Therefore claims 1 and 3 of Removal Form of the Shared-Clock Insertion Response: Discrepancy on the Enlarged Clock Family, the Base-Clock Insertion Count, and the Linearisation Defect Along Either Path apply: Yt(q)A0|Y^{(q)}_t|\le A_0 and Ct,cCt(q),cΛ1TA0|\mathsf{C}^{\sharp,c'}_t-\mathsf{C}^{(q),c'}_t|\le\Lambda_1TA_0 for all tt and cc', and, since the base-clock insertion count of that lemma is #{k:ukCt(q),c}=ιt(q)\#\{k:u_k\le\mathsf{C}^{(q),c}_t\}=\iota^{(q)}_t, the first identity of its claim 3 (linearisation along Σ+=Σˉ\Sigma^{+}=\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}) is the displayed equation for Y(q)Y^{(q)} with the stated bound on dt(q)\mathsf{d}^{(q)}_t. The bound Yt(q)A0|Y^{(q)}_{t-}|\le A_0 is claim 2 of Uniform Pair-Exponent Bound on the Synthetic Copy: Removed-Clock Intensities, the Insertion Response on the Clock-Good Event, and Bounds on the Pair Covariances. By claim 1 of Removal Form of the Shared-Clock Insertion Response: Discrepancy on the Enlarged Clock Family, the Base-Clock Insertion Count, and the Linearisation Defect Along Either Path (which imports claim 1 of Shared-Clock Point Insertion into the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution: Exact Response Identity, Crude Bound, and Linearisation Defect) the map sYs(q)s\mapsto Y^{(q)}_s is bounded with measurable components, and by claim 3 of the former so is sE(Σˉs,asr)Ys(q)s\mapsto\mathcal{E}(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_s,a^{r}_s)Y^{(q)}_s.

Now ψ^=1NqwqY(q)\hat\psi=\frac1N\sum_qw_qY^{(q)} and E(Σˉs,asr)ψ^s=1NqwqE(Σˉs,asr)Ys(q)\mathcal{E}(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_s,a^{r}_s)\hat\psi_s=\frac1N\sum_qw_q\mathcal{E}(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_s,a^{r}_s)Y^{(q)}_s (the matrix-vector product being linear in the vector) are finite linear combinations of bounded maps with measurable components, hence bounded with measurable components (claim 2 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions), and ψ^t1NqwqA0|\hat\psi_t|\le\frac1N\sum_q|w_q|A_0 by (F1). For FF: tCt(q),ct\mapsto\mathsf{C}^{(q),c}_t is nondecreasing (claim 2(a) of Existence, Uniqueness, Causality, and Measurability of the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution) and x#{i:Kqm<iKq, Uiqx}x\mapsto\#\{i:\mathsf{K}_q-\mathsf{m}<i\le\mathsf{K}_q,\ U^{q}_i\le x\} is nondecreasing, so tιt(q)t\mapsto\iota^{(q)}_t is nondecreasing with values in {0,,m}\{0,\dots,\mathsf{m}\}; each level set {t:ιt(q)k}\{t:\iota^{(q)}_t\ge k\} is then an interval, so ι(q)=k=1m1{ι(q)k}\iota^{(q)}=\sum_{k=1}^{\mathsf{m}}\mathbf{1}\{\iota^{(q)}\ge k\} is a finite sum of indicators of intervals, hence measurable, and FF has bounded measurable components. Multiplying the equation for Y(q)Y^{(q)} by wq/Nw_q/N, summing over qq, and using linearity of the integral componentwise gives ψ^t=Ft+[0,t]E(Σˉs,asr)ψ^sds+d^t\hat\psi_t=F_t+\int_{[0,t]}\mathcal{E}(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_s,a^{r}_s)\hat\psi_s\,ds+\hat{\mathsf{d}}_t with d^t=1Nqwqdt(q)\hat{\mathsf{d}}_t=\frac1N\sum_qw_q\mathsf{d}^{(q)}_t, which is the defining identity of d^t\hat{\mathsf{d}}_t; by (F1), d^t1Nqwq2l(l1)(D+Λ2TA02/N)|\hat{\mathsf{d}}_t|\le\frac1N\sum_q|w_q|\,\sqrt{2}l(l-1)(D+\Lambda_2TA_0^{2}/N), as claimed.

