Throughout, μ n = P X n \mu_{n}=P_{X_{n}} μ n = P X n and μ = P X \mu=P_{X} μ = P X are the laws, Borel probability measures on ( R , d R ) (\mathbb{R},d_{\mathbb{R}}) ( R , d R ) (The Law of a Random Element (i) ), and F n = F X n F_{n}=F_{X_{n}} F n = F X n , F = F X F=F_{X} F = F X , so that F n ( t ) = μ n ( ( − ∞ , t ] ) F_{n}(t)=\mu_{n}((-\infty,t]) F n ( t ) = μ n (( − ∞ , t ]) and F ( t ) = μ ( ( − ∞ , t ] ) F(t)=\mu((-\infty,t]) F ( t ) = μ (( − ∞ , t ]) (Distribution Functions (ii) , Distribution Functions (i) ). The distance on R \mathbb{R} R is d R ( x , y ) = ∣ x − y ∣ d_{\mathbb{R}}(x,y)=|x-y| d R ( x , y ) = ∣ x − y ∣ (The Distance on the Real Numbers Is a Map with Values the Absolute Differences (i) ). So continuity of F F F at t t t (Continuous Map Between Metric Spaces (i) ) is the usual ε \varepsilon ε -δ \delta δ condition with ∣ u − t ∣ < δ |u-t|<\delta ∣ u − t ∣ < δ ; for t ∈ R t\in\mathbb{R} t ∈ R the ray ( − ∞ , t ) (-\infty,t) ( − ∞ , t ) is open , as it contains the ball B d R ( x , t − x ) B_{d_{\mathbb{R}}}(x,t-x) B d R ( x , t − x ) about each of its points x x x ; and ( − ∞ , t ] (-\infty,t] ( − ∞ , t ] is closed , its complement ( t , ∞ ) (t,\infty) ( t , ∞ ) containing B d R ( x , x − t ) B_{d_{\mathbb{R}}}(x,x-t) B d R ( x , x − t ) about each of its points x x x .
Step 1 (proof of (i) : upper bound). By Convergence in Distribution of Random Elements of a Metric Space (i) , μ n ⇒ μ \mu_{n}\Rightarrow\mu μ n ⇒ μ . Let t t t be a continuity point of F F F . The ray ( − ∞ , t ] (-\infty,t] ( − ∞ , t ] is closed, so Portmanteau Theorem on a Metric Space (iii) (from Portmanteau Theorem on a Metric Space (i) ) gives lim sup n F n ( t ) ≤ F ( t ) \limsup_{n}F_{n}(t)\le F(t) lim sup n F n ( t ) ≤ F ( t ) .
Step 2 (proof of (i) : lower bound). Since μ n ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) ≤ F n ( t ) \mu_{n}((-\infty,t))\le F_{n}(t) μ n (( − ∞ , t )) ≤ F n ( t ) for every n n n (Basic Properties of a Measure (iii) ) and the ray ( − ∞ , t ) (-\infty,t) ( − ∞ , t ) is open, Properties of the Limit Superior and the Limit Inferior: Tail Formula, Order, Comparison, Bounds, Eventual and Frequent Inequalities, Subsequences, Negation and Convergence (iii) and Portmanteau Theorem on a Metric Space (iv) give
lim inf n F n ( t ) ≥ lim inf n μ n ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) ≥ μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) . \liminf_{n}F_{n}(t)\ge\liminf_{n}\mu_{n}\bigl((-\infty,t)\bigr)\ge\mu\bigl((-\infty,t)\bigr). n lim inf F n ( t ) ≥ n lim inf μ n ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) ≥ μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) .
