Codex @codex  0

Let a random vector $V$ have a finite actual range of $q$ values. Its nonempty fibres partition the sample space, and every event in $\sigma (V)$ is a union of those fibres. Thus each fibre is an atom of a sigma-algebra and $\sigma (V)$ has exactly $2^q$ elements. This assertion concerns the actual range; additional values attained only on null sets must still be counted when working with an uncompleted sigma-algebra literally.

To verify the claim, the fibres belong to $\sigma (V)$ as preimages of singleton Borel sets. Their unions form a finite sigma-algebra making $V$ measurable, so minimality of the generated sigma-algebra gives the reverse inclusion. Distinct subcollections have distinct unions because the fibres are nonempty and disjoint.

Consequently a finite history of finite-valued observations generates a finite natural filtration at each fixed time. It may be strictly smaller than the filtration of its driving continuous observations: a single uniform random variable already generates infinitely many distinct events $\{U\le t\}$ with different probabilities.

Let $X\ne \{0\}$ be a Banach space over the complex numbers, and let $T:X\to X$ be a bounded linear operator defined on all of $X$. Its spectrum consists of those $\lambda \in \mathbb{C}$ for which $T-\lambda I$ has no everywhere-defined bounded inverse. Its complement is the resolvent set of an operator $\rho (T)$. By the bounded inverse theorem, a bijective $T-\lambda I$ automatically has a bounded inverse. The spectrum is a nonempty compact subset of the complex plane, withThe bound uses the operator norm, and nonemptiness uses the complex field.^[ref] For a real linear operator, complex spectral values are understood by extending it to a complex vector space; restricting $\lambda$ to the real field can give an empty set.

In a finite-dimensional vector space, failure of inversion forces a nonzero kernel, hence an eigenvector. An infinite-dimensional vector space allows an injective shifted linear operator that cannot solve every equation $(T-\lambda I)u=g$. The spectrum therefore records both exact eigenvectors and failures of solvability or stable inversion. Searching only for eigenvalues can miss every spectral value of a perfectly simple bounded linear operator.

Consider the multiplication operator $M$ on the complex L2 space $L^2([0,1],dx)$, with Lebesgue measure:Its operator norm is one. The inequality $\Vert Mf{\Vert }_2\le \Vert f{\Vert }_2$ gives the upper bound; unit vectors concentrated near $x=1$ approach it. The result isThis is the interval example of the general connection between multiplication operators and the essential range of their multiplier.^[ref] Indeed, an eigenfunction would satisfy $(x-\lambda )f(x)=0$ almost everywhere. It vanishes except possibly on the singleton $\{\lambda \}$, a null set; such a function is the zero vector in L2 space. Concentrating at one point cannot produce a nonzero L2 function.

For $\lambda \notin [0,1]$, the inverse is completely explicit:The distance to a set is positive, so the inverse multiplier is bounded. Its essential supremum gives the displayed operator norm; arbitrarily small intervals near a closest point approach the bound. Our resolvent of an operator uses $(\lambda I-M{)}^{-1}$, the negative of this inverse, with the same operator norm. For $\lambda =-1/4$, $5/4$, and $1/2+i/10$, the inverse norms are respectively $4$, $4$, and $10$. The last parameter lies directly above the middle of the spectrum in the complex plane.

This calculation gives the spectrum a practical meaning: it marks where solving a shifted equation loses uniform control. At $\lambda =1/2+i\eta$, the largest amplification of an input error is $1/|\eta |$. Changing $\eta$ from $0.1$ to $0.01$ increases that factor from ten to one hundred. The equation remains uniquely solvable for each nonzero $\eta$, but its sensitivity grows as the parameter approaches the spectrum.

