Lévy’s inequality, Rademacher sums, and Kahane’s inequality

Jordan Bell
May 21, 2015

1 Lévy’s inequality

Let (Ω,𝒜,P) be a probability space. A random variable is a Borel measurable function Ω→ℝ. For a random variable X, we denote by X*⁢P the pushforward measure of P by X. X*⁢P is a Borel probability measure on ℝ, called the distribution of X. A random variable X is called symmetric when the distribution of X is equal to the distribution of -X. Because the collection {(-∞,a]:a∈ℝ} generates the Borel σ-algebra of ℝ, the statement that X*⁢P=(-X)*⁢P is equivalent to the statement that for all a∈ℝ,

P({ω∈Ω:X(ω)≤a})=P(ω∈Ω:-X(ω)≤a}).

The following is Lévy’s inequality.11 1 Joe Diestel, Hans Jarchow, and Andrew Tonge, Absolutely Summing Operators, p. 213, Theorem 11.3.

Theorem 1 (Lévy’s inequality).

Suppose that χk, k≥1, are independent symmetric random variables, that U is a real or complex Banach space, and that uk∈U, k≥1. Then for each a>0 and for each n≥1,

P(max1≤k≤n∥∑1≤j≤kχjuj∥≥a)≤2⋅P(∥∑1≤j≤nχjuj∥≥a).
Proof.

Let S0=0 and for 1≤k≤n,

Sk⁢(ω)=∑j=1kχj⁢(ω)⁢uj,ω∈Ω.

For 1≤k≤n, the function ω↦(χ1⁢(ω),…,χk⁢(ω)) is Borel measurable Ω→ℝk.22 2 Charalambos D. Aliprantis and Kim C. Border, Infinite Dimensional Analysis: A Hitchhiker’s Guide, third ed., p. 152, Lemma 4.49. The function (t1,…,tk)↦∑j=1ktj⁢uj is continuous ℝk→U. And the function u↦∥u∥ is continuous U→ℝ. Therefore ω↦∥Sk⁢(ω)∥, the composition of these functions, is Borel measurable Ω→ℝ. This then implies that ω↦max1≤k≤n⁡∥Sk⁢(ω)∥ is Borel measurable Ω→ℝ. Let

A={ω∈Ω:max1≤k≤n⁡∥Sk⁢(ω)∥≥a},B={ω∈Ω:∥Sn⁢(ω)∥≥a},

for which B⊂A. For 1≤k≤n, let

Ak=⋂0≤j<k{ω∈Ω:∥Sj⁢(ω)∥<a and ∥Sk⁢(ω)∥≥a}.

It is apparent that that A1,…,An are pairwise disjoint and that A=⋃k=1nAk.

For 1≤k≤n, let

Tn,k⁢(ω)=Sk⁢(ω)-∑j=k+1nχj⁢(ω)⁢uj=∑j=1kχj⁢(ω)⁢uj-∑j=k+1nχj⁢(ω)⁢uj,ω∈Ω,

in other words, Sn+Tn,k=2⁢Sk. Let

Uk=Ak∩B,Vk=Ak∩{ω∈Ω:∥Tn,k⁢(ω)∥≥a}.

If ω∈Ak, then

∥Sn⁢(ω)+Tn,k⁢(ω)∥=2⁢∥Sk⁢(ω)∥≥2⁢a,

which implies that at least one of the inequalities ∥Sn⁢(ω)∥≥a or ∥Tn,k⁢(ω)∥≥a is true. Therefore

Ak=Uk∪Vk.

Because χ1,…,χn are independent, the random vector X=(χ1,…,χn):Ω→ℝn has the pushforward measure

X*⁢P=χ1*⁢P×⋯×χn*⁢P,

and for each 1≤k≤n, the random vector Xk=(χ1,…,χk,-χk+1,…,-χn):Ω→ℝn has the pushforward measure

Xk*⁢P=χ1*⁢P×⋯⁢χk*⁢P×(-χk+1)*⁢P×⋯⁢(-χn)*⁢P,

and because each χj is symmetric, these pushforward measures are equal. Define σk:ℝk→ℝ by

σk⁢(t1,…,tk)=∥∑j=1ktj⁢uj∥,(t1,…,tk)∈ℝk,

define σ0=0, and set

Hk =(⋂0≤j<k{(t1,…,tn)∈ℝn:σj⁢(t1,…,tj)<a})
∩{(t1,…,tn)∈ℝn:σk⁢(t1,…,tk)≥a,σn⁢(t1,…,tn)≥a}.

Because each σj is continuous, Hk is a Borel set in ℝn. Then we have

P⁢(Uk) =P⁢(Ak∩B)
=P⁢(X-1⁢(Hk))
=(X*⁢P)⁢(Hk)
=(Xk*⁢P)⁢(Hk)
=P⁢(Xk-1⁢(Hk))
=P⁢(Ak∩{ω∈Ω:∥Tn,k⁢(ω)∥≥a})
=P⁢(Vk);

among the above equalities, the two equalities that deserve chewing on are

P⁢(Ak∩B)=P⁢(X-1⁢(Hk)) and P⁢(Xk-1⁢(Hk))=P⁢(Ak∩{ω∈Ω:∥Tn,k⁢(ω)∥≥a}).