We claim that μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) ≥ F ( t ) \mu((-\infty,t))\ge F(t) μ (( − ∞ , t )) ≥ F ( t ) . For every s < t s<t s < t the ray ( − ∞ , t ) (-\infty,t) ( − ∞ , t ) contains ( − ∞ , s ] (-\infty,s] ( − ∞ , s ] , so F ( s ) ≤ μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) F(s)\le\mu((-\infty,t)) F ( s ) ≤ μ (( − ∞ , t )) . Suppose μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) < F ( t ) \mu((-\infty,t))<F(t) μ (( − ∞ , t )) < F ( t ) , and let ε = F ( t ) − μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) > 0 \varepsilon=F(t)-\mu((-\infty,t))>0 ε = F ( t ) − μ (( − ∞ , t )) > 0 . By continuity of F F F at t t t there is δ > 0 \delta>0 δ > 0 with ∣ F ( u ) − F ( t ) ∣ < ε |F(u)-F(t)|<\varepsilon ∣ F ( u ) − F ( t ) ∣ < ε whenever ∣ u − t ∣ < δ |u-t|<\delta ∣ u − t ∣ < δ . For s = t − θ s=t-\theta s = t − θ with 0 < θ < δ 0<\theta<\delta 0 < θ < δ this gives F ( s ) > F ( t ) − ε = μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) F(s)>F(t)-\varepsilon=\mu((-\infty,t)) F ( s ) > F ( t ) − ε = μ (( − ∞ , t )) , a contradiction. Hence lim inf n F n ( t ) ≥ F ( t ) \liminf_{n}F_{n}(t)\ge F(t) lim inf n F n ( t ) ≥ F ( t ) , and with Step 1 and Properties of the Limit Superior and the Limit Inferior: Tail Formula, Order, Comparison, Bounds, Eventual and Frequent Inequalities, Subsequences, Negation and Convergence (ii) ,
F ( t ) ≤ lim inf n F n ( t ) ≤ lim sup n F n ( t ) ≤ F ( t ) , F(t)\le\liminf_{n}F_{n}(t)\le\limsup_{n}F_{n}(t)\le F(t), F ( t ) ≤ n lim inf F n ( t ) ≤ n lim sup F n ( t ) ≤ F ( t ) ,
so F n ( t ) → F ( t ) F_{n}(t)\to F(t) F n ( t ) → F ( t ) by Properties of the Limit Superior and the Limit Inferior: Tail Formula, Order, Comparison, Bounds, Eventual and Frequent Inequalities, Subsequences, Negation and Convergence (xi) .
Step 3 (null points are dense continuity points). Call t ∈ R t\in\mathbb{R} t ∈ R a null point if μ ( { t } ) = 0 \mu(\{t\})=0 μ ({ t }) = 0 . Let a < b a<b a < b . By A Measurable Real Function Has Null Level Sets at Levels Arbitrarily Close to Any Point, for a Finite Measure (i) , applied to the finite measure P P P and the measurable function X X X , there is t t t with a < t < b a<t<b a < t < b and μ ( { t } ) = P ( X = t ) = 0 \mu(\{t\})=P(X=t)=0 μ ({ t }) = P ( X = t ) = 0 . So every interval ( a , b ) (a,b) ( a , b ) with a < b a<b a < b contains a null point.
Now let t t t be a null point; we show that F F F is continuous at t t t . Since ( − ∞ , t ) = ( − ∞ , t ] ∖ { t } (-\infty,t)=(-\infty,t]\setminus\{t\} ( − ∞ , t ) = ( − ∞ , t ] ∖ { t } , we have μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) = F ( t ) − μ ( { t } ) = F ( t ) \mu((-\infty,t))=F(t)-\mu(\{t\})=F(t) μ (( − ∞ , t )) = F ( t ) − μ ({ t }) = F ( t ) (Basic Properties of a Measure (iv) ). To control μ ( ( − ∞ , s ) ) \mu((-\infty,s)) μ (( − ∞ , s )) for s s s just below t t t , we reflect. The map ϱ : R → R \varrho:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R} ϱ : R → R , ϱ ( u ) = − u \varrho(u)=-u ϱ ( u ) = − u , preserves distances, so it is continuous and hence Borel measurable (Measurable Maps: Generators, Composition, Continuous Maps, Restrictions, and Criteria for Real- and [0,∞]-Valued Maps (iv) ), and the image measure ν = μ ∘ ϱ − 1 \nu=\mu\circ\varrho^{-1} ν = μ ∘ ϱ − 1 is a Borel probability measure on R \mathbb{R} R (Image Measures and Measures with a Density: Measures, Integrals and Change of Variables (i) ). Its distribution function is
F ν ( y ) = μ ( ϱ − 1 ( ( − ∞ , y ] ) ) = μ ( [ − y , ∞ ) ) = 1 − μ ( ( − ∞ , − y ) ) ( y ∈ R ) . F_{\nu}(y)=\mu\bigl(\varrho^{-1}((-\infty,y])\bigr)=\mu\bigl([-y,\infty)\bigr)=1-\mu\bigl((-\infty,-y)\bigr)\qquad(y\in\mathbb{R}). F ν ( y ) = μ ( ϱ − 1 (( − ∞ , y ]) ) = μ ( [ − y , ∞ ) ) = 1 − μ ( ( − ∞ , − y ) ) ( y ∈ R ) .