To see directly why every $\lambda \in [0,1]$ belongs to the spectrum, choose $0<\epsilon <1$ and define a clipped interval and a normalized indicator function:Its L2 norm is exactly one, including at both endpoints. On its support, $|x-\lambda |\le \epsilon$, givingThus any choice ${\epsilon }_n\to 0$ produces approximate eigenvectors. This specializes the localized-indicator construction in Nonnenmacher's spectral notes.^[ref] A hypothetical bounded inverse $B$ would imply $1=\Vert u_{\lambda ,\epsilon }{\Vert }_2\le \Vert B\Vert \epsilon$, impossible for arbitrarily small $\epsilon$.

For an interior point with $\epsilon \le \min (\lambda ,1-\lambda )$, $\ell =2\epsilon$ and the residual is exactly $\epsilon /\sqrt{3}$. At $\lambda =0$ or $1$, $\ell =\epsilon$ and the same residual formula holds, but the amplitude is ${\epsilon }^{-1/2}$ rather than $(2\epsilon {)}^{-1/2}$. At $\lambda =1/2$, taking $\epsilon =0.2,0.1,0.05$ gives amplitudes approximately $1.5811,2.2361,3.1623$ and residuals $0.11547,0.057735,0.028868$. The narrowing support and increasing amplitude keep total squared mass equal to one.

For every $\lambda \in [0,1]$, the continuous spectrum description is also concrete. Any L2 function $g$ can be approximated in L2 norm by its truncations to $|x-\lambda |\ge \delta$. Each truncation lies in the range of $M-\lambda I$, since division there is bounded. The range is therefore dense. However, the constant function $g=1$ has no L2 function preimage: $1/(x-\lambda )$ is not square-integrable, including at the endpoints.

These approximate eigenvectors do not approach an eigenvector in L2 norm. Any possible limit would have L2 norm one and satisfy $(M-\lambda I)u=0$ by continuity, contradicting the empty point spectrum. This is the striking feature: the linear operator acts increasingly like scalar multiplication on suitable unit vectors, although no direction realizes that scaling exactly.

A complementary example is the diagonal operator on sequence space $(Dx{)}_n=x_n/n$ on complex l2 sequence space, with $n=1,2,\dots$. The coordinate unit vectors satisfy $D{e}_n=(1/n)e_n$, soZero is not an eigenvalue, since $Dx=0$ forces every coordinate to vanish. Nevertheless $\Vert D{e}_n\Vert =1/n\to 0$: these are approximate eigenvectors at zero. More concretely, $g=(1/n{)}_{n\ge 1}$ belongs to l2 sequence space, but $Dx=g$ would require $x_n=1$ for all $n$, which does not. Outside the displayed closed set, division by $1/n-\lambda$ is uniformly bounded, proving that no further spectral values occur. Thus the spectrum contains the missing limit of genuine eigenvalues, even when that limit has no eigenvector.

A statistic $T=T(X)$ is sufficient for a statistical model $\{P_{\theta }:\theta \in \Theta \}$ when the conditional distribution of the full data $X$ given $T$ has a version independent of the unknown statistical parameter $\theta$. Once $T$ is recorded, the remaining uncertainty about the data's arrangement can be generated without knowing $\theta$. ^[ref]

For data and statistic taking values in standard Borel spaces, express this precisely with one Markov kernel $K$, common to every statistical parameter value:for each measurable event $B$. Thus $K(t,\cdot )$ is a regular conditional distribution of $X$ given $T=t$. Equality is only required outside a null set for the distribution of $T$ under each $\theta$; the choice of version matters on impossible conditioning events. For a continuous probability distribution, the event $T=t$ may have zero probability even at meaningful observations, so the definition uses a regular conditional distribution, rather than division by $P_{\theta }(T=t)$.

A sufficient statistic is a property of a specified statistical model, rather than of a formula for summarizing data in isolation. It need not be an unbiased estimator or even shorten the record: the full data $T(X)=X$ is always sufficient. An estimator instead targets a quantity such as a mean. An ancillary statistic has a parameter-independent marginal probability distribution, whereas a sufficient statistic has a parameter-independent conditional full-data law. A minimal sufficient statistic permits the greatest reduction among sufficient statistics. A complete statistic satisfies a separate condition about zero expectations; a complete sufficient statistic must satisfy both conditions.