The Kolmogorov extension theorem
1 -algebras and semirings
If is a nonempty set, an algebra of sets on is a collection of subsets of such that if is finite then , and if then . An algebra is called a -algebra if being countable implies that .
If is a set and is a collection of subsets of , we denote by the smallest -algebra containing , and we say that is the -algebra generated by .
Later we will also use the following notion. If is a nonempty set, a semiring of sets on is a collection of subsets of such that (i) , (ii) if then , and (iii) if then there are pairwise disjoint such that ; we do not demand that this union itself belong to . We remark that a semiring on need not include .
If is a semiring of sets and , we say that is finitely additive if being finite, pairwise disjoint, and satisfying implies that , and countably additive if being countable, pairwise disjoint, and satisfying implies that . If is a collection of subsets of , the algebra generated by is the smallest algebra containing . We shall use the following lemma in the proof of Lemma 10.
Lemma 1.
If is a semiring on a set and , then the algebra generated by is equal to the collection of finite unions of members of .
For a bounded countably additive function, the Carathéodory extension theorem states the following.11 1 René L. Schilling, Measures, Integrals and Martingales, p. 37, Theorem 6.1. If we had not specified that but rather had talked about , then the Carathéodory extension theorem shows that there is some extension of to , but this extension need not be unique.
Theorem 2 (Carathéodory extension theorem).
Suppose that is a nonempty set, that is a semiring on , and that is countably additive. Then there is one and only one measure on whose restriction to is equal to .
2 Product -algebras
Suppose that is a set, that is a family of measurable spaces, and that are functions. The smallest -algebra on such that each is measurable is called the -algebra generated by . This is analogous to the initial topology induced by a family of functions on a set. Calling this -algebra and supposing that for each , we check then that
(1) |
Suppose that is a family of measurable spaces. Let
the cartesian product of the sets , and let be the projection maps. The product -algebra on is the -algebra generated by , and is denoted
This is analogous to the product topology on a cartesian product of topological spaces, which has the initial topology induced by the family of projection maps.
For , we define
Thus, and , and for ,
For , let
the product -algebra on . Thus, and , and for we have
For , we define to be the projection map: an element of is a function on such that for all , and is the restriction of to .
Lemma 3.
For , is measurable.
If is a finite subset of and , we call an -cylinder set. Cylinder sets for the product -algebra are analogous to the usual basic open sets for the product topology.
Lemma 4.
The collection of all cylinder sets is an algebra of sets on , and this collection generates the product -algebra .
The product -algebra can in fact be generated by a smaller collection of sets. (The following collection of sets is not a minimal collection of sets that generates the product -algebra, but it is smaller than the collection of all cylinder sets and it has the structure of a semiring, which will turn out to be useful.) An intersection of finitely many sets of the form , , is called a product cylinder.
Lemma 5.
The collection of all product cylinders is a semiring of sets on , and this collection generates the product -algebra .
3 Borel -algebras
If is a topogical space, the Borel -algebra on is , and is denoted . A member of is called a Borel set.
Lemma 6.
If is a topological space and is a countable subbasis for the topology of , then
A separable metrizable space is second-countable, so we can apply the following theorem to such spaces.
Theorem 7.
Suppose that , , are second-countable topological spaces and let , with the product topology. Then
Proof.
For each , let be a countable subbasis for the topology of . Because is a subbasis for the topology of for each , we check that is a subbasis for the product topology of , where
Because each is countable and is countable, is countable. Hence by Lemma 6,
On the other hand, for each we have by Lemma 6 that , and so by (1),
∎
4 Product measures
If are -finite measure spaces, let and . It is a fact that there is a unique measure on such that for ,
and is a -finite measure. We write and call the product measure.22 2 Gerald B. Folland, Real Analysis: Modern Techniques and Their Applications, second ed., pp. 64–65, and p. 31, Theorem 1.14.
5 Compact classes
If is a set and is a collection of subsets of , we say that is a compact class if every countable subset of with the finite intersection property has nonempty intersection. We remind ourselves that a collection of sets is said to have the finite intersection property if for any finite subset of we have . Usually one speaks about a collection of sets having the finite intersection property in the following setting: A topological space is compact if and only if every collection of closed sets that has the finite intersection property has nonempty intersection.
We will employ the following lemma in the proof of the Kolmogorov extension theorem.33 3 V. I. Bogachev, Measure Theory, volume I, p. 50, Proposition 1.12.4.
Lemma 8.
Suppose that is a compact class of subsets of a set and let be the collection of countable intersections of finite unions of members of . is the smallest collection of subsets of containing that is closed under finite unions and countable intersections, and is itself a compact class.
We state the following result that gives conditions under which a finitely additive functions on an algebra of sets is in fact countably additive,44 4 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 378, Theorem 10.13. and then use it to prove an analogous result for semirings.
Lemma 9.
Suppose that is an algebra of sets on a set , and that is finitely additive and . If there is a compact class such that
then is countably additive.
The following lemma gives conditions under which a finitely additive function on a semiring of sets is in fact countably additive.55 5 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 521, Lemma 15.25.
Lemma 10.
Suppose that is a semiring of sets on with and that is finitely additive and . If there is a compact class such that
then is a countably additive.
Proof.
Let be the collection of finite unions of members of . is a subset of the compact class produced in Lemma 8, hence is itself a compact class. Let be the collection of finite unions of members of , which by Lemma 1 is the algebra generated by . Because and is closed under finite unions, it follows that .