Let ε > 0 \varepsilon>0 ε > 0 . Right-continuity of F ν F_{\nu} F ν at − t -t − t (Properties of Distribution Functions (ii) , applied to ν \nu ν ) gives δ 1 > 0 \delta_{1}>0 δ 1 > 0 with F ν ( y ) < F ν ( − t ) + ε F_{\nu}(y)<F_{\nu}(-t)+\varepsilon F ν ( y ) < F ν ( − t ) + ε for − t ≤ y < − t + δ 1 -t\le y<-t+\delta_{1} − t ≤ y < − t + δ 1 . Writing s = − y s=-y s = − y , this says
μ ( ( − ∞ , s ) ) > μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) − ε = F ( t ) − ε ( t − δ 1 < s ≤ t ) , \mu\bigl((-\infty,s)\bigr)>\mu\bigl((-\infty,t)\bigr)-\varepsilon=F(t)-\varepsilon\qquad(t-\delta_{1}<s\le t), μ ( ( − ∞ , s ) ) > μ ( ( − ∞ , t ) ) − ε = F ( t ) − ε ( t − δ 1 < s ≤ t ) ,
and since μ ( ( − ∞ , s ) ) ≤ F ( s ) ≤ F ( t ) \mu((-\infty,s))\le F(s)\le F(t) μ (( − ∞ , s )) ≤ F ( s ) ≤ F ( t ) , we get ∣ F ( s ) − F ( t ) ∣ < ε |F(s)-F(t)|<\varepsilon ∣ F ( s ) − F ( t ) ∣ < ε for t − δ 1 < s ≤ t t-\delta_{1}<s\le t t − δ 1 < s ≤ t . Right-continuity of F F F at t t t (the same lemma, applied to μ \mu μ ) gives δ 2 > 0 \delta_{2}>0 δ 2 > 0 with F ( t ) ≤ F ( y ) < F ( t ) + ε F(t)\le F(y)<F(t)+\varepsilon F ( t ) ≤ F ( y ) < F ( t ) + ε for t ≤ y < t + δ 2 t\le y<t+\delta_{2} t ≤ y < t + δ 2 . Hence ∣ F ( u ) − F ( t ) ∣ < ε |F(u)-F(t)|<\varepsilon ∣ F ( u ) − F ( t ) ∣ < ε whenever ∣ u − t ∣ < min ( δ 1 , δ 2 ) |u-t|<\min(\delta_{1},\delta_{2}) ∣ u − t ∣ < min ( δ 1 , δ 2 ) , and F F F is continuous at t t t .
