Arxiv:2106.00086V2 [Math.LO] 2 Jun 2021 Esrsudrdffrn Ovrec Oin 3 9]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EFFECTIVE NOTIONS OF WEAK CONVERGENCE OF MEASURES ON THE REAL LINE TIMOTHY H. MCNICHOLL AND DIEGO A. ROJAS Abstract. We establish a framework for the study of the effective theory of weak convergence of measures. We define two effective notions of weak convergence of measures on R: one uniform and one non-uniform. We show that these notions are equivalent. By means of this equivalence, we prove an effective version of the Portmanteau Theorem, which consists of multiple equivalent definitions of weak convergence of measures. 1. Introduction Beginning with Alan Turing’s pioneering work on the computability of real num- bers in the mid-1930s [15], mathematicians have understood that concepts central to the study of mathematical analysis have analogues in computability theory. Com- putable analysis examines these computable analogues and attempts to recover as much of the classical theory of analysis as possible while working in a framework for computation. Current research in the field has investigated the interactions between computability and measure theory, one of the main sub-fields of classical analysis, especially with its deep connections to algorithmic randomness [13, 14]. In particular, one aspect of measure theory in algorithmic randomness lies in the connections between random points and measures defined as limits of sequences of measures under different convergence notions [3, 9]. The most commonly studied notion of convergence for sequences of measures in analysis is weak convergence. A sequence of finite Borel measures {µn}n∈N on a separable metric space X weakly converges to a measure µ if, for every bounded continuous real-valued function f on X, the sequence of real numbers arXiv:2106.00086v2 [math.LO] 2 Jun 2021 limn X f dµn = X f dµ. The measure µ in this definition is unique and is called the weakR limit measureR . Weak convergence is a useful tool in probability. In par- ticular, weak convergence can be used to demonstrate convergence in distribution and to construct stable distributions [5]. Weak convergence also underlies current research in computable measure the- ory and algorithmic randomness. In particular, the space M(X) of finite Borel measures on a computable metric space X forms a computable metric space when equipped with the Prokhorov metric [10]. The Prokhorov metric was introduced by Prokhorov [12] in 1956 and metrizes the topology of weak convergence. Galatolo, Hoyrup, and C. Rojas proved an effective version of the Borel-Cantelli Lemma by using the computability framework obtained by weak convergence of probability measures [7]. A few years later, Binder, Braverman, C. Rojas, and Yampolsky used this framework to show that a Brolin-Lyubich probability measure is always 1 2 TIMOTHYH.MCNICHOLLANDDIEGOA.ROJAS computable [2]. In algorithmic randomness, G´acs developed an approach to uni- form randomness tests using the properties of P(X) (the space of Borel probability measures on X) equipped with the weak convergence topology [6]. As shown in Example 4.8 below, a weakly convergent sequence of measures, even if computable, need not have a computable limit. This possibility has been noted before. More specifically, the First Computability Obstruction (Proposition 1.1.3, [8]) states that any sequence of measures generated by iterating a computable mea- 0 sure through a cellular automaton converges weakly to a ∆2-computable measure. In fact, it is a fairly easy consequence of our results that any sequence of measures 0 that is computable and weakly convergent has a ∆2 limit. The conditions under which the weak limit of a computable sequence of measures is computable appear not to have been investigated. We are thus led to the following. Question 1.1. What is a suitable definition of effective weak convergence? We propose two answers to this question, one of which is uniform (Definition 4.2), and one of which is not (Definition 4.1). At first glance, the uniform version is much stronger. In particular, the uniform condition automatically implies weak convergence, whereas the non-uniform version does not. However, our first main result (Theorem 4.3) is that in fact the two definitions are equivalent. We then provide evidence that our definition of effective weak convergence in M(R) is the appropriate computable