Reason: First version: Steps 1-4 adapted from the proof of thm:van-trees-inequality-2026b (version 24faa7bd, cited), using hypothesis (iv) only through square-integrability of the scores; new Steps 5-6 prove the directional identity and the mixture-weight bound.
Step 1 (change of variables).(Θ,D) is measurable and Q is its image measure, and by assumption (i), Q is the measure with density p with respect to κ. Hence claims 2 and 3 of Image Measures, Measures with Densities, and Change of Variables give: for every Bl⊗G-measurable g:Rl×Y→[0,∞],
∫Ωg∘(Θ,D)dP=∫gdQ=∫gpdκin [0,∞];
and for measurable g:Rl×Y→R, the random variable g∘(Θ,D) is integrable with respect to P if and only if gp is integrable with respect to κ, in which case E[g(Θ,D)]=∫gpdκ. Taking g≡1: ∫pdκ=Q(Rl×Y)=P(Ω)=1.
Step 2 (a one-dimensional vanishing lemma). Let g:R→R be differentiable at every point of R, regarded as an interval each of whose points x is an interior point (as x−1<x<x+1 with x−1,x+1∈R), let g and its derivative g′ be continuous on R as maps from the real line with the absolute value metric into itself, and let g and g′ be integrable with respect to λ. (They are measurable: for continuous u:R→R and real a, each point of {u>a} has an open interval around it inside the set, by continuity, so {u>a} is open and hence lies in the Borel σ-algebra.) Then:
(i)∫Rg′dλ=0.
(ii) If moreover t↦tg(t) and t↦tg′(t) are integrable with respect to λ, then ∫Rtg′(t)dλ(t)=−∫Rgdλ.
Proof of (i). Let a<b be real and write [a,b] for the closed interval they determine, regarded as a subset of the real line with the absolute value metric. The restrictions of g and of g′ to [a,b] are continuous on [a,b] by claim 1 of the restriction lemma. By claim 3 of the interval toolkit, the restriction of g′ is therefore Riemann integrable on [a,b] with ∫abg′(t)dt=∫[a,b]g′dλ[a,b], and by claim 2 of the same lemma the latter integral is ∫Rg′1[a,b]dλ, since the zero extension of the restriction of g′ is g′1[a,b]. Moreover R is an interval containing [a,b] and every x with a<x<b is an interior point of [a,b], so claim 2 of the restriction lemma makes the restriction of g differentiable at every such x, with derivative g′(x). Applying the second fundamental theorem of calculus to the restrictions of g and g′ gives g(b)−g(a)=∫abg′(t)dt. Thus
g(b)−g(a)=∫Rg′1[a,b]dλ(a<b).(∗)
As n→∞ through the natural numbers, g′1[0,n]→g′1[0,∞) pointwise, dominated by the integrable ∣g′∣, so Dominated Convergence Theorem and (∗) give g(n)→c+:=g(0)+∫g′1[0,∞)dλ. Moreover, by (∗) and monotonicity, supt∈[n,n+1]∣g(t)−g(n)∣≤∫∣g′∣1[n,∞)dλ→0 (dominated convergence again), so g(t)→c+ as t→∞. If c+=0, there is R0>0 with ∣g(t)∣≥∣c+∣/2 for all t≥R0; then for every natural n>R0, monotonicity, the integral of simple functions, and Existence of Lebesgue Measure on the Real Line give ∫∣g∣dλ≥(∣c+∣/2)λ([R0,n])=(∣c+∣/2)(n−R0)→∞, contradicting integrability of g; so c+=0. Symmetrically, g(−n)=g(0)−∫g′1[−n,0]dλ converges to a limit c−, g(t)→c− as t→−∞, and c−=0. Finally, by dominated convergence and (∗),
Step 3 (slices of the density). Fix i∈{1,…,l}. For (θ′,y)∈Rl−1×Y and t∈R put gθ′,y(t)=p(Ψi(t,(θ′,y))), and write Ψi(t,(θ′,y))=(θ(t),y), so that θ(t)∈Rl has ith coordinate t and all other coordinates independent of t, and gθ′,y(t)=p(θ(t),y). Since θ(t) and θ(t0) differ only in the ith coordinate,
k=1∑l(θ(t)k−θ(t0)k)2=(t−t0)2(t,t0∈R).
By assumption (ii), gθ′,y is strictly positive.