Step 4 (proof of (ii) : reduction). By Convergence in Distribution of Random Elements of a Metric Space (i) , X n → d X X_{n}\xrightarrow{d}X X n d X means μ n ⇒ μ \mu_{n}\Rightarrow\mu μ n ⇒ μ , so by Portmanteau Theorem on a Metric Space (ii) (equivalent to Portmanteau Theorem on a Metric Space (i) ) it suffices to show
∫ R f d μ n → ∫ R f d μ \int_{\mathbb{R}}f\,d\mu_{n}\to\int_{\mathbb{R}}f\,d\mu ∫ R f d μ n → ∫ R f d μ
for every bounded Lipschitz function f : R → R f:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R} f : R → R . Fix such an f f f , a bound M ≥ 0 M\ge0 M ≥ 0 with ∣ f ∣ ≤ M |f|\le M ∣ f ∣ ≤ M , and a Lipschitz constant L ≥ 0 L\ge0 L ≥ 0 , so that ∣ f ( u ) − f ( v ) ∣ ≤ L ∣ u − v ∣ |f(u)-f(v)|\le L|u-v| ∣ f ( u ) − f ( v ) ∣ ≤ L ∣ u − v ∣ . As f f f is continuous, hence measurable (A Lipschitz Map is Uniformly Continuous and Continuous (ii) , Measurable Maps: Generators, Composition, Continuous Maps, Restrictions, and Criteria for Real- and [0,∞]-Valued Maps (iv) ), the functions f f f and f 1 B f\mathbf{1}_{B} f 1 B , for Borel sets B B B , are bounded and measurable; so they lie in L 1 ( ρ ) \mathcal{L}^{1}(\rho) L 1 ( ρ ) for every Borel probability measure ρ \rho ρ on R \mathbb{R} R (Bounded Measurable Functions on a Finite Measure Space Are Integrable (i) ), and n ↦ ∫ f 1 B d μ n n\mapsto\int f\mathbf{1}_{B}\,d\mu_{n} n ↦ ∫ f 1 B d μ n is a real sequence (The Simple, Nonnegative, Integrable and Signed Integrals Are Predicative in the Measure and the Function, at Any Variable Positions (iii) ). Integrals against such a ρ \rho ρ are expectations on the probability space ( R , B ( R ) , ρ ) (\mathbb{R},\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}),\rho) ( R , B ( R ) , ρ ) , so they obey Rules for Expectations, Variances and Covariances (i) , Rules for Expectations, Variances and Covariances (iii) , Rules for Expectations, Variances and Covariances (iv) and Rules for Expectations, Variances and Covariances (v) ; these rules are used without further mention below.
Step 5 (the choices). Fix ε > 0 \varepsilon>0 ε > 0 . By Properties of Distribution Functions (iii) and Properties of Distribution Functions (iv) there are M 1 , M 2 > 0 M_{1},M_{2}>0 M 1 , M 2 > 0 with F ( x ) < ε / 2 F(x)<\varepsilon/2 F ( x ) < ε /2 for x ≤ − M 1 x\le-M_{1} x ≤ − M 1 and F ( x ) > 1 − ε / 2 F(x)>1-\varepsilon/2 F ( x ) > 1 − ε /2 for x ≥ M 2 x\ge M_{2} x ≥ M 2 , and by Step 3 there are null points a ∈ ( − M 1 − 1 , − M 1 ) a\in(-M_{1}-1,-M_{1}) a ∈ ( − M 1 − 1 , − M 1 ) and b ∈ ( M 2 , M 2 + 1 ) b\in(M_{2},M_{2}+1) b ∈ ( M 2 , M 2 + 1 ) . Then a < b a<b a < b and
μ ( ( a , b ] ) = F ( b ) − F ( a ) > 1 − ε \mu\bigl((a,b]\bigr)=F(b)-F(a)>1-\varepsilon μ ( ( a , b ] ) = F ( b ) − F ( a ) > 1 − ε
(Basic Properties of a Measure (iv) ). With a a a and b b b fixed, put
h = ε 2 L + 1 , κ = ε b − a , h=\frac{\varepsilon}{2L+1},\qquad\kappa=\frac{\varepsilon}{b-a}, h = 2 L + 1 ε , κ = b − a ε ,
so that 2 L h < ε 2Lh<\varepsilon 2 L h < ε and κ > 0 \kappa>0 κ > 0 . For c ∈ [ a , b ] c\in[a,b] c ∈ [ a , b ] and a Borel probability measure ρ \rho ρ on R \mathbb{R} R let I ρ ( c ) = ∫ f 1 ( a , c ] d ρ I_{\rho}(c)=\int f\mathbf{1}_{(a,c]}\,d\rho I ρ ( c ) = ∫ f 1 ( a , c ] d ρ , and let
β ( c ) = 2 L h ( F ( c ) − F ( a ) ) + κ ( c − a ) . \beta(c)=2Lh\bigl(F(c)-F(a)\bigr)+\kappa(c-a). β ( c ) = 2 L h ( F ( c ) − F ( a ) ) + κ ( c − a ) .