analogue to classical weak convergence in M(R). In particular, our other main result is an effective version of the Port- manteau Theorem, a 1941 theorem due to Alexandroff [1] that characterizes weak convergence of measures, for M(R). This paper is divided as follows. Section 2 consists of the necessary background in both classical and computable analysis and measure theory. Section 3 covers some preliminary material used in latter sections to state and prove the main results of this paper. In Section 4, we define effective notions of weak convergence in M(R), and we show that they are equivalent for uniformly computable sequences in M(R). In Section 5, we prove an effective version of the Portmanteau Theorem for M(R). We conclude in Section 6 with a discussion on the results and implications for future research in this direction. 2. Background 2.1. Background from classical analysis and measure theory. We denote the set of all bounded continuous functions on R by Cb(R). We denote the indicator function of a set E by 1E. Fix a measure µ ∈ M(R), and let A ⊆ R. A is said to be a µ-continuity set if µ(∂A) = 0. Below, we state a version of the classical Portmanteau Theorem. Although there are as many as ten equivalent definitions of weak convergence (see [11]), we will focus on five. Theorem 2.1 (Classical Portmanteau Theorem, [1]). Let {µn}n∈N be a sequence in M(R). The following are equivalent. (1) {µn}n∈N weakly converges to µ. (2) For every uniformly continuous f ∈ Cb(R), lim fdµn = fdµ. n→∞ ZR ZR EFFECTIVE NOTIONS OF WEAK CONVERGENCE OF MEASURES ON THE REAL LINE 3 (3) For every closed C ⊆ R, lim sup µn(C) ≤ µ(C). n→∞ (4) For every open U ⊆ R, lim inf µn(U) ≥ µ(U). n→∞ (5) For every µ-continuity set A ⊆ R, lim µn(A)= µ(A). n→∞ 2.2. Background from computable analysis and computable measure the- ory. We presume familiarity with the fundamentals of computability theory as expounded in [4]. For a more expansive treatment of computable analysis, see [16]. We say that a bounded interval I ⊆ R is rational if each of its endpoints is ra- tional. Fix an effective enumeration {Ii}i∈N of the set of all rational open intervals. If I is compact, let PQ(I) denote the space of polygonal functions on I with rational vertices; we will refer to these functions as rational polygonal functions on I. When p ∈ PQ[a,b], we extend p to all of R by letting p(x)= p(a) for x<a and p(x)= p(b) for x>b. 0 An open set U ⊆ R is Σ1 if {i ∈ N : Ii ⊆ U} is c.e.. Similarly, a closed set C ⊆ R 0 0 0 is Π1 if {i ∈ N : Ii ∩ C = ∅} is c.e.. We denote the set of Σ1 subsets of R by Σ1(R), 0 0 and we denote the set of Π1 subsets of R by Π1(R). We say that e ∈ N indexes 0 0 U ∈ Σ1(R) if e indexes {i ∈ N : Ii ⊆ U}. Indices of sets in Π1(R) are defined 0 analogously. A pair (U, V )ofΣ1 sets is indexed by an e ∈ N if U is indexed by (e)0 and V is indexed by (e)1. Fix a real number x. A Cauchy name of x is a sequence {qn}n∈N of rational −n numbers so that limn qn = x and so that |qn − qn+1| < 2 for all n ∈ N. When I ⊆ R is a compact rational interval and J ⊆ R is a rational open interval, we let NI,J = {f ∈ C(R): f[I] ⊆ J}. A compact-open (c.o.) name of a function f ∈ C(R) is an enumeration of {NI,J : f ∈ NI,J }. If f ∈ C(R), then f is computable if and only f has a computable c.o. name. Each of the names we have just discussed can be represented as a point in Σω for a sufficiently large alphabet Σ. Fix x ∈ R. x is computable if it has a computable Cauchy name. An index of such a name is also said to be an index of f. x is left-c.e. (right-c.e.) if its left (right) Dedekind cut is c.e.. It follows that x is computable if and only if it is left-c.e. and right-c.e.. A sequence {xn}n∈N is computable if xn is computable uniformly in n. A function f :⊆ R → R is computable if there is a Turing functional F so that F (ρ) is a Cauchy name of f(x) whenever ρ is a Cauchy name of x. An index of such a functional F is also said to be an index of f. We denote the set of all bounded c computable functions on R by Cb (R). A function f :⊆ R → R is lower semi-computable if there is a Turing functional F so that F (ρ) enumerates the left Dedekind cut of f(x) whenever ρ is a Cauchy name of x. A function f :⊆ R → R is upper semi-computable if −f is lower semi-computable. A function F :⊆ C(R) → R is computable if there is a Turing functional Φ so that Φ(ρ) is a Cauchy name of F (f) whenever ρ is a c.o.-name of f.