Differentiability. Fix t0∈R. By assumption (ii) the function p(⋅,y) is of class C1 on Rl, so by clauses 1 and 3 of the definition of a Ck map its partial derivative with respect to the ith variable exists at θ(t0). Unwinding that definition: for every real ε>0 there is a real δ>0 such that every real h with 0<∣h∣<δ satisfies
hp(θ(t0+h),y)−p(θ(t0),y)−∂ip(θ(t0),y)<ε,
because the point obtained from θ(t0) by increasing its ith coordinate by h is exactly θ(t0+h). The further requirement in that definition, that the incremented point belong to the domain, is automatic here because the domain is all of Rl; what remains is verbatim the assertion that gθ′,y is differentiable at t0 with
Continuity. By clause 1 of the same definition, p(⋅,y) and ∂ip(⋅,y) are continuous at every point of Rl. Let u be either of them, let t0∈R and let ε>0 be real; continuity of u at θ(t0) supplies a real δ>0 such that every w∈Rl with ∑k(wk−θ(t0)k)2<δ2 satisfies (u(w)−u(θ(t0)))2<ε2. Taking w=θ(t) and using the displayed identity, (t−t0)2<δ2 implies (u(θ(t))−u(θ(t0)))2<ε2; by clause 2 of monotonicity of squaring, applied to the nonnegative reals ∣t−t0∣,δ and ∣u(θ(t))−u(θ(t0))∣,ε, this says that ∣t−t0∣<δ implies ∣u(θ(t))−u(θ(t0))∣<ε. Hence gθ′,y and gθ′,y′ are continuous at every point of R, as maps from the real line with the absolute value metric into itself.
Step 4 (the score identities). Fix i,j∈{1,…,l} and let δij=1 if i=j and δij=0 otherwise. We show
E[m(D)Si]=0andE[ΘjSi]=−δij.
We use three elementary facts on a measure space, from Lebesgue Integral of a Nonnegative Measurable Function, Simple Function and Its Integral, and Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral: (F1) a [0,∞]-valued measurable u with finite integral is finite off a set of measure zero (on N={u=∞} one has u≥L1N for every L, so Lν(N)≤∫udν for every L, ν denoting the measure of the space in question); (F2) a [0,∞]-valued measurable u vanishing off a set of measure zero has ∫udν=0 (every simple s with 0≤s≤u is bounded by a multiple of the indicator of that set, so ∫sdm=0; take the supremum); (F3) consequently, integrable real functions agreeing off a set of measure zero have equal integrals, and likewise [0,∞]-valued measurable functions (split by the exceptional set and use additivity with (F2)).
the second equality holding pointwise because p>0 everywhere (assumption (ii)). Apply claim 4 of Finite Products of Lebesgue Measure and Coordinate Integration on Rl (coordinate Fubini at coordinate i) to the κ-integrable (θ,y)↦m(y)∂ip(θ,y): there is a set N1 of measure zero off which t↦m(y)gθ′,y′(t) is λ-integrable (Step 3 identifies the integrand), and ∫m∂ipdκ equals the integral of the function F given off N1 by F(θ′,y)=∫Rm(y)gθ′,y′(t)dλ(t) and by 0 on N1. Now apply claim 3 of Finite Products of Lebesgue Measure and Coordinate Integration on Rl (coordinate Tonelli) to the nonnegative measurable functions p and ∣∂ip∣: since ∫pdκ=1<∞ (Step 1) and ∫∣∂ip∣dκ<∞ (assumption (iii)), the measurable [0,∞]-valued functions (θ′,y)↦∫Rgθ′,ydλ and (θ′,y)↦∫R∣gθ′,y′∣dλ have finite integrals, hence by (F1) are finite off sets N2, N3 of measure zero. For (θ′,y)∈/N1∪N2∪N3, the function gθ′,y satisfies all hypotheses of Step 2(i) (continuity and differentiability from Step 3, integrability off N2∪N3), so ∫Rgθ′,y′dλ=0 and, pulling out the constant m(y) by linearity (licensed off N3, where gθ′,y′ is λ-integrable), F(θ′,y)=0. Thus F vanishes off a set of measure zero, and E[m(D)Si]=∫Fd(λl−1⊗μ)=0 by (F3).
(b) E[ΘjSi]=−δij. Take G(θ,y)=θj∂ip(θ,y)/p(θ,y); the coordinate map (θ,y)↦θj is measurable (preimages are measurable rectangles), G(Θ,D)=ΘjSi is integrable as a product of square-integrable random variables, and Step 1 gives
E[ΘjSi]=∫θj∂ip(θ,y)dκ(θ,y),
the integrand being κ-integrable also directly from assumption (iii), since ∣θj∂ip∣≤(1+∑j′∣θj′∣)∣∂ip∣ pointwise.
Case i=j. The jth coordinate of Ψi(t,(θ′,y)) does not depend on t: it equals θj′ if j<i and θj−1′ if j>i; call it θ(j)′. Coordinate Fubini applied to θj∂ip represents the integral through inner integrals ∫Rθ(j)′gθ′,y′(t)dλ(t)=θ(j)′∫Rgθ′,y′dλ=0 off a set of measure zero, exactly as in (a) with the constant θ(j)′ in place of m(y). Hence E[ΘjSi]=0.
