Khinchin’s inequality and Etemadi’s inequality

Jordan Bell
September 4, 2015

1 Khinchin’s inequality

We will use the following to prove Khinchin’s inequality.11 1 Camil Muscalu and Wilhelm Schlag, Classical and Multilinear Harmonic Analysis, volume I, p. 113, Lemma 5.4.

Lemma 1.

Let X1,…,Xn be independent random variables each with the Rademacher distribution. For a1,…,an∈R and λ>0,

P(|Sn|>λ(∑k=1nak2)1/2)≤2e-λ2/2,

where

Sn=∑k=1nak⁢Xk.
Proof.

For t∈ℝ,

E⁢(et⁢ak⁢Xk)=∫ℝet⁢ak⁢x⁢d⁢(12⁢δ-1+12⁢δ1)⁢(x)=12⁢(e-t⁢ak+et⁢ak)=cosh⁡(t⁢ak).

Because the Xk are independent,

E⁢(et⁢Sn)=∏k=1nE⁢(et⁢ak⁢Xk)=∏k=1ncosh⁡(t⁢ak),

and because cosh⁡x≤ex2/2 for all x∈ℝ, we have

E⁢(et⁢Sn)≤∏k=1net2⁢ak22=exp⁡(t22⁢∑k=1nak2).

Let σ2=∑k=1nak2, with which

E⁢(et⁢Sn)≤exp⁡(t2⁢σ22).

Because t↦eλ⁢σ⁢t is nonnegative and nondecreasing, for t>0 we have

1Sn>λ⁢σ⁢eλ⁢σ⁢t<et⁢Sn,

which yields P(Sn>λσ)≤e-λ⁢σ⁢tE(et⁢Sn), and hence

P(Sn>λσ)≤e-λ⁢σ⁢texp(t2⁢σ22)=exp(-λσt+t2⁢σ22).

The minimum of the right-hand side occurs when λ⁢σ=t⁢σ2, i.e. t=λσ, at which

P(Sn>λσ)≤exp(-λ2+λ22)=e-λ2/2.

For t>0,

1Sn<-λ⁢σ⁢eλ⁢σ⁢t<e-t⁢Sn,

which yields P(Sn<-λσ)≤e-λ⁢σ⁢tE(e-t⁢Sn), and hence

P(Sn<-λσ)≤e-λ⁢σ⁢texp((-t)2⁢σ22)=exp(-λσt+t2⁢σ22),

whence

P(Sn<-λσ)≤e-λ2/2.

Therefore

P(|Sn|>λσ)=P(Sn>λσ)+P(Sn<-λσ)≤2e-λ2/2,

proving the claim. ∎

Corollary 2.

Let X1,…,Xn be independent random variables each with the Rademacher distribution. For α1,…,αn∈C and λ>0,

P(|Sn|>λ(∑k=1n|αk|2)1/2)≤4e-λ2/2,

where

Sn=∑k=1nαk⁢Xk.
Proof.

Write αk=ak+i⁢bk. If

|Sn⁢(ω)|>λ⁢(∑k=1n|αk|2)1/2,

then

|Sn⁢(ω)|2>λ2⁢∑k=1n(ak2+bk2).

But

|Sn⁢(ω)|2=(∑k=1nak⁢Xk⁢(ω))2+(∑k=1nbk⁢Xk⁢(ω))2,

so at least one of the following is true:

|∑k=1nak⁢Xk⁢(ω)|>λ⁢(∑k=1nak2)1/2,|∑k=1nbk⁢Xk⁢(ω)|>λ⁢(∑k=1nbk2)1/2.

By Lemma 4,

P(|Sn|>λ(∑k=1nak2)1/2)≤2e-λ2/2

and

P(|Sn|>λ(∑k=1nbk2)1/2)≤2e-λ2/2,

thus

P(|Sn|>λ(∑k=1n|αk|2)1/2) ≤P(|Sn|>λ(∑k=1nak2)1/2)
+P(|Sn|>λ(∑k=1nbk2)1/2)
≤4⁢e-λ2/2,

proving the claim. ∎

We now prove Khinchin’s inequality.22 2 Camil Muscalu and Wilhelm Schlag, Classical and Multilinear Harmonic Analysis, volume I, p. 114, Lemma 5.5; Thomas H. Wolff, Lectures on Harmonic Analysis, p. 28, Proposition 4.5.

Theorem 3 (Khinchin’s inequality).

For 1≤p<∞, let

C⁢(p)=(21+p2⋅p⋅Γ⁢(p2))1/p,

and let 1p+1q=1. If X1,…,Xn are independent random variables each with the Rademacher distribution and a1,…,an∈C, then

C⁢(q)-1⁢(∑k=1n|ak|2)1/2≤E⁢(|∑k=1nak⁢Xk|p)1/p≤C⁢(p)⁢(∑k=1n|ak|2)1/2.
Proof.

First we remark that it can be computed that

(∫0∞p⁢tp-1⋅4⁢e-t2/2⁢𝑑t)1/p=(21+p2⋅p⋅Γ⁢(p2))1/p=C⁢(p).

