, convergence in measure, equi-integrability, the Vitali convergence theorem, and the de la Vallée-Poussin criterion
1 Measurable spaces
Let , with the order topology. We assign the Borel -algebra. It is a fact that for , if and only if .
Theorem 1.
Let be a measurable space. If is a sequence of measurable functions , then for each ,
are measurable , and
are measurable .
Proof.
Let . For each , , so
For each ,
so
If , then for each , , hence , which means that . Therefore,
and thus . Because this is true for all and is generated by the collection , it follows that is measurable.
That is measurable follows from the fact that if is measurable then is measurable, and that .
For ,
and because each is measurable it follows that is measurable. Likewise,
and because each is measurable it follows that is measurable. ∎
2 Convergence in measure
Let be a probability space. Let be the collection of equivalence classes of measurable functions , where has the Borel -algebra, and where two functions and are equivalent when
is a vector space. For we define
This is a metric on , and one proves that with this metric is a topological vector space. We call the topology induced by the topology of convergence in measure.11 1 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 480, Lemma 13.40.
Theorem 2.
Suppose that is a sequence in . in the topology of convergence in measure if and only if for each ,
Proof.
Suppose that in the topology of convergence in measure and let . For each , let
Because ,
i.e. , which tends to as .
Let and for each , let
Suppose that as . There is some such that implies that . For ,
This shows that in the topology of convergence in measure. ∎
We now prove that if a sequence in converges almost everywhere to then it converges in measure to .22 2 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 479, Theorem 13.37.
Theorem 3.
Suppose that is a sequence in and that for almost all , as . Then in the topology of convergence in measure.
Proof.
Let and let . Egorov’s theorem tells us that there is some with such that uniformly on . So there is some such that if and then . Thus for ,
Then as , namely, in measure. ∎
Theorem 4.
If is a sequence in that converges in to , then converges in measure to .
Proof.
Let and let . By Chebyshev’s inequality,
hence as , namely, converges to in measure. ∎
The following theorem shows that a sequence in that converges in measure to then it has a subsequence that almost everywhere converges to .33 3 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 479, Theorem 13.38.
Theorem 5.
Suppose that is a sequence in that converges in measure to . Then there is a subsequence of such that for almost all , .
Proof.
For each , with , there is some such that implies that
For each , let
for which . Let
and for each ,
Because this is true for all , . If , then there is some such that . This means that for we have , i.e. . This implies that for , as , showing that for almost all , as . ∎
We now prove that is a complete metric, namely that with this metric is an -space.44 4 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 481, Theorem 13.41; Gerald B. Folland, Real Analysis: Modern Techniques and Their Applications, second ed., p. 61, Theorem 2.30.
Theorem 6.
is a complete metric on .
Proof.
Suppose that is a Cauchy sequence in . To prove that is convergent it suffices to prove that has a convergent subsequence. If is a metric space and is a Cauchy sequence in , for any let be such that implies that and a fortiori . Thus we presume that itself satisfies for .
Let
for which
If ,
(1) |
For and , let be such that , i.e. . For and , assume that satisfies and . For , let be such that and . For any we have, because , . Then using (1) with ,
(2) |
Let and let
for which, by (2), . Let
which satisfies
Hence satisfies .
If , then there is some for which , i.e. for each we have , i.e. for each we have . This implies that for and for any positive integer ,
so if then
(3) |
This shows that if then is a Cauchy sequence in , and hence converges. We define by
and by Theorem 1, . For we have and so as . Then for and , using (3) we have
as , so . For , let be such that . Then
which tends to as , showing that converges to in measure, and because is a subsequence of this completes the proof. ∎
3 Equi-integrability
Let be a probability space. A subset of is said to be equi-integrable if for every there is some such that for all with and for all ,
In other words, to say that is equi-integrable means that
The following theorem gives an equivalent condition for a bounded subset of to be equi-integrable.55 5 Fernando Albiac and Nigel J. Kalton, Topics in Banach Space Theory, p. 105, Lemma 5.2.6.
Theorem 7.
Suppose that is a bounded subset of . Then the following are equivalent:
-
1.
is equi-integrable.
-
2.
.
Proof.
Let and suppose that is equi-integrable. For , Chebyshev’s inequality tells us
Because as and is equi-integrable,
Theorem 8 (Absolute continuity of Lebesgue integral).
Suppose that . If then there is some such that for any with ,
Proof.
For , define
Then is a sequence in such that for each , is nondecreasing and , and thus the monotone convergence theorem tells us that
Then there is some for which
For and with ,
∎
The following is the Vitali convergence theorem.66 6 V. I. Bogachev, Measure Theory, volume I, p. 268, Theorem 4.5.4.
Theorem 9 (Vitali convergence theorem).
Suppose that and is a sequence in . Then the following are equivalent:
-
1.
is equi-integrable, is bounded in , and in measure.
-
2.
and in .
Proof.
Suppose that is equi-integrable and in measure. Because in measure, there is a subsequence of that converges almost everywhere to and so converges almost everywhere to . Let . Fatou’s lemma tells us that and
Because and , . To show that converges to in , it suffices to show that any subsequence of itself has a subsequence that converges to in . (Generally, a sequence in a topological space converges to if and only if any subsequence itself has a subsequence that converges to .) Thus, let be a subsequence of . Because converges to in measure, the subsequence converges to in measure and so there is a subsequence of that converges almost everywhere to . Let . Because is equi-integrable, there is some such that for all with and for all ,
If with , then converges almost everywhere to , and , so by Fatou’s lemma we obtain
But because converges almost everywhere to , by Egorov’s theorem there is some with such that uniformly on , and so there is some such that if and then . Thus for ,
which shows that in . That is, we have shown that for any subsequence of there is a subsequence of that converges to in , which implies that the sequence converges to in .
Suppose that and in . First, because the sequence is convergent in the set is bounded in . Second, in implies that in measure. Third, for , let such that implies that . For each , by Theorem 8 there is some such that for and ,
and likewise there is some such that for and ,
Let be the minimum of . Thus if and , then for ,
and for for ,
This shows that is equi-integrable, completing the proof. ∎
The following is the de la Vallée-Poussin criterion for equi-integrability.77 7 V. I. Bogachev, Measure Theory, volume I, p. 272, Theorem 4.5.9.
Theorem 10 (de la Vallée-Poussin criterion).
Proof.
Suppose that is a nonnegative nondecreasing function on satisfying (6). Let
For , there is some such that implies that , and hence, for , if and then , i.e. , which yields
Therefore by Theorem 7, is bounded and equi-integrable.
Suppose that is bounded and equi-integrable. For and , let
By induction, because is bounded and equi-integrable there is a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers such that for each ,
(7) |
For and ,
Using this and (7), for ,
For we define
It is straightforward that as . We define a step function on by
and we define a function on by
It is apparent that is nonnegative and nondecreasing. For , , by the fundamental theorem of calculus,
showing that is convex. The above inequality also yields that for , , and as so we get that . For , using , , and for ,
we get
showing that , which completes the proof. ∎