Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a223d00fb93e70b8

Jump to content

Talk:Continuous mapping theorem

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Jburroni in topic References

Generalization

[edit]

This theorem has a generalization to differences. For convergence in probability, it is as follows: if and are sequences of random variables such that converges to zero in probability, , and converges to in distribution, then converges to zero in probability. This is Corollary 2 in the paper by Mann & Wald.

--Kaba3 (talk) 22:39, 5 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Quantifier for set of discontinuity points

[edit]

The phase in the theorem that says "has the set of discontinuity points Dg such that Pr[X ∈ Dg] = 0 " would be clearer if the quantifier for the set Dg was made plainer. I think the condition Pr[X ∈ Dg] = 0" is intended to apply to each discontinuity point of the function. If so, the intended meaning is that each discontinuity point of the function satisfies the condition. However another interpretation of "has the set of discontinuity points" is that there exists a set of discontinuity points that satisfy the condition. By that interpretation, Dg need not contain all the discontinuity points.

Tashiro (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Continuity of g

[edit]

The statement of the theorems (correctly) ask for the set of discontinuity points Dg to be a measure-zero set, i.e., that g is almost-surely continuous. However, the assumption that g is continuous was used for the proofs. Notice that the proof for the convergence in distribution becomes more involved when the assumption of a.s. continuity of g is used [cf. Theorem 2.7[1]].

On a related note, in the proof of convergence in probability, it must be shown that Bδ is indeed measurable.

References

[edit]
  1. Billingsley, Patrick (1999). Convergence of Probability Measures. Wiley-Interscience publication. p. 21 (Theorem 2.7). ISBN 0-471-19745-9. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)


--Jburroni (talk) 20:16, 4 July 2020 (UTC)Reply