Because is a semiring, it is a fact that if , then there are pairwise disjoint such that .66 6 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 134, Lemma 4.7. Thus, if , defining , with , the sets are pairwise disjoint, and for each there are pairwise disjoint such that . Then the sets , , are pairwise disjoint and their union is equal to . This shows that any element of can be written as a union of pairwise disjoint elements of .
Furthermore, because is a semiring, if , there are pairwise disjoint such that for each there is some such that , and for each , there is a subset such that .77 7 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 134, Lemma 4.8.
Let and suppose that , where are pairwise disjoint, and that , where are pairwise disjoint. There are pairwise disjoint such that for each there is some or such that, respectively, or , and for each there is some subset such that , and for each there is some subset such that . It follows that , and because is finitely additive,
Therefore, for it makes sense to define
where are pairwise disjoint elements of whose union is equal to . Also, .
We shall now show that the function is finitely additive. If are pairwise disjoint, for each there are pairwise disjoint such that , and there are pairwise disjoint such that for each , there is some and some such that , and for each and each there is some subset such that . It follows that , and
showing that is finitely additive.
For with pairwise disjoint , let , and for each let with and . Then . As are pairwise disjoint and , are pairwise disjoint, so because is finitely additive on ,
Lemma 9 tells us now that is countably additive, and therefore , its restriction to the semiring , is countably additive. ∎
6 Kolmogorov consistent families
Suppose that is a family of measurable spaces. The collection of all finite subsets of , ordered by set inclusion, is a directed set. Suppose that for each , is a probability measure on ; we defined the notation in §2 and we use that here. We say that the family of measures is Kolmogorov consistent if whenever with , it happens that , where denotes the pushforward of by , i.e. . It makes sense to talk about because is measurable, as stated in Lemma 3.
We are now prepared to prove the Kolmogorov extension theorem.88 8 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 522, Theorem 15.26.
Theorem 11 (Kolmogorov extension theorem).
Suppose that is a family of measurable spaces and suppose that for each , is a probability measure on . If the family of probability measures is Kolmogorov consistent and if for each there is a compact class satisfying
(2) |
then there is a unique probability measure on such that for each , the pushforward of by the projection map is equal to .
Proof.
Define
We shall show that is a compact class. Suppose
has empty intersection. For each , let
and if there are no such , then . Then
Because this intersection is equal to , one of the factors in the product is equal to . (For some purposes one wants to keep track of where the axiom of choice is used, so we mention that concluding that some factor of any empty cartesian product is itself empty is equivalent to the axiom of choice). No is empty, so this empty must be of the form for which at least one is equal to . But if then , and because is a compact class, implies that there are finitely many such that , and this yields . We have thus proved that if an intersection of countably many members of is empty then some intersection of finitely many of these is empty, showing that is a compact class. Let be the smallest collection of subsets of containing that is closed under finite unions and countable intersections, and by Lemma 8 we know that is a compact class; we use the notation because presently we will use a subset of .
Let be the collection of all cylinder sets of the product -algebra . Explicitly,
Suppose , , , and that . It follows that , and then using we get
Therefore it makes sense to define as follows: for ,
Let and , and suppose that are pairwise disjoint. With ,
which is an -cylinder set. Then,
showing that is finitely additive.
Let be the collection of all product cylinder sets of the product -algebra . Explicitly,
It is apparent that . Let be the intersection of and . A subset of a compact class is a compact class, so is a compact class, and .
Suppose that : there is some and for each such that
Take , and let . Then, for each , by (2) there is some such that and , and we set
which is a finite intersection of members of and hence belongs to , and which visibly belongs to , and hence belongs to . We have
Both and the above union are cylinder sets so it makes sense to apply to them, and because is finitely additive,
Hence , i.e. . Thus, we have proved that for each , there is some such that and , which means that
Using the restriction of to the semiring and the compact class , the conditions of Lemma 10 are satisfied, and therefore the restriction of to is countably additive.
By Lemma 5, . Because the restriction of to the semiring is countably additive, we can apply the Carathéodory extension theorem, which tells us that there is a unique measure on whose restriction to is equal to the restriction of to . Check that the restriction of to is equal to . For and ,
showing that . Certainly , namely, is a probability measure. If is a probability measure on whose pushforward by is equal to for each , then check that the restriction of to is equal to the restriction of to , and then by the assertion of uniqueness in Carathéodory’s theorem, , completing the proof. ∎
If is a Hausdorff space, we say that a Borel measure on is tight if for every ,
A Polish space is a topological space that is homeomorphic to a complete separable metric space, and it is a fact that a finite Borel measure on a Polish space is tight.99 9 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 438, Theorem 12.7. In particular, any Borel probability measure on a Polish space is tight. We use this in the proof of the following version of the Kolmogorov extension theorem, which applies for instance to the case where for each , with any index set.
Corollary 12.
Suppose that is a family of Polish spaces and suppose that for each , is a Borel probability measure on . If the family of measures is Kolmogorov consistent, then there is a unique probability measure on such that for each , the pushforward of by the projection map is equal to .
Proof.
For each , let be the collection of all compact subsets of . In any topological space, check that a collection of compact sets is a compact class. The fact that is a Borel probability measure on a Polish space then implies that it is tight, which we can write as
Therefore the conditions of Theorem 11 are satisfied, so the claim follows. ∎
If the index set in the above corollary is countable, then by Theorem 7 the product -algebra is equal to the Borel -algebra of the product , so that the probability measure on the product -algebra is in this case a Borel measure.