Let σ2=∑k=1n|ak|2 and let αk=akσ; if σ=0 then the claim is immediate. To prove the claim it is equivalent to prove that

C⁢(q)-1≤E⁢(|∑k=1nαk⁢Xk|p)1/p≤C⁢(p).

Write Sn=∑k=1nαk⁢Xk. Using the fact that for a random variable X with P(X≥0)=1,

E(Xp)=∫0∞ptp-1P(X≥t)dt,

we obtain, applying Lemma 2,

E(|Sn|p)=∫0∞ptp-1P(|Sn|≥t)dt≤∫0∞ptp-1⋅4e-t2/2dt,

and thus

E⁢(|Sn|p)1/p≤C⁢(p). (1)

Using Hölder’s inequality, because the Xk are independent and E⁢(Xk)=0 and E⁢(|Xk|2)=1,

∑k=1n|αk|2=E⁢(|∑k=1nαk⁢Xk|2)≤E⁢(|∑k=1nαk⁢Xk|p)1/p⁢E⁢(|∑k=1nαk⁢Xk|q)1/q.

Applying (1),

E⁢(|∑k=1nαk⁢Xk|q)1/q≤C⁢(q),

and as ∑k=1n|αk|2=1 we obtain

1≤C⁢(q)⁢E⁢(|∑k=1nαk⁢Xk|p)1/p.

Thus we have

C⁢(q)-1≤E⁢(|Sn|p)1/p≤C⁢(p),

which proves the claim. ∎

2 Etemadi’s inequality

The following is Etemadi’s inequality.33 3 Allan Gut, Probability: A Graduate Course, p. 143, Theorem 7.6.

Theorem 4 (Etemadi’s inequality).

If X1,…,Xn are independent random variables, then for any x>0,

P(max1≤k≤n|Sk|≥3x)≤2P(|Sn|≥x)+max1≤k≤nP(|Sk|≥x)≤3max1≤k≤nP(|Sk|≥x),

where Sk=∑j=1kXj.

Proof.

For k=1,…,n, let

Ak={max1≤j≤k-1|Sj|<3x}∩{|Sk|≥3x},

with A1={|S1|≥3x}. A1,…,An are disjoint, and

A=⋃k=1nAk={max1≤k≤n|Sk|≥3x}.

For each 1≤k≤n,

Ak∩{|Sn|<x}⊂Ak∩{|Sn-Sk|>2x},

and also, the events Ak and {|Sn-Sk|>2⁢x} are independent, and thus

P⁢(A) =P(A∩{|Sn|≥x})+P(A∩{|Sn|<x})
≤P(|Sn|≥x)+P(A∩{|Sn|<x})
≤P(|Sn|≥x)+∑k=1nP(Ak∩{|Sn-Sk|>2x})
=P(|Sn|≥x)+∑k=1nP(Ak)P(|Sn-Sk|>2x)
≤P(|Sn|≥x)+max1≤k≤nP(|Sn-Sk|>2x)⋅P(A).

Then, because |a-b|>2⁢x implies that |a|>x or |b|>x,

P⁢(A) ≤P(|Sn|≥x)+max1≤k≤nP(|Sn-Sk|>2x)
≤P(|Sn|≥x)+max1≤k≤n(P(|Sn|>x)+P(|Sk|>x)).

∎

The following inequality is similar enough to Etemadi’s inequality to be placed in this note.44 4 K. R. Parthasarathy, Probability Measures on Metric Spaces, p. 219, Chapter VII, Lemma 4.1.

Lemma 5.

Let ξ1,…,ξn be independent random variables with sample space (Ω,F,P). Let ζ0=0 and for 1≤k≤n let ξk=∑i=1kξi. If P(|ζn-ζk|≤t)≥α for 0≤k≤n then

P(max1≤k≤n|ζk|>2t)≤α-1P(|ζn|>t).
Proof.

For 0≤k≤n let

Ak={|ζ1|≤2t,…,|ζk-1|≤2t,|ζk|>2t},Bk={|ζn-ζk|≤t},

where A0=Ω. Because |ζn|≥|ζk|-|ζn-ζk|,

Ak∩Bk⊂{|ζn|>t},

and so

⋃k=1n(Ak∩Bk)⊂{|ζn|>t}.

It is apparent that for j≠k the events Aj and Ak are disjoint, so the sets A1∩B1,…,Ak∩Bk are pairwise disjoint, hence

P(|ζn|>t)≥P(⋃k=1n(Ak∩Bk))=∑k=1nP(Ak∩Bk).

For each k, using that ξ1,…,ξn are independent one checks that the events Ak and Bk are independent, and using this,

P(|ζn|>t)≥∑k=1nP(Ak)P(Bk)≥α∑k=1nP(Ak)=αP(⋃k=1nAk),

that is,

P(|ζn|>t)≥αP(max1≤k≤n|ζk|>2t),

proving the claim. ∎