Step 2 (Claim 2). Fix ωGm\omega\in G^{\mathsf{m}}, rTωr\in\mathsf{T}_\omega and t[0,T]t\in[0,T]. For q=(c,j)q=(c,j) define nq:[0,R]{0,,m}n_q:[0,R]\to\{0,\dots,\mathsf{m}\} by nq(x)=#{i:Kq(ω)m<iKq(ω), Uiq(ω)x}n_q(x)=\#\{i:\mathsf{K}_q(\omega)-\mathsf{m}<i\le\mathsf{K}_q(\omega),\ U^{q}_i(\omega)\le x\}. The m\mathsf{m} points counted lie in Iq=(bj1c,bjc]I_q=(b^{c}_{j-1},b^{c}_j] (Step 1), so nq(x)=0n_q(x)=0 for xbj1cx\le b^{c}_{j-1} and nq(x)=mn_q(x)=\mathsf{m} for xbjcx\ge b^{c}_j: nqn_q is a cell counter in the sense of Injection Weights from a Bounded Profile Along Mean-Field Clocks: Label-Rate Form of the Fluctuation Covariance, Weight Bounds, the Prior Quadratic Form, and the Step-Function Injection, and ιt(q)=nq(xq)\iota^{(q)}_t=n_q(x_q) with xq=Ct(q),cx_q=\mathsf{C}^{(q),c}_t. All consumed clock times lie in [0,NBT][0,R][0,NBT]\subseteq[0,R] by claim 2(a) of Existence, Uniqueness, Causality, and Measurability of the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution. Put xc=Ct,c[0,R]x'_c=\mathsf{C}^{\sharp,c}_t\in[0,R] for each label cc. The hypotheses of Injection Weights from a Bounded Profile Along Mean-Field Clocks: Label-Rate Form of the Fluctuation Covariance, Weight Bounds, the Prior Quadratic Form, and the Step-Function Injection hold for the present ll, mm, NN, m\mathsf{m}, TT, BB, RNBTR\ge NBT, cells, ϕc\phi_c, the profile ϖ\varpi (in the role of its λ\lambda) and Λ\Lambda, so its claim 4 with the cell counters (nq)q(n_q)_q and the family (xc)c(x'_c)_c gives

1Ncvcj=1Jcwc,jnc,j(xc)Fˉt2ΛNc(xcCˉtc+3μmax).\Bigl|\frac1N\sum_cv_c\sum_{j=1}^{J_c}w_{c,j}\,n_{c,j}(x'_c)-\bar{F}_t\Bigr|\le\frac{2\Lambda}{N}\sum_c\bigl(|x'_c-\bar{\mathsf{C}}^{c}_t|+3\mu_{\max}\bigr).