Case i=j. Note that the ith coordinate of Ψi(t,(θ′,y)) is exactly t. Coordinate Fubini applied to the κ-integrable θi∂ip represents E[ΘiSi] as the integral of the function F equal, off a set N1′ of measure zero, to F(θ′,y)=∫Rtgθ′,y′(t)dλ(t) and to 0 on N1′. Two further applications of coordinate Tonelli give sets of measure zero off which ∫R∣t∣gθ′,y(t)dλ(t)<∞ and ∫R∣t∣∣gθ′,y′(t)∣dλ(t)<∞: the first because ∫∣θi∣pdκ=E[∣Θi∣]<∞ by Step 1 (square-integrable random variables are integrable, Square-Integrable Random Variables and the Mean-Square Inner Product), the second from assumption (iii) with the weight ∣θi∣, both followed by (F1). Off the union of all these sets and N2, N3 of part (a), Step 2(ii) applies to gθ′,y and gives
F(θ′,y)=∫Rtgθ′,y′(t)dλ(t)=−∫Rgθ′,ydλ.
Let G0(θ′,y)=∫Rgθ′,ydλ, the [0,∞]-valued measurable function of coordinate Tonelli applied to p, with ∫G0d(λl−1⊗μ)=∫pdκ=1. Then F is integrable (claim 4), F+ vanishes off a set of measure zero, and F−=G0 off a set of measure zero; so by (F2) and (F3), ∫Fd(λl−1⊗μ)=−∫G0d(λl−1⊗μ)=−1. Hence E[ΘiSi]=−1.
Together, (a) and (b) are the two identities of claim 1:
E[m(D)Si]=0,E[ΘjSi]=−δij(1≤i,j≤l).(∗∗)
Step 5 (claim 1, directional form). Fix u,α∈Rl. The random variable (m(D)−α⋅Θ)Su=∑i=1luim(D)Si−∑i=1l∑j=1luiαjΘjSi is a finite linear combination of integrable random variables (products of square-integrable ones), so by linearity of the expectation and (∗∗),
(apply claim 2 of Translation and Reflection Invariance of Lebesgue Measure on Rn to the section θ↦F(θ,y)p(θ−aj,y) with the shift aj (that claim gives ∫h(θ+aj)dλl=∫hdλl for h(θ)=F(θ,y)p(θ−aj,y)), noting that (θ,y)↦F(θ+aj,y) is measurable as F∘τj−1, with τj−1(θ,y)=(θ+aj,y) measurable by the same generator argument).
The mixture-weight information. Fix u. The function ∂up=∑iui∂ip is measurable (assumption (iii)), so (∂up)2/pˉ is measurable by Sequentially Continuous Functions of Measurable Euclidean Maps are Measurable applied to the continuous map (s,t)↦s2/t on R×(0,∞). Since pˉ≥21p pointwise, (∂up)2/pˉ≤2(∂up)2/p, and by Step 1 (change of variables, with g=(∂up)2/p2, so that gp=(∂up)2/p and g(Θ,D)=Su2),
Iu=∫pˉ(∂up)2dκ≤2∫p(∂up)2dκ=2E[Su2]<∞,
Su being square-integrable as a linear combination of the square-integrable Si (hypothesis (iv′)).
The shifted errors. Fix m and α, put e(θ,y)=m(y)−α⋅θ, a measurable real-valued function on Rl×Y (as in Step 4, (θ,y)↦m(y) and the coordinate maps are measurable), and put ϵ=∥e(Θ,D)∥2=∥m(D)−α⋅Θ∥2 and cj=α⋅aj. For each j, e(θ+aj,y)=e(θ,y)−cj, so by (T) applied to F=e2 and then Step 1,
Cauchy-Schwarz with the mixture weight. Apply claim 1 of Weighted Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality on a Measure Space and the Symmetrised Score Functional: Bounds and Averaging on the measure space (Rl×Y,Bl⊗G,κ) with β=e2pˉ (measurable, nonnegative, finite integral by the previous display) and αCS=e∂up (measurable). Where β=0 one has e=0 (as pˉ>0), hence αCS=0; and on {β>0}, αCS2/β=(∂up)2/pˉ, so the function q of that claim is at most (∂up)2/pˉ pointwise and ∫qdκ≤Iu<∞. The claim yields that e∂up is κ-integrable and
(∫e∂updκ)2≤(∫e2pˉdκ)(∫qdκ)≤(ϵ+cmax)2Iu.
Finally, e∂up=gp with g=e∂up/p, and g(Θ,D)=(m(D)−α⋅Θ)Su is integrable (Step 5), so by Step 1 and Step 5, ∫e∂updκ=E[(m(D)−α⋅Θ)Su]=α⋅u. Therefore (α⋅u)2≤(ϵ+cmax)2Iu, and taking nonnegative square roots (monotone by Monotonicity of Squaring on the Nonnegative Elements of an Ordered Field, with st=st for s,t≥0 as the right side is nonnegative with square st) gives ∣α⋅u∣≤Iu(ϵ+cmax), which is claim 2. ■