LeanMachineLearning

Learning.hasCondDistrib_unit🔗

Lemma

From the authors

A random variable with values in Unit admits any Markov kernel as conditional distribution.

Types
  • Ω : Type u_4mΩ : MeasurableSpace ΩA measurable space is a space equipped with a σ-algebra.
  • α : Type u_5mα : MeasurableSpace α
Given
  • P : MeasureTheory.Measure ΩA measure is defined to be an outer measure that is countably additive on measurable sets, with the additional assumption that the outer measure is the canonical extension of the restricted measure.MeasureTheory.IsProbabilityMeasure PA measure μ is called a probability measure if μ univ = 1.
  • X : Ω → α
  • U : Ω → Unit
  • κ : ProbabilityTheory.Kernel α UnitA kernel from a measurable space α to another measurable space β is a measurable function κ : α → Measure β.ProbabilityTheory.IsMarkovKernel κA kernel is a Markov kernel if every measure in its image is a probability measure.
Assuming
  • hX : AEMeasurable X PA function is almost everywhere measurable if it coincides almost everywhere with a measurable function.
Then
ProbabilityTheory.HasCondDistrib U X κ P
Predicate stating that the conditional distribution of Y given X under the measure P is equal to the kernel κ.
Code
lemma hasCondDistrib_unit {α : Type*} {mα : MeasurableSpace α} {P : Measure Ω}
    [IsProbabilityMeasure P] {X : Ω → α} (hX : AEMeasurable X P) (U : Ω → Unit)
    (κ : Kernel α Unit) [IsMarkovKernel κ] :
    HasCondDistrib U X κ P
Proof
by
  have hU : U = fun _ ↦ () := funext fun _ ↦ rfl
  subst hU
  refine HasLaw.mk (hX.prodMk aemeasurable_const) ?_
  rw [Kernel.eq_const_dirac_unit κ, Measure.compProd_const, Measure.prod_dirac,
    AEMeasurable.map_map_of_aemeasurable (by fun_prop) hX]
  rfl

Meaning last changed in v4.34.0-rc2-76-g565f652 (2026-09-10).

Self-contained, with its dependencies inlined and proofs replaced by sorry: download the raw file · open it in the Lean web editor.

Dependency graph

Nothing to draw. Its statement rests on no other declaration in this project, and names nothing from a package left unaudited — so the graph is this declaration alone. That is the answer, not a missing picture.

Audit surface: 0 project declarations, 9 external constants

✓ Proved: no sorry anywhere in its closure

This is the tool's own reading of one build's recorded axioms, and it is not robust against an author who wants it to pass. Checking meant to be relied on should go through Comparator, which replays the proof through the kernel from an export against an explicit list of permitted axioms.