TheoremBase

Proof

Preliminaries. Integrals of nonnegative measurable functions are handled with claim 1 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral (additivity, positive homogeneity, monotonicity), integrable functions with claim 2 there and with Integrable Function and the Lebesgue Integral. Sums, scalar multiples, products, absolute values and pointwise limits of measurable real-valued functions are measurable by claims 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions. Two elementary facts on a measure space (Z,Z,ν)(\mathsf{Z},\mathcal{Z},\nu), both from Lebesgue Integral of a Nonnegative Measurable Function and Simple Function and Its Integral: (F1) if β:Z→[0,∞)\beta:\mathsf{Z}\to[0,\infty) is measurable with ∫β dν=0\int\beta\,d\nu=0, then ν({β>0})=0\nu(\{\beta>0\})=0, because for every natural number kk the simple function 1k1{β>1/k}\tfrac1k\mathbf{1}_{\{\beta>1/k\}} is at most β\beta, so 1k ν({β>1/k})≤∫β dν=0\tfrac1k\,\nu(\{\beta>1/k\})\le\int\beta\,d\nu=0, and {β>0}\{\beta>0\} is the union of the sets {β>1/k}\{\beta>1/k\}, whose measure is then 00 by countable subadditivity (claim 4 of Basic Properties of a Measure); (F2) if a measurable u:Z→[0,∞]u:\mathsf{Z}\to[0,\infty] vanishes off a set N∈ZN\in\mathcal{Z} with ν(N)=0\nu(N)=0, then ∫u dν=0\int u\,d\nu=0, because every simple function ss with 0≤s≤u0\le s\le u vanishes off NN, so s≤(max⁡s)1Ns\le(\max s)\mathbf{1}_N and ∫s dν≤(max⁡s) ν(N)=0\int s\,d\nu\le(\max s)\,\nu(N)=0; the integral of uu is the least upper bound of these.

Step 1: claim 1. Measurability of qq. For every natural number kk the map hk:[0,∞)→Rh_k:[0,\infty)\to\mathbb{R}, hk(v)=v/(v2+1/k)h_k(v)=v/(v^{2}+1/k), is sequentially continuous on [0,∞)[0,\infty) (a quotient of sequentially continuous maps with positive denominator, by claims 1, 2 and 4 of Arithmetic of Limits of Real Sequences), so hk∘βh_k\circ\beta is measurable by Sequentially Continuous Functions of Measurable Euclidean Maps are Measurable. For v>0v>0, hk(v)→1/vh_k(v)\to1/v as k→∞k\to\infty (again by the limit laws, since 1/k→01/k\to0), while hk(0)=0h_k(0)=0 for every kk. Hence h∘βh\circ\beta, where h(v)=1/vh(v)=1/v for v>0v>0 and h(0)=0h(0)=0, is the pointwise limit of the measurable maps hk∘βh_k\circ\beta and is measurable. Now q=α2⋅(h∘β)q=\alpha^{2}\cdot(h\circ\beta) pointwise: on {β>0}\{\beta>0\} both sides equal α2/β\alpha^{2}/\beta, and on {β=0}\{\beta=0\} both sides vanish, as α=0\alpha=0 there by hypothesis. So qq is measurable, being a product of measurable functions.

Case I=0I=0, where I=∫β dνI=\int\beta\,d\nu. By (F1), N={β>0}N=\{\beta>0\} has ν(N)=0\nu(N)=0, and ∣α∣|\alpha| vanishes off NN by hypothesis. By (F2), ∫∣α∣ dν=0\int|\alpha|\,d\nu=0, so α\alpha is integrable (Integrable Function and the Lebesgue Integral) with ∫α± dν≤∫∣α∣ dν=0\int\alpha^{\pm}\,d\nu\le\int|\alpha|\,d\nu=0 by monotonicity, hence ∫α dν=0\int\alpha\,d\nu=0, and the asserted inequality reads 0≤00\le0.