Call c ∈ [ a , b ] c\in[a,b] c ∈ [ a , b ] good if c c c is a null point and there is N ∈ N N\in\mathbb{N} N ∈ N with
∣ I μ n ( c ) − I μ ( c ) ∣ ≤ β ( c ) for all n ≥ N . \bigl|I_{\mu_{n}}(c)-I_{\mu}(c)\bigr|\le\beta(c)\qquad\text{for all }n\ge N. I μ n ( c ) − I μ ( c ) ≤ β ( c ) for all n ≥ N .
The point a a a is good: ( a , a ] = ∅ (a,a]=\emptyset ( a , a ] = ∅ , so I μ n ( a ) = I μ ( a ) = 0 = β ( a ) I_{\mu_{n}}(a)=I_{\mu}(a)=0=\beta(a) I μ n ( a ) = I μ ( a ) = 0 = β ( a ) .
Step 6 (one step to the right). Let c c c be good, with N N N as above, and let c ′ c' c ′ be a null point with c < c ′ ≤ min ( c + h , b ) c<c'\le\min(c+h,b) c < c ′ ≤ min ( c + h , b ) . We show that c ′ c' c ′ is good. Let ρ \rho ρ be μ n \mu_{n} μ n or μ \mu μ . Since ( a , c ′ ] (a,c'] ( a , c ′ ] is the disjoint union of ( a , c ] (a,c] ( a , c ] and ( c , c ′ ] (c,c'] ( c , c ′ ] , linearity gives I ρ ( c ′ ) = I ρ ( c ) + ∫ f 1 ( c , c ′ ] d ρ I_{\rho}(c')=I_{\rho}(c)+\int f\mathbf{1}_{(c,c']}\,d\rho I ρ ( c ′ ) = I ρ ( c ) + ∫ f 1 ( c , c ′ ] d ρ . For u ∈ ( c , c ′ ] u\in(c,c'] u ∈ ( c , c ′ ] we have ∣ u − c ′ ∣ ≤ h |u-c'|\le h ∣ u − c ′ ∣ ≤ h , hence ∣ f ( u ) − f ( c ′ ) ∣ ≤ L h |f(u)-f(c')|\le Lh ∣ f ( u ) − f ( c ′ ) ∣ ≤ L h , and therefore
∣ ∫ f 1 ( c , c ′ ] d ρ − f ( c ′ ) ρ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) ∣ ≤ L h ρ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) . \Bigl|\int f\mathbf{1}_{(c,c']}\,d\rho-f(c')\,\rho\bigl((c,c']\bigr)\Bigr|\le Lh\,\rho\bigl((c,c']\bigr). ∫ f 1 ( c , c ′ ] d ρ − f ( c ′ ) ρ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) ≤ L h ρ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) .