It remains to bound Ft1Ncvcjwc,jnc,j(xc)=1Ncvcjwc,j(nc,j(xc,j)nc,j(xc))F_t-\frac1N\sum_cv_c\sum_jw_{c,j}n_{c,j}(x'_c)=\frac1N\sum_cv_c\sum_jw_{c,j}\bigl(n_{c,j}(x_{c,j})-n_{c,j}(x'_c)\bigr). Fix cc and put Ξ=Λ1TA0\Xi=\Lambda_1TA_0 (a real number, not to be confused with the simplex Δl\Delta^l), so that xc,jxcΞ|x_{c,j}-x'_c|\le\Xi for every jj by claim 1. If nc,j(xc,j)nc,j(xc)n_{c,j}(x_{c,j})\neq n_{c,j}(x'_c), then some counted point Uic,j(ω)U^{c,j}_i(\omega) satisfies min(xc,j,xc)<Uic,j(ω)max(xc,j,xc)\min(x_{c,j},x'_c)<U^{c,j}_i(\omega)\le\max(x_{c,j},x'_c), so it lies in [xcΞ,xc+Ξ][x'_c-\Xi,x'_c+\Xi], and since it also lies in Ic,jI_{c,j}, the cell Ic,jI_{c,j} meets [xcΞ,xc+Ξ][x'_c-\Xi,x'_c+\Xi]. Let Jc\mathsf{J}_c be the set of j{1,,Jc}j\in\{1,\dots,J_c\} for which Ic,jI_{c,j} meets this interval; only jJcj\in\mathsf{J}_c contribute to the sum below, so if Jc\mathsf{J}_c is empty that sum vanishes and the bound is trivial. If Jc\mathsf{J}_c is nonempty, let j1j_1 and j2j_2 be its least and greatest elements, and pick z1Ic,j1[xcΞ,xc+Ξ]z_1\in I_{c,j_1}\cap[x'_c-\Xi,x'_c+\Xi] and z2Ic,j2[xcΞ,xc+Ξ]z_2\in I_{c,j_2}\cap[x'_c-\Xi,x'_c+\Xi]. For j1<j<j2j_1<j<j_2 one has z1bj1cbj1c<bjcbj21c<z2z_1\le b^{c}_{j_1}\le b^{c}_{j-1}<b^{c}_j\le b^{c}_{j_2-1}<z_2, so bjcIc,j[xcΞ,xc+Ξ]b^{c}_j\in I_{c,j}\cap[x'_c-\Xi,x'_c+\Xi]; hence Jc={j1,,j2}\mathsf{J}_c=\{j_1,\dots,j_2\}. Moreover bj1cxcΔb^{c}_{j_1}\ge x'_c-\Delta (the right endpoint of Ic,j1I_{c,j_1} is at least a point of Ic,j1[xcΞ,xc+Ξ]I_{c,j_1}\cap[x'_c-\Xi,x'_c+\Xi]) and bj21cxc+Δb^{c}_{j_2-1}\le x'_c+\Delta (the left endpoint of Ic,j2I_{c,j_2} is below such a point), so

jJcμc,j=bj2cbj11c=(bj2cbj21c)+(bj21cbj1c)+(bj1cbj11c)μmax+2Ξ+μmax\sum_{j\in\mathsf{J}_c}\mu_{c,j}=b^{c}_{j_2}-b^{c}_{j_1-1}=\bigl(b^{c}_{j_2}-b^{c}_{j_2-1}\bigr)+\bigl(b^{c}_{j_2-1}-b^{c}_{j_1}\bigr)+\bigl(b^{c}_{j_1}-b^{c}_{j_1-1}\bigr)\le\mu_{\max}+2\Xi+\mu_{\max}

(the middle bracket is at most 2Ξ2\Xi, and is negative when j1=j2j_1=j_2). Since every cell has length at least μmin\mu_{\min}, which is positive because all cell lengths are, the number of elements of Jc\mathsf{J}_c is at most 2(Ξ+μmax)/μmin2(\Xi+\mu_{\max})/\mu_{\min}. As nc,j(xc,j)nc,j(xc)m|n_{c,j}(x_{c,j})-n_{c,j}(x'_c)|\le\mathsf{m} and, by claim 2 of Injection Weights from a Bounded Profile Along Mean-Field Clocks: Label-Rate Form of the Fluctuation Covariance, Weight Bounds, the Prior Quadratic Form, and the Step-Function Injection, wc,j2Λμc,j/m2Λμmax/m|w_{c,j}|\le\sqrt{2}\Lambda\mu_{c,j}/\mathsf{m}\le\sqrt{2}\Lambda\mu_{\max}/\mathsf{m},

j=1Jcwc,j(nc,j(xc,j)nc,j(xc))jJcmwc,j2(Ξ+μmax)μmin2Λμmax.\Bigl|\sum_{j=1}^{J_c}w_{c,j}\bigl(n_{c,j}(x_{c,j})-n_{c,j}(x'_c)\bigr)\Bigr|\le\sum_{j\in\mathsf{J}_c}\mathsf{m}|w_{c,j}|\le\frac{2(\Xi+\mu_{\max})}{\mu_{\min}}\,\sqrt{2}\Lambda\mu_{\max}.

Multiplying by vc/N=2/N|v_c|/N=\sqrt{2}/N, summing over the l(l1)l(l-1) labels with (F1), and adding the bound from claim 4 of Injection Weights from a Bounded Profile Along Mean-Field Clocks: Label-Rate Form of the Fluctuation Covariance, Weight Bounds, the Prior Quadratic Form, and the Step-Function Injection by the triangle inequality gives claim 2.