Case I>0I>0. By claim 3 of Image Measures, Measures with Densities, and Change of Variables, ν′(A)=∫1A (β/I) dν\nu'(A)=\int\mathbf{1}_A\,(\beta/I)\,d\nu (A∈ZA\in\mathcal{Z}) is a measure on (Z,Z)(\mathsf{Z},\mathcal{Z}) with ν′(Z)=∫β dν/I=1\nu'(\mathsf{Z})=\int\beta\,d\nu/I=1, so (Z,Z,ν′)(\mathsf{Z},\mathcal{Z},\nu') is a probability space, and for every measurable F:Z→[0,∞]F:\mathsf{Z}\to[0,\infty] one has ∫F dν′=∫F (β/I) dν\int F\,d\nu'=\int F\,(\beta/I)\,d\nu, while a measurable F:Z→RF:\mathsf{Z}\to\mathbb{R} is ν′\nu'-integrable if and only if Fβ/IF\beta/I is ν\nu-integrable, with equal integrals. Put X=α⋅(h∘β)X=\alpha\cdot(h\circ\beta), a measurable real-valued function, equal to α/β\alpha/\beta on {β>0}\{\beta>0\} and to 00 on {β=0}\{\beta=0\}. Then X2β=qX^{2}\beta=q pointwise (on {β>0}\{\beta>0\} both are α2/β\alpha^{2}/\beta; on {β=0}\{\beta=0\} both vanish), so

∫X2 dν′=1I∫q dν<∞,\int X^{2}\,d\nu'=\frac1I\int q\,d\nu<\infty ,

and XX is a square-integrable random variable on (Z,Z,ν′)(\mathsf{Z},\mathcal{Z},\nu'), hence integrable there. Also Xβ=αX\beta=\alpha pointwise (on {β=0}\{\beta=0\} both vanish), so ∣X∣β/I=∣α∣/I|X|\beta/I=|\alpha|/I; the ν′\nu'-integrability of ∣X∣|X| therefore gives ∫∣α∣ dν=I∫∣X∣ dν′<∞\int|\alpha|\,d\nu=I\int|X|\,d\nu'<\infty, so α\alpha is ν\nu-integrable, and by the change-of-density identity for integrable functions, ∫α dν=I∫X dν′=I E′[X]\int\alpha\,d\nu=I\int X\,d\nu'=I\,\mathbb{E}'[X], where E′\mathbb{E}' is the expectation under ν′\nu'. The constant 11 is square-integrable with mean-square norm 11, so claim 1 of Cauchy-Schwarz and Triangle Inequalities for the Mean-Square Norm gives ∣E′[X]∣=∣E′[X⋅1]∣≤∥X∥2|\mathbb{E}'[X]|=|\mathbb{E}'[X\cdot1]|\le\lVert X\rVert_{2}, that is, E′[X]2≤E′[X2]\mathbb{E}'[X]^{2}\le\mathbb{E}'[X^{2}] (squaring is monotone on [0,∞)[0,\infty) by Monotonicity of Squaring on the Nonnegative Elements of an Ordered Field). Therefore

(∫α dν)2=I2 E′[X]2≤I2 E′[X2]=I∫q dν,\Bigl(\int\alpha\,d\nu\Bigr)^{2}=I^{2}\,\mathbb{E}'[X]^{2}\le I^{2}\,\mathbb{E}'[X^{2}]=I\int q\,d\nu ,

which is the claim.

Step 2: claim 2. First, since every term of D(a,b)\mathsf{D}(a,b) is nonnegative with a positive coefficient, D(a,b)=0\mathsf{D}(a,b)=0 holds exactly when a=b1=⋯=bn=0a=b_1=\dots=b_n=0; this is used throughout. (b). Let (a,b)∈[0,∞)1+n(a,b)\in[0,\infty)^{1+n} and put Σ=a+∑jbj≥0\Sigma=a+\sum_jb_j\ge0. Since ∣wj∣≤∥w∥1|w_j|\le\lVert w\rVert_1 for every jj and a,bj≥0a,b_j\ge0, the absolute-value bound for finite sums (Comparison and Absolute Value Bounds for Finite Sums of Real Numbers) gives

∣Nw(a,b)∣≤∑j=1n∣wj∣ (a+bj)=∥w∥1 a+∑j=1n∣wj∣ bj≤∥w∥1 Σ.|\mathsf{N}_w(a,b)|\le\sum_{j=1}^{n}|w_j|\,(a+b_j)=\lVert w\rVert_1\,a+\sum_{j=1}^{n}|w_j|\,b_j\le\lVert w\rVert_1\,\Sigma .