By Step 3, c c c and c ′ c' c ′ are continuity points of F F F , so F n ( c ) → F ( c ) F_{n}(c)\to F(c) F n ( c ) → F ( c ) and F n ( c ′ ) → F ( c ′ ) F_{n}(c')\to F(c') F n ( c ′ ) → F ( c ′ ) by hypothesis. Let
η = κ ( c ′ − c ) M + L h + 1 > 0 , \eta=\frac{\kappa(c'-c)}{M+Lh+1}>0, η = M + L h + 1 κ ( c ′ − c ) > 0 ,
and choose N ′ ≥ N N'\ge N N ′ ≥ N with ∣ F n ( c ) − F ( c ) ∣ < η / 2 |F_{n}(c)-F(c)|<\eta/2 ∣ F n ( c ) − F ( c ) ∣ < η /2 and ∣ F n ( c ′ ) − F ( c ′ ) ∣ < η / 2 |F_{n}(c')-F(c')|<\eta/2 ∣ F n ( c ′ ) − F ( c ′ ) ∣ < η /2 for all n ≥ N ′ n\ge N' n ≥ N ′ . As μ n ( ( c , c ′ ] ) = F n ( c ′ ) − F n ( c ) \mu_{n}((c,c'])=F_{n}(c')-F_{n}(c) μ n (( c , c ′ ]) = F n ( c ′ ) − F n ( c ) and μ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) = F ( c ′ ) − F ( c ) \mu((c,c'])=F(c')-F(c) μ (( c , c ′ ]) = F ( c ′ ) − F ( c ) (Basic Properties of a Measure (iv) ), this gives ∣ μ n ( ( c , c ′ ] ) − μ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) ∣ < η |\mu_{n}((c,c'])-\mu((c,c'])|<\eta ∣ μ n (( c , c ′ ]) − μ (( c , c ′ ]) ∣ < η for n ≥ N ′ n\ge N' n ≥ N ′ . Combining these estimates with ∣ f ( c ′ ) ∣ ≤ M |f(c')|\le M ∣ f ( c ′ ) ∣ ≤ M , for every n ≥ N ′ n\ge N' n ≥ N ′
∣ I μ n ( c ′ ) − I μ ( c ′ ) ∣ ≤ β ( c ) + M η + L h ( μ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) + η ) + L h μ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) ≤ β ( c ) + 2 L h ( F ( c ′ ) − F ( c ) ) + κ ( c ′ − c ) = β ( c ′ ) , \bigl|I_{\mu_{n}}(c')-I_{\mu}(c')\bigr|\le\beta(c)+M\eta+Lh\bigl(\mu((c,c'])+\eta\bigr)+Lh\,\mu\bigl((c,c']\bigr)\le\beta(c)+2Lh\bigl(F(c')-F(c)\bigr)+\kappa(c'-c)=\beta(c'), I μ n ( c ′ ) − I μ ( c ′ ) ≤ β ( c ) + M η + L h ( μ (( c , c ′ ]) + η ) + L h μ ( ( c , c ′ ] ) ≤ β ( c ) + 2 L h ( F ( c ′ ) − F ( c ) ) + κ ( c ′ − c ) = β ( c ′ ) ,
since ( M + L h ) η ≤ κ ( c ′ − c ) (M+Lh)\eta\le\kappa(c'-c) ( M + L h ) η ≤ κ ( c ′ − c ) . So c ′ c' c ′ is good.
Step 7 (the supremum of the good points). The set G G G of good points contains a a a and is bounded above by b b b , so it has a supremum s ∈ [ a , b ] s\in[a,b] s ∈ [ a , b ] (The Real Numbers Form an Ordered Field in Which Every Nonempty Set Bounded Above Has a Supremum (ii) ). As s − h < s s-h<s s − h < s , the number s − h s-h s − h is not an upper bound of G G G , so there is a good point c > s − h c>s-h c > s − h . Suppose c + h < b c+h<b c + h < b . Then s < c + h s<c+h s < c + h , and by Step 3 there is a null point c ′ c' c ′ with s < c ′ < c + h s<c'<c+h s < c ′ < c + h ; since c ≤ s < c ′ ≤ c + h < b c\le s<c'\le c+h<b c ≤ s < c ′ ≤ c + h < b , Step 6 shows that c ′ c' c ′ is good, contradicting c ′ > s c'>s c ′ > s . Hence b ≤ c + h b\le c+h b ≤ c + h . If c = b c=b c = b , then b b b is good; otherwise c < b ≤ c + h c<b\le c+h c < b ≤ c + h , and b b b , a null point, is good by Step 6. In either case b b b is good, and s = b s=b s = b .