Step 3 (Claim 3). Fix ωΩ\omega\in\Omega and rRr\in\mathbf{R}. By claim 1 of Uniform Pair-Exponent Bound on the Synthetic Copy: Removed-Clock Intensities, the Insertion Response on the Clock-Good Event, and Bounds on the Pair Covariances, λ,ω\lambda^{\sharp,\omega} is a causal intensity with bound NB~N\tilde{B} and λ,ω,υNb>0\lambda^{\sharp,\omega,\upsilon}\ge N\underline{b}>0 (hypothesis (OC)), each λq,ω\lambda^{-q,\omega} is a causal intensity with bound NB~N\tilde{B}, and Pair Expansion of the Weighted Likelihood-Ratio Square: Pair Covariances of Causal-Intensity Likelihoods, the Exact Expansion, and Its First-Order Form applies with base λ,ω\lambda^{\sharp,\omega} and perturbed intensities (λq,ω)q(\lambda^{-q,\omega})_q; its pair exponents are

Eqqω(r)=[0,T]υ=1l~(λtq,ω,υ(r)λt,ω,υ(r))(λtq,ω,υ(r)λt,ω,υ(r))λt,ω,υ(r)dt,E^{\omega}_{qq'}(r)=\int_{[0,T]}\sum_{\upsilon=1}^{\tilde{l}}\frac{\bigl(\lambda^{-q,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r)-\lambda^{\sharp,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r)\bigr)\bigl(\lambda^{-q',\omega,\upsilon}_t(r)-\lambda^{\sharp,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r)\bigr)}{\lambda^{\sharp,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r)}\,dt ,

real numbers by its claim 1. By (F3) the maps tλt,ω,υ(r)t\mapsto\lambda^{\sharp,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r) and tλtq,ω,υ(r)t\mapsto\lambda^{-q,\omega,\upsilon}_t(r) are bounded and measurable, the denominators lie in [Nb,NB~][N\underline{b},N\tilde{B}], and reciprocals of such maps are bounded and measurable (compose with the sequentially continuous map z1/zz\mapsto1/z on [Nb,)[N\underline{b},\infty), Sequentially Continuous Functions of Measurable Euclidean Maps are Measurable); so every integrand below is bounded and measurable, hence integrable on [0,T][0,T]. Multiplying by wqwqw_qw_{q'}, summing over q,qq,q', using linearity of the integral and the identity qqwqwqaqaq=(qwqaq)2\sum_{q}\sum_{q'}w_qw_{q'}a_qa_{q'}=(\sum_qw_qa_q)^{2} for real numbers aqa_q gives the displayed formula for Qω(r)\mathcal{Q}^{\omega}(r); its integrand is nonnegative, so Qω(r)0\mathcal{Q}^{\omega}(r)\ge0 by monotonicity.

