Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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 ...
Proofs of Borel's lemma can be found in many text books on analysis, including Golubitsky & Guillemin (1974) and Hörmander (1990), from which the proof below is taken. Note that it suffices to prove the result for a small interval I = (− ε , ε ), since if ψ ( t ) is a smooth bump function with compact support in (− ε , ε ) equal ...
Borel–Cantelli lemma; C. Covering lemma; Covering problem of Rado; H. Hewitt–Savage zero–one law; K. ... This page was last edited on 1 January 2018, at 13:47 ...
Burnside's lemma also known as the Cauchy–Frobenius lemma; Frattini's lemma (finite groups) Goursat's lemma; Mautner's lemma (representation theory) Ping-pong lemma (geometric group theory) Schreier's subgroup lemma; Schur's lemma (representation theory) Zassenhaus lemma
Proof: We will prove this statement using the portmanteau lemma, part A. First we want to show that (X n, c) converges in distribution to (X, c). By the portmanteau lemma this will be true if we can show that E[f(X n, c)] → E[f(X, c)] for any bounded continuous function f(x, y). So let f be such arbitrary bounded continuous function.
For (,) a measurable space, a sequence μ n is said to converge setwise to a limit μ if = ()for every set .. Typical arrow notations are and .. For example, as a consequence of the Riemann–Lebesgue lemma, the sequence μ n of measures on the interval [−1, 1] given by μ n (dx) = (1 + sin(nx))dx converges setwise to Lebesgue measure, but it does not converge in total variation.
(A block of length k is a substring of length k appearing at a position in the sequence that is a multiple of k: e.g. the first length-k block in S is S[1..k], the second length-k block is S[k+1..2k], etc.) This was implicit in the work of Ziv and Lempel and made explicit in the work of Bourke, Hitchcock, and Vinodchandran .
This is a consequence of Itō's lemma. The property of being a semimartingale is preserved under shrinking the filtration. More precisely, if X is a semimartingale with respect to the filtration F t , and is adapted with respect to the subfiltration G t , then X is a G t -semimartingale.