Moreover D(a,b)≥12nΣ\mathsf{D}(a,b)\ge\frac{1}{2n}\Sigma, because 12≥12n\frac12\ge\frac1{2n} and a≥0a\ge0. If D(a,b)>0\mathsf{D}(a,b)>0 then Σ>0\Sigma>0 (otherwise a=b1=⋯=bn=0a=b_1=\dots=b_n=0 and D(a,b)=0\mathsf{D}(a,b)=0), and

Φw(a,b)=Nw(a,b)2D(a,b)≤∥w∥12 Σ2Σ/(2n)=2n ∥w∥12 Σ;\Phi_w(a,b)=\frac{\mathsf{N}_w(a,b)^{2}}{\mathsf{D}(a,b)}\le\frac{\lVert w\rVert_1^{2}\,\Sigma^{2}}{\Sigma/(2n)}=2n\,\lVert w\rVert_1^{2}\,\Sigma ;

if D(a,b)=0\mathsf{D}(a,b)=0 then Φw(a,b)=0≤2n∥w∥12Σ\Phi_w(a,b)=0\le2n\lVert w\rVert_1^{2}\Sigma. Nonnegativity of Φw\Phi_w is clear, as a quotient of a square by a positive number or 00.

(a). Each coordinate map (a,b)↦a(a,b)\mapsto a, (a,b)↦bj(a,b)\mapsto b_j is sequentially continuous on R1+n\mathbb{R}^{1+n}, since the distance between two points bounds the difference of any fixed coordinate (The Euclidean Distance on Rn\mathbb{R}^n); hence Nw\mathsf{N}_w and D\mathsf{D}, finite linear combinations of coordinates, are sequentially continuous by claims 1 and 3 of Arithmetic of Limits of Real Sequences. Let (ak,bk)k∈N(a^k,b^k)_{k\in\mathbb{N}} be a sequence in [0,∞)1+n[0,\infty)^{1+n} converging to (a,b)∈[0,∞)1+n(a,b)\in[0,\infty)^{1+n}. If D(a,b)>0\mathsf{D}(a,b)>0, then D(ak,bk)→D(a,b)>0\mathsf{D}(a^k,b^k)\to\mathsf{D}(a,b)>0, so D(ak,bk)>0\mathsf{D}(a^k,b^k)>0 for all large kk, and Φw(ak,bk)=Nw(ak,bk)2/D(ak,bk)→Nw(a,b)2/D(a,b)=Φw(a,b)\Phi_w(a^k,b^k)=\mathsf{N}_w(a^k,b^k)^{2}/\mathsf{D}(a^k,b^k)\to\mathsf{N}_w(a,b)^{2}/\mathsf{D}(a,b)=\Phi_w(a,b) by claims 2 and 4 of Arithmetic of Limits of Real Sequences. If D(a,b)=0\mathsf{D}(a,b)=0, then (a,b)=0(a,b)=0 and Φw(a,b)=0\Phi_w(a,b)=0, while by (b), 0≤Φw(ak,bk)≤2n∥w∥12 (ak+∑jbjk)→00\le\Phi_w(a^k,b^k)\le2n\lVert w\rVert_1^{2}\,(a^k+\sum_jb^k_j)\to0, so Φw(ak,bk)→0=Φw(a,b)\Phi_w(a^k,b^k)\to0=\Phi_w(a,b) by the comparison of limits (claim 1 of Order Properties of Limits of Real Sequences). Thus Φw\Phi_w is sequentially continuous on [0,∞)1+n[0,\infty)^{1+n}.

(c). For c≥0c\ge0, Nw(ca,cb)=c Nw(a,b)\mathsf{N}_w(ca,cb)=c\,\mathsf{N}_w(a,b) and D(ca,cb)=c D(a,b)\mathsf{D}(ca,cb)=c\,\mathsf{D}(a,b) by homogeneity of finite sums. If c>0c>0 and D(a,b)>0\mathsf{D}(a,b)>0, then D(ca,cb)>0\mathsf{D}(ca,cb)>0 and Φw(ca,cb)=c2Nw(a,b)2/(c D(a,b))=c Φw(a,b)\Phi_w(ca,cb)=c^{2}\mathsf{N}_w(a,b)^{2}/(c\,\mathsf{D}(a,b))=c\,\Phi_w(a,b); if c>0c>0 and D(a,b)=0\mathsf{D}(a,b)=0 then D(ca,cb)=0\mathsf{D}(ca,cb)=0 and both sides vanish; if c=0c=0 then (ca,cb)=0(ca,cb)=0 and both sides vanish.