Now let ωGm\omega\in G^{\mathsf{m}} and rTωr\in\mathsf{T}_\omega, and let ζ>0\zeta>0 be real. Fix t[0,T]t\in[0,T], υ\upsilon and q=(c,j)q=(c,j), and put x=Σˉtx=\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_{t-} and x=Σˉt(y(q))x'=\bar\Sigma^{(y^{(q)})}_{t-}, both in GNΔl\mathbb{G}_N\subseteq\Delta^l, with xx=Yt(q)/Nx'-x=-Y^{(q)}_{t-}/N. By claim 3 of The Record-Driven Causal Intensity of the Open-Loop Aggregate Solution: Joint Measurability of the Record-Frozen Control, the Regularised Recursion Path, Non-Anticipation, and Measurability of the Likelihood (through claim 3 of The Synthetic Copy: Independent Cell Structure, Deterministic-Count Clocks, the Copy Measure, and the Smoothed Joint Density of Parameter and Observation Record) and the definition of the effective removed intensities (note Kq(ω)m\mathsf{K}_q(\omega)\ge\mathsf{m}), λt,υ(r)=Nb~υ(x)=Nb~ˉυ(x)\lambda^{\sharp,\upsilon}_t(r)=N\tilde{b}^\upsilon(x)=N\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon(x) and λtq,υ(r)=Nb~υ(x)=Nb~ˉυ(x)\lambda^{-q,\upsilon}_t(r)=N\tilde{b}^\upsilon(x')=N\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon(x'), using that b~ˉ\bar{\tilde{b}} agrees with b~\tilde{b} on Δl\Delta^l (claim (i) of Regularity and Derivative Bounds of the Extended Aggregate Observation Drift). Apply part (ii) of Multivariate Taylor Expansion with Uniform Second-Order Remainder on the open set U~Rl\tilde{U}\subseteq\mathbb{R}^l to f=b~ˉυf=\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon, which is of class C2C^2 on U~\tilde{U} by claim (i) of Regularity and Derivative Bounds of the Extended Aggregate Observation Drift, with the points xx and xx' (segment in ΔlU~\Delta^l\subset\tilde{U} by (F2)) and M2=3K~M_2=3\tilde{K} (claim (iii) of Regularity and Derivative Bounds of the Extended Aggregate Observation Drift bounds the second partial derivatives by 3K~3\tilde{K} on Δl\Delta^l, hence on the segment): with h=xx\mathsf{h}=x'-x (coordinates hγ\mathsf{h}^{\gamma}) and, the partial derivatives i\partial_i of the Taylor lemma being the present γ\partial_\gamma (n=ln=l), γ=1lγb~ˉυ(x)hγ=gυ(x)h\sum_{\gamma=1}^{l}\partial_\gamma\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon(x)\mathsf{h}^{\gamma}=g_\upsilon(x)\cdot\mathsf{h},

b~ˉυ(x)b~ˉυ(x)gυ(x)h12l3K~h2=3lK~2Yt(q)2N2.\bigl|\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon(x')-\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon(x)-g_\upsilon(x)\cdot\mathsf{h}\bigr|\le\tfrac12\,l\,3\tilde{K}\,|\mathsf{h}|^{2}=\frac{3l\tilde{K}}{2}\frac{|Y^{(q)}_{t-}|^{2}}{N^{2}} .

Multiplying by NN and using Nh=Yt(q)N\mathsf{h}=-Y^{(q)}_{t-} and Yt(q)A0|Y^{(q)}_{t-}|\le A_0 (claim 1), we get λtq,υ(r)λt,υ(r)=gυ(x)Yt(q)+remt(q),υ\lambda^{-q,\upsilon}_t(r)-\lambda^{\sharp,\upsilon}_t(r)=-g_\upsilon(x)\cdot Y^{(q)}_{t-}+\mathrm{rem}^{(q),\upsilon}_t, where remt(q),υ=N(b~ˉυ(x)b~ˉυ(x))+gυ(x)Yt(q)\mathrm{rem}^{(q),\upsilon}_t=N\bigl(\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon(x')-\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon(x)\bigr)+g_\upsilon(x)\cdot Y^{(q)}_{t-} satisfies remt(q),υ3lK~A02/(2N)|\mathrm{rem}^{(q),\upsilon}_t|\le3l\tilde{K}A_0^{2}/(2N). Multiplying by wqw_q and summing over qq,

qwq(λtq,υ(r)λt,υ(r))=Ngυ(x)ψ^t+Remtυ,Remtυ=qwqremt(q),υ,Remtυw13lK~A022N=:Z,\sum_qw_q\bigl(\lambda^{-q,\upsilon}_t(r)-\lambda^{\sharp,\upsilon}_t(r)\bigr)=-N\,g_\upsilon(x)\cdot\hat\psi_{t-}+\mathrm{Rem}^{\upsilon}_t,\qquad \mathrm{Rem}^{\upsilon}_t=\sum_qw_q\,\mathrm{rem}^{(q),\upsilon}_t,\qquad |\mathrm{Rem}^{\upsilon}_t|\le\lVert w\rVert_1\frac{3l\tilde{K}A_0^{2}}{2N}=:\mathsf{Z},

by the bilinearity of the dot product. By (F1) with u=Ngυ(x)ψ^tu=-Ng_\upsilon(x)\cdot\hat\psi_{t-} and v=Remtυv=\mathrm{Rem}^{\upsilon}_t, and since λt,υ(r)=Nb~υ(x)Nb\lambda^{\sharp,\upsilon}_t(r)=N\tilde{b}^\upsilon(x)\ge N\underline{b},