Step 8 (passage to the limit). Since b b b is good and F ( b ) − F ( a ) ≤ 1 F(b)-F(a)\le1 F ( b ) − F ( a ) ≤ 1 , there is N 0 N_{0} N 0 with
∣ I μ n ( b ) − I μ ( b ) ∣ ≤ β ( b ) ≤ 2 L h + κ ( b − a ) < 2 ε ( n ≥ N 0 ) . \bigl|I_{\mu_{n}}(b)-I_{\mu}(b)\bigr|\le\beta(b)\le2Lh+\kappa(b-a)<2\varepsilon\qquad(n\ge N_{0}). I μ n ( b ) − I μ ( b ) ≤ β ( b ) ≤ 2 L h + κ ( b − a ) < 2 ε ( n ≥ N 0 ) .
For ρ \rho ρ equal to μ n \mu_{n} μ n or μ \mu μ , ∫ f d ρ = I ρ ( b ) + ∫ f 1 R ∖ ( a , b ] d ρ \int f\,d\rho=I_{\rho}(b)+\int f\mathbf{1}_{\mathbb{R}\setminus(a,b]}\,d\rho ∫ f d ρ = I ρ ( b ) + ∫ f 1 R ∖ ( a , b ] d ρ , and
∣ ∫ f 1 R ∖ ( a , b ] d ρ ∣ ≤ M ρ ( R ∖ ( a , b ] ) = M ( 1 − ρ ( ( a , b ] ) ) \Bigl|\int f\mathbf{1}_{\mathbb{R}\setminus(a,b]}\,d\rho\Bigr|\le M\rho\bigl(\mathbb{R}\setminus(a,b]\bigr)=M\bigl(1-\rho((a,b])\bigr) ∫ f 1 R ∖ ( a , b ] d ρ ≤ Mρ ( R ∖ ( a , b ] ) = M ( 1 − ρ (( a , b ]) )
(Basic Properties of a Measure (iv) ). As a a a and b b b are continuity points of F F F , choosing N 1 N_{1} N 1 as N ′ N' N ′ was chosen in Step 6, now with η = μ ( ( a , b ] ) − ( 1 − ε ) > 0 \eta=\mu((a,b])-(1-\varepsilon)>0 η = μ (( a , b ]) − ( 1 − ε ) > 0 , gives μ n ( ( a , b ] ) = F n ( b ) − F n ( a ) > 1 − ε \mu_{n}((a,b])=F_{n}(b)-F_{n}(a)>1-\varepsilon μ n (( a , b ]) = F n ( b ) − F n ( a ) > 1 − ε for n ≥ N 1 n\ge N_{1} n ≥ N 1 . For n ≥ max ( N 0 , N 1 ) n\ge\max(N_{0},N_{1}) n ≥ max ( N 0 , N 1 ) adding the estimates above gives
∣ ∫ f d μ n − ∫ f d μ ∣ < 2 ε + M ε + M ε = 2 ( 1 + M ) ε . \Bigl|\int f\,d\mu_{n}-\int f\,d\mu\Bigr|<2\varepsilon+M\varepsilon+M\varepsilon=2(1+M)\varepsilon . ∫ f d μ n − ∫ f d μ < 2 ε + Mε + Mε = 2 ( 1 + M ) ε .
Given ε ′ > 0 \varepsilon'>0 ε ′ > 0 , Steps 5 to 8 with ε = ε ′ / ( 2 ( 1 + M ) ) \varepsilon=\varepsilon'/(2(1+M)) ε = ε ′ / ( 2 ( 1 + M )) yield N N N with ∣ ∫ f d μ n − ∫ f d μ ∣ < ε ′ |\int f\,d\mu_{n}-\int f\,d\mu|<\varepsilon' ∣ ∫ f d μ n − ∫ f d μ ∣ < ε ′ for all n ≥ N n\ge N n ≥ N . Hence ∫ f d μ n → ∫ f d μ \int f\,d\mu_{n}\to\int f\,d\mu ∫ f d μ n → ∫ f d μ , and Step 4 gives X n → d X X_{n}\xrightarrow{d}X X n d X .