(d). Under the hypotheses, D(a,b)≥12a+12n⋅n(1−δ)a=(1−δ/2) a>0\mathsf{D}(a,b)\ge\frac12a+\frac{1}{2n}\cdot n(1-\delta)a=(1-\delta/2)\,a>0, so Φw(a,b)=Nw(a,b)2/D(a,b)≤Nw(a,b)2/((1−δ/2)a)\Phi_w(a,b)=\mathsf{N}_w(a,b)^{2}/\mathsf{D}(a,b)\le\mathsf{N}_w(a,b)^{2}/((1-\delta/2)a). Finally (1+δ)(1−δ/2)=1+δ2(1−δ)≥1(1+\delta)(1-\delta/2)=1+\tfrac{\delta}{2}(1-\delta)\ge1 for 0≤δ≤10\le\delta\le1, so 1/(1−δ/2)≤1+δ1/(1-\delta/2)\le1+\delta, which gives (d).

Step 3: claim 3. The map z↦(ℓ0(z),ℓ1(z),…,ℓn(z))z\mapsto(\ell_0(z),\ell_1(z),\dots,\ell_n(z)) has measurable components and takes values in the nonempty set E=[0,∞)1+nE=[0,\infty)^{1+n}, on which Φw\Phi_w is sequentially continuous by claim 2(a); so z↦Φw(ℓ0(z),…,ℓn(z))z\mapsto\Phi_w(\ell_0(z),\dots,\ell_n(z)) is measurable by Sequentially Continuous Functions of Measurable Euclidean Maps are Measurable. Define the measurable functions

βˉ=12ℓ0+12n∑j=1nℓj:Z→[0,∞),α=∑j=1nwj(ℓ0−ℓj):Z→R,\bar\beta=\tfrac12\ell_0+\tfrac{1}{2n}\sum_{j=1}^{n}\ell_j:\mathsf{Z}\to[0,\infty),\qquad \alpha=\sum_{j=1}^{n}w_j(\ell_0-\ell_j):\mathsf{Z}\to\mathbb{R},

so that βˉ(z)=D(ℓ0(z),…,ℓn(z))\bar\beta(z)=\mathsf{D}(\ell_0(z),\dots,\ell_n(z)) and α(z)=Nw(ℓ0(z),…,ℓn(z))\alpha(z)=\mathsf{N}_w(\ell_0(z),\dots,\ell_n(z)) for every zz. By linearity of the integral for nonnegative functions, ∫βˉ dν=D(A,B1,…,Bn)<∞\int\bar\beta\,d\nu=\mathsf{D}(A,B_1,\dots,B_n)<\infty; each ℓi\ell_i is integrable (nonnegative with finite integral), so α\alpha is integrable with ∫α dν=∑jwj(A−Bj)=Nw(A,B1,…,Bn)\int\alpha\,d\nu=\sum_jw_j(A-B_j)=\mathsf{N}_w(A,B_1,\dots,B_n) by linearity for integrable functions. Where βˉ(z)=0\bar\beta(z)=0, every ℓi(z)\ell_i(z) vanishes, hence α(z)=0\alpha(z)=0. The function qq of claim 1 built from (α,βˉ)(\alpha,\bar\beta) equals Φw(ℓ0(z),…,ℓn(z))\Phi_w(\ell_0(z),\dots,\ell_n(z)) pointwise, by the definition of Φw\Phi_w (where βˉ(z)>0\bar\beta(z)>0 it is α(z)2/βˉ(z)\alpha(z)^{2}/\bar\beta(z), and where βˉ(z)=0\bar\beta(z)=0 both are 00). If ∫q dν=∞\int q\,d\nu=\infty there is nothing to prove. Otherwise claim 1 applies and gives Nw(A,B)2≤D(A,B)∫q dν\mathsf{N}_w(A,B)^{2}\le\mathsf{D}(A,B)\int q\,d\nu, writing B=(B1,…,Bn)B=(B_1,\dots,B_n). If D(A,B)>0\mathsf{D}(A,B)>0, dividing yields Φw(A,B)≤∫q dν\Phi_w(A,B)\le\int q\,d\nu; if D(A,B)=0\mathsf{D}(A,B)=0, then Φw(A,B)=0≤∫q dν\Phi_w(A,B)=0\le\int q\,d\nu. This proves claim 3. ■\blacksquare

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…