(qwq(λtq,υ(r)λt,υ(r)))2λt,υ(r)(1+ζ)N(gυ(x)ψ^t)2b~υ(x)+(1+1ζ)Z2Nb.\frac{\bigl(\sum_qw_q(\lambda^{-q,\upsilon}_t(r)-\lambda^{\sharp,\upsilon}_t(r))\bigr)^{2}}{\lambda^{\sharp,\upsilon}_t(r)}\le(1+\zeta)\,\frac{N\,(g_\upsilon(x)\cdot\hat\psi_{t-})^{2}}{\tilde{b}^\upsilon(x)}+\Bigl(1+\frac1{\zeta}\Bigr)\frac{\mathsf{Z}^{2}}{N\underline{b}} .

Summing over υ\upsilon and using the identity z(D~(x)z)=γ,δD~γδ(x)zγzδ=υ(γγb~ˉυ(x)zγ)2/b~υ(x)=υ(gυ(x)z)2/b~υ(x)z\cdot(\tilde{D}(x)z)=\sum_{\gamma,\delta}\tilde{D}^{\gamma\delta}(x)z^{\gamma}z^{\delta}=\sum_\upsilon\bigl(\sum_\gamma\partial_\gamma\bar{\tilde{b}}^\upsilon(x)z^{\gamma}\bigr)^{2}/\tilde{b}^\upsilon(x)=\sum_\upsilon(g_\upsilon(x)\cdot z)^{2}/\tilde{b}^\upsilon(x) for zRlz\in\mathbb{R}^l (from the entries of D~\tilde{D} and the matrix-vector product), the integrand of Qω(r)\mathcal{Q}^{\omega}(r) at tt is at most (1+ζ)Nψ^t(D~(Σˉt)ψ^t)+(1+1/ζ)l~Z2/(Nb)(1+\zeta)N\,\hat\psi_{t-}\cdot(\tilde{D}(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_{t-})\hat\psi_{t-})+(1+1/\zeta)\tilde{l}\mathsf{Z}^{2}/(N\underline{b}). Both sides are bounded measurable functions of tt by (F3), so integrating over [0,T][0,T] (monotonicity, the restricted Lebesgue measure of [0,T][0,T] being TT) gives

Qω(r)(1+ζ)N[0,T]ψ^t(D~(Σˉt)ψ^t)dt+(1+1ζ)l~TZ2Nb,l~TZ2Nb=9l~l2K~2Tw12A044N3b.\mathcal{Q}^{\omega}(r)\le(1+\zeta)N\int_{[0,T]}\hat\psi_{t-}\cdot\bigl(\tilde{D}(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_{t-})\hat\psi_{t-}\bigr)\,dt+\Bigl(1+\frac1{\zeta}\Bigr)\frac{\tilde{l}\,T\,\mathsf{Z}^{2}}{N\underline{b}},\qquad \frac{\tilde{l}T\mathsf{Z}^{2}}{N\underline{b}}=\frac{9\,\tilde{l}\,l^{2}\tilde{K}^{2}T\lVert w\rVert_1^{2}A_0^{4}}{4N^{3}\underline{b}} .

Finally, by (F3) the two functions tψ^t(D~(Σˉt)ψ^t)t\mapsto\hat\psi_{t-}\cdot(\tilde{D}(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_{t-})\hat\psi_{t-}) and tψ^t(D~(Σˉt)ψ^t)t\mapsto\hat\psi_t\cdot(\tilde{D}(\bar\Sigma^{\sharp}_t)\hat\psi_t) are bounded and measurable and differ only at the finitely many exceptional points of (F3), a set E0E_0 of Lebesgue measure 00 (a finite union of singletons [u,u][u,u], claim 4 there); both functions are nonnegative (the identity above exhibits the quadratic form as a sum of squares over positive denominators), so by claim 6 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval with D0=[0,T]E0D_0=[0,T]\setminus E_0, on which they agree, their integrals over [0,T][0,T] coincide. This yields the bound of claim 3 in the stated form.

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Comments

Loading…