The sigma-algebra generated by a random variable is the smallest sigma-algebra on making a measurable function into . Equivalently, it is the intersection of all sigma-algebras containing the inverse images of Borel sets .
Let . This collection is already a sigma-algebra: ,
The right-hand sets are in , since the Borel sigma-algebra is closed under the indicated operations. Any sigma-algebra making measurable must contain every member of . Conversely makes measurable by definition. Hence
This equality holds exactly as a collection of sets, without completing the sigma-algebra.
We prove the Doob-Dynkin lemma here by simple function approximation. Choose such that everywhere, and let
Each is a finite-valued -measurable function and pointwise. Write its level sets as , with associated values . By part (i), choose Borel sets with . Define the Borel measurable functions
Although the chosen need not partition all of , their inverse images do partition , so exactly.
Apply scalar clipping to each with bounds , preserving this equality, and define . A bounded limit superior of Borel measurable functions is a finite Borel measurable function. At every the limit of a sequence exists and gives
Thus the factorization is exact for a bounded, exactly -measurable function. If hypotheses are instead given only up to null sets, the corresponding conclusion is a factorization holding almost surely after choosing a representative.
For this part and part (c), take to be -valued everywhere. The uniform distribution gives , but the paper's expression for is undefined there because . Define on . Keep exactly as printed, including on that null set; this preserves the exact sigma-algebra equality in part (ii). Every slope formula below is asserted on , hence almost surely.
The floor function gives the deterministic bound
for every outcome, including . Thus all three convergence assertions hold: there is pointwise, and hence almost sure convergence, as well as convergence in probability and convergence in L2. In detail, for the probability is zero as soon as ; also
The uniform distribution even gives the exact second moment of the error by integrating over the dyadic partition:
Every is a Borel measurable function of , by the formula involving the floor function. Thus
Conversely, part (i) gives the everywhere identity . For fixed , this is the pointwise limit of random variables measurable with respect to . Such a limit of a sequence is measurable, so . Consequently
These are increasing-precision observations even when the first finitely many are discarded; they do not behave like the independent random variables whose tail sigma-algebra appears in Question 1(b).
A family of integrable random variables is uniformly integrable when
The Lipschitz condition gives, on ,
Our chosen zero value on satisfies the same bound. Hence the random variables are integrable, and for every tail expectation in the definition vanishes. Therefore the family is uniformly integrable.
For , repeated use of the floor function identity gives
Thus the filtration satisfies . Each positive-probability atom of a sigma-algebra here has the form
with probability ; is a possible additional null set atom. Averaging over each dyadic interval gives a version
For a globally defined version of the right side, assign any value, for example zero, on .
Indeed, the displayed random variable is -measurable and bounded by . On each its integral is
by the uniform distribution. Every member of is a union of the displayed sets and the possible zero-probability atom. Summing these identities therefore verifies the defining conditional expectation property on all of .
Each is a bounded Borel measurable function of , including the specified value at . Therefore is an adapted process for and consists of integrable random variables.
Fix an atom of a sigma-algebra in with positive probability, corresponding to the dyadic interval , with . By the uniform distribution, each half has conditional probability . The conditional expectation of on that atom is therefore
The middle values cancel. On the zero-probability atom the conditional expectation can be chosen as zero, agreeing with our version of . Hence
so is a martingale. This is the dyadic slope martingale associated with the Lipschitz function .
The uniformly integrable martingale convergence theorem states that a uniformly integrable martingale has an integrable terminal random variable such that almost surely and in the L1 norm, and
The last identity follows by passing to the limit of a sequence in for and , using convergence in L1.
Part (b)(iii) verifies uniform integrability for , so
Moreover almost surely. In this particular problem the common bound also yields convergence in Lp for every finite , including convergence in L2: the dominated convergence theorem applies to . General uniform integrability alone does not assert these higher-power conclusions.
Choose as the pointwise limit of a sequence of where it exists, and as zero otherwise. The convergence event and every are -measurable, so this is an exactly -measurable version, bounded by . Part (a)(ii), the Doob-Dynkin lemma, supplies a Borel measurable function on such that . Applying scalar clipping to with bounds preserves that equality and ensures everywhere.
Part (c)(ii) and the conditional expectation formula from part (b)(iv) now give
Since the indices form a countable family, these identities may be taken on one common full-probability event.
For fixed , both the slope and the displayed average are constant on the atom , whose probability is . An equality holding almost surely of these constants forces the deterministic equality
Sum over . The telescoping sum gives
Thus the desired identity holds at every dyadic endpoint, including , without evaluating the undefined slope at .
Finally, given , take dyadic endpoints . The Lipschitz condition implies , and the bound on the Borel measurable function gives
Passing to the limit of a sequence proves
This is a martingale proof of the integral representation of a Lipschitz function. It constructs a bounded Lebesgue integrable function representing the increments of , and in particular proves absolute continuity of . No prior assumption that has a derivative is needed.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.