Borel–Cantelli lemma

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Short description Template:More footnotes In probability theory, the Borel–Cantelli lemma is a theorem about sequences of events. In general, it is a result in measure theory. It is named after Émile Borel and Francesco Paolo Cantelli, who gave statement to the lemma in the first decades of the 20th century.[1][2] A related result, sometimes called the second Borel–Cantelli lemma, is a partial converse of the first Borel–Cantelli lemma. The lemma states that, under certain conditions, an event will have probability of either zero or one. Accordingly, it is the best-known of a class of similar theorems, known as zero-one laws. Other examples include Kolmogorov's zero–one law and the Hewitt–Savage zero–one law.

Statement of lemma for probability spaces

Let E1, E2, ... be a sequence of events in some probability space. The Borel–Cantelli lemma states:[3][4]

Template:Math theorem

Here, "lim sup" denotes limit supremum of the sequence of events, and each event is a set of outcomes. That is, lim sup En is the set of outcomes that occur infinitely many times within the infinite sequence of events (En). Explicitly, lim supnEn=n=1k=nEk.The set lim sup En is sometimes denoted {En i.o.}, where "i.o." stands for "infinitely often". The theorem therefore asserts that if the sum of the probabilities of the events En is finite, then the set of all outcomes that are "repeated" infinitely many times must occur with probability zero. Note that no assumption of independence is required.

Example

Suppose (Xn) is a sequence of random variables with Pr(Xn = 0) = 1/n2 for each n. The probability that Xn = 0 occurs for infinitely many n is equivalent to the probability of the intersection of infinitely many [Xn = 0] events. The intersection of infinitely many such events is a set of outcomes common to all of them. However, the sum ΣPr(Xn = 0) converges to Template:Nowrap and so the Borel–Cantelli Lemma states that the set of outcomes that are common to infinitely many such events occurs with probability zero. Hence, the probability of Xn = 0 occurring for infinitely many n is 0. Almost surely (i.e., with probability 1), Xn is nonzero for all but finitely many n.

Proof

Let (En) be a sequence of events in some probability space.

The sequence of events {n=NEn}N=1 is non-increasing: n=1Enn=2Enn=NEnn=N+1Enlim supnEn.By continuity from above, Pr(lim supnEn)=limNPr(n=NEn).By subadditivity, Pr(n=NEn)n=NPr(En).By original assumption, n=1Pr(En)<. As the series n=1Pr(En) converges, limNn=NPr(En)=0, as required.[5]

General measure spaces

For general measure spaces, the Borel–Cantelli lemma takes the following form:

Template:Math theorem

Converse result

A related result, sometimes called the second Borel–Cantelli lemma, is a partial converse of the first Borel–Cantelli lemma. The lemma states: If the events En are independent and the sum of the probabilities of the En diverges to infinity, then the probability that infinitely many of them occur is 1. That is:[4]

Template:Math theorem

The assumption of independence can be weakened to pairwise independence, but in that case the proof is more difficult.

The infinite monkey theorem follows from this second lemma.

Example

The lemma can be applied to give a covering theorem in Rn. Specifically Template:Harv, if Ej is a collection of Lebesgue measurable subsets of a compact set in Rn such that jμ(Ej)=, then there is a sequence Fj of translates Fj=Ej+xj such that limsupFj=n=1k=nFk=n apart from a set of measure zero.

Proof

Suppose that n=1Pr(En)= and the events (En)n=1 are independent. It is sufficient to show the event that the En's did not occur for infinitely many values of n has probability 0. This is just to say that it is sufficient to show that 1Pr(lim supnEn)=0.

Noting that: 1Pr(lim supnEn)=1Pr({En i.o.})=Pr({En i.o.}c)=Pr((N=1n=NEn)c)=Pr(N=1n=NEnc)=Pr(lim infnEnc)=limNPr(n=NEnc), it is enough to show: Pr(n=NEnc)=0. Since the (En)n=1 are independent: Pr(n=NEnc)=n=NPr(Enc)=n=N(1Pr(En)). The convergence test for infinite products guarantees that the product above is 0, if n=NPr(En) diverges. This completes the proof.

Counterpart

Another related result is the so-called counterpart of the Borel–Cantelli lemma. It is a counterpart of the Lemma in the sense that it gives a necessary and sufficient condition for the limsup to be 1 by replacing the independence assumption by the completely different assumption that (An) is monotone increasing for sufficiently large indices. This Lemma says:

Let (An) be such that AkAk+1, and let A¯ denote the complement of A. Then the probability of infinitely many Ak occur (that is, at least one Ak occurs) is one if and only if there exists a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers (tk) such that kPr(Atk+1A¯tk)=.This simple result can be useful in problems such as for instance those involving hitting probabilities for stochastic process with the choice of the sequence (tk) usually being the essence.

Kochen–Stone

Let (An) be a sequence of events with Pr(An)= and lim supk(n=1kPr(An))21m,nkPr(AmAn)>0. Then there is a positive probability that An occur infinitely often.

Proof

Let Sm,n=i=mn𝟏Ai. Then, note that E[Sm,n]2=(i=mnPr(Ai))2 and E[Sm,n2]=1ijnPr(AiAj). Hence, we know that lim supn𝔼[S1,n]2𝔼[S1,n2]>0. We have that Pr(i=mnAi)=Pr(Sm,n>0). Now, notice that by the Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality, 𝔼[X]2𝔼[X𝟏{X>0}]2𝔼[X2]Pr(X>0), therefore, Pr(Sm,n>0)𝔼[Sm,n]2𝔼[Sm,n2]. We then have 𝔼[Sm,n]2𝔼[Sm,n2]E[S1,nS1,m1]2E[S1,n2]. Given m, since limn𝔼[S1,n]=, we can find n large enough so that |𝔼[S1,n]𝔼[S1,m1]𝔼[S1,n]1|<ϵ, for any given ϵ>0. Therefore, limmsupnmPr(i=mnAi)limmsupnmE[S1,n]2E[S1,n2]>0. But the left side is precisely the probability that the An occur infinitely often since {Ak i.o.}={ωΩ:m,nm s.t. ωAn}. We're done now, since we've shown that P(Ak i.o.)>0.

See also

References

Template:Reflist

  1. E. Borel, "Les probabilités dénombrables et leurs applications arithmetiques" Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) 27 (1909) pp. 247–271.
  2. F.P. Cantelli, "Sulla probabilità come limite della frequenza", Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei 26:1 (1917) pp.39–45.
  3. Template:Cite book
  4. 4.0 4.1 Template:Cite book
  5. Template:Cite web