User Tools

Site Tools


math105-s22:s:rasmuspallisgaard:start

Rasmus Pallisgaard

Hi everyone, I'm Rasmus and I'm an exchange student all the way from Denmark. Back home I study Machine Learning and have done research in the field of NLP, specifically studying multilingual models. I'm at Berkeley for a semester to study mathematics for a semester in order to get more familiar with the rigorous nature of maths (ML research is basically result driven with little theory to back it up - godspeed!). If you want to hear about whether AI will kill us all one day (It might, but then again so will global warming. edit: or Russia. Слава Україні!)

Notes

I'm gonna publish my notes on the lectures this weekend after I finish this weeks homework.

Homework

Homework 1

Homework 2

Homework 3

Homework 4

Resume of the Lebesque Integral We begin by covering the Riemann integral in short. Riemann integration, like all others, seek to measure the area under a graph. It does this using approximation by partitioning the area into rectangles. In this function the Riemann sum corresponds to i=1nf(ti)(xixi1) \sum_{i=1}^nf(t_i)(x_i-x_{i-1}) Letting Δxi=xixi1\Delta_{x_i}=x_i-x_{i-1} be the same value for all ii, and letting xi1tixiix_{i-1}\leq t_i\leq x_i\forall i. If a<xi<bia<x_i<b\forall i, then we can define the Riemann integral as abf(x)dx=limni=1nf(ti)(xixi1 \int_a^b f(x) dx = \lim_{n\to\infty}\sum_{i=1}^nf(t_i)(x_i-x_{i-1} If the limit of this sum exists and is unique, then the function ff is Riemann integrable.

The Lebesque integral is based on the measurability of a functions undergraph. This undergraph is defined by Uf={(x,y)R×[0,):py<f(x)} Uf=\{(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}\times[0,\infty):p\leq y<f(x)\} We say that the function ff is Lebesque measurable if the undergraph UfUf is measurable. If ff is Lebesque measurable, then we let f=m(Uf) \int f=m(Uf) Note that dxdx is missing. Because the Lebesque integral does not handle a limit of a sum of rectangles with width of Δxi\Delta x_i, we omit the dxdx.

Finally, a function is Lebesque integrable if the measure m(Uf)m(Uf) is finite. Since the Lebesgue measure of UfUf can be infinity, we do by definition allow the Lebesque integral of ff to be infinite.

Homework 5

Homework 6 (There is a mistake in problem 1, b. I'll fix it and update the file.)

Resume of Lebesque measure theory

*This is gonna be a rough summarisation of all we've covered in Lebesque measure theory so far. It will probably not contain everything of importance and might have some gaps that I didn't think to cover. If you find gaps like these, please do write to me on Discord so I can review these. Thanks!*

Our venture into Lebesque measure theory begins with the definition of the outer measure - a measure of a subset AA found by m(A)=inf{kBk:{Bk} is a covering of A by open boxes} m^*(A)=\inf\left\{ \sum_k|B_k|:\{B_k\} \text{ is a covering of } A \text{ by open boxes} \right\} Useful from this definition and this section is the definition that sets with outer measure zero is called a zero set. Boxes are created from intervals (ai,bi)(a_i,b_i) since the measure of an interval is its end point minus its starting point. The proofs of useful properties, such as monotonicity, sub-additivity, etc. are most often proved using the ϵ\epsilon trick.

A set ARA\subset R is then measurable if it the division AAcA|A^c is so *clean* that for all subsets XRX\subset R, m(A)=m(XA)+m(AEc) m^*(A)=m^*(X\cap A) + m^*(A\cap E^c) Although I personally like the Tao condition better: m(A)=m(XA)+m(AE) m^*(A)=m^*(X\cap A) + m^*(A\setminus E) Here we see that by this definition, additivity is achieved. Throughout the course we have proved a lot of properties of measurable sets, including sub-additivities of outer measures, monotonicity, etc. As mentioned before, for this we often use the ϵ\epsilon trick - a trick that is also used to prove measurability of a closed interval, a zero set, and a closed box in n dimensions.

We then went on to proof that the Lebesque measure is regular in the sense that a measurable set EE can be sandwiched between an FσF_\sigma-set and a GδG_\delta-set such that FσEGδF_\sigma\subset E\subset G_\delta. Here an FσF_\sigma-set is a countable union of closed sets Fσ=iFiF_\sigma=\cup^\infty_iF_i and a GδG_\delta-set is a countable intersection of open sets Gδ=iGiG_\delta=\cup^\infty_iG_i.

The proof of this uses the fact that can define a decreasing sequence of open sets from R\mathbb{R} such that the measure of these set sequences goes to the measure of EE. You can then define a closed increasing sequence from the complement of one of these sequences. The major step here is then to show that this complement set has the same measure as EE.

We then covered the theorems of products and slices. The theorem of measurable products says that if sets AA and BB are measurable, then m(A×B)=m(A)m(B)m(A\times B)=m(A)\cdot m(B). The proof of this uses hulls and kernels of measurable sets (These are FσF_\sigma-sets and GδG_\delta-sets).

Afterwards we proved that if EE is measurable then it has measure zero iff almost every slice of EE has measure zero. A slice ExE_x of a set ERn×RkE\subset R^n\times R^k is defined as Ex={yRn:(x,y)E}E_x=\{y\in R^n:(x,y)\in E\}.

The prove of the above theorem is bit more involved, but essentially boils down to first finding that the set EE has the same measure as the set EE with all nonzero slices removed. Afterwards one seeks to prove that since all these slices has measure zero, then measure of EE is zero. We then, for a slice of any compact KEK\subset E, surround it by a a long but thin compact box W(x)W(x). Since these boxes are thin, but not zero width, we can cover the set by a countable amount of these boxes. By disjointizing the widths we can find that the boxes have measure zero, so measure of KK is zero. Then inner measure is zero (see definition of inner measure with respect to closed subsets) is zero, and by measurability measure of EE is zero.

Proving the other direction, if EE has measure zero, then there exists a GδG_\delta-set GEG\supset E, The main step is to set up X(α)={x:m(Gx)>α}X(\alpha)=\{x:m(G_x)>\alpha\} for each slice GxG_x. One can then finalise the proof using the same disjointizing method on a compact set K(x)K(x) contained in GxG_x with m(K(x))=m(Gx)m(K(x))=m(G_x) and a neighbourhood W(x)W(x).

Homework 5

Homework 6

Homework 7

Homework 8

Homework 9

Homework 10

Homework 11

Homework 12

Final Essay

Here is my final essay on lebesque integration and measure theory, and why its needed and relevant in the context of integration.

Why Do We Need Measure Theory?

math105-s22/s/rasmuspallisgaard/start.txt · Last modified: 2022/05/12 13:30 by pallisgaard