Thus we have

P⁢(Ak)=P⁢(Uk∪Vk)≤P⁢(Uk)+P⁢(Vk)=2⁢P⁢(Uk)=2⁢P⁢(Ak∩B).

Therefore

P⁢(A) =∑k=1nP⁢(Ak)
≤∑k=1n2⁢P⁢(Ak∩B)
=2⁢P⁢(A∩B)
=2⁢P⁢(B),

proving the claim. ∎

2 Rademacher sums

Suppose that ϵn:(Ω,𝒜,P)→(ℝ,ℬℝ,λ), n≥1, are independent random variables each with the Rademacher distribution: for each n,

ϵn*⁢P=12⁢δ-1+12⁢δ1,

in other words, P(ϵn=1)=12 and P(ϵn=-1)=12.

We now use Lévy’s inequality to prove the following for independent random variables with the Rademacher distribution.33 3 Joe Diestel, Hans Jarchow, and Andrew Tonge, Absolutely Summing Operators, p. 214, Lemma 11.4.

Theorem 2.

Suppose that X is a real or complex Banach space, and that xk∈X, k≥1. Then for each a>0 and for each n≥1,

P(∥∑k=1nϵkxk∥≥2a)≤4(P(∥∑k=1nϵkxk∥≥a))2.
Proof.

Let S0=0 and for 1≤k≤n, define

Sk⁢(ω)=∑1≤j≤kϵj⁢(ω)⁢xj,ω∈Ω.

Let

A={max1≤k≤n∥Sk∥≥a},B={∥Sn∥≥a},C={∥Sn∥≥2a}.

Lévy’s inequality tells us that P⁢(A)≤2⁢P⁢(B).

For 1≤k≤n, let

Ak=⋂0≤j<k{∥Sj∥<a}∩{∥Sk∥≥a}

and

Ck={∥Sn-Sk-1∥≥a}.

If ω∈Ak∩C, then

∥Sn⁢(ω)-Sk-1⁢(ω)∥≥∥Sn⁢(ω)∥-∥Sk-1⁢(ω)∥≥2⁢a-a=a,

hence Ak∩C⊂Ck. Then because C⊂A and because A is the disjoint union of A1,…,An,

P⁢(C)=P⁢(A∩C)=P⁢(⋃k=1n(Ak∩C))=∑k=1nP⁢(Ak∩C)≤∑k=1nP⁢(Ak∩Ck).

Let 1≤k≤n. P(ϵk2=1)=1, so for almost all ω∈Ω,

∥∑j=knϵj⁢(ω)⁢xj∥=∥ϵk⁢(ω)⁢∑j=knϵj⁢(ω)⁢xj∥=∥xk+∑j=k+1nϵk⁢(ω)⁢ϵj⁢(ω)⁢xj∥.

Thus, for

Dk={∥xk+∑j=k+1nϵkϵjxj∥≥a},

we have

P⁢(Ck⁢△⁢Dk)=0.

Let (δ1,…,δn)∈{+1,-1}n. On the one hand, because δj2=1 and using that ϵ1,…,ϵn are independent,

P(ϵ1=δ1,…,ϵk=δk,ϵkϵk+1=δk+1,…,ϵkϵn=δn)=P(ϵ1=δ1,…,ϵk=δk,ϵk+1=δkδk+1,…,ϵn=δkδn)=P(ϵ1=δ1)⋯P(ϵk=δk)P(ϵk+1=δkδk+1)⋯P(ϵn=δkδn)=2-n.

On the other hand, for k+1≤j≤n we have

P(ϵkϵj=δj)=P(ϵkϵj=δj|ϵk=1)P(ϵk=1)+P(ϵkϵj=δj|ϵk=-1)P(ϵk=-1)=12P(ϵj=δj)+12P(ϵj=-δj)=12⋅12+12⋅12=12,

and hence

P(ϵ1=δ1)⋯P(ϵk=δk)P(ϵkϵk+1=δk+1)⋯P(ϵkϵn=δn)=2-n.

Therefore, for each 1≤k≤n and for each (δ1,…,δn)∈{+1,-1}n,

P(ϵ1=δ1,…,ϵk=δk,ϵkϵk+1=δk+1,…,ϵkϵn=δn)=P(ϵ1=δ1)⋯P(ϵk=δk)P(ϵkϵk+1=δk+1)⋯P(ϵkϵn=δn).

But for almost all ω∈Ω,

(ϵ1⁢(ω),…,ϵk⁢(ω),ϵk⁢(ω)⁢ϵk+1⁢(ω),…,ϵk⁢(ω)⁢ϵn⁢(ω))∈{+1,-1}n,

so it follows that

ϵ1,…,ϵk,ϵk⁢ϵk+1,…,ϵk⁢ϵn

are independent random variables. We check that Ak∈σ⁢(ϵ1,…,ϵk) and Dk∈σ⁢(σk⁢σk+1,…,σk⁢σn), and what we have just established means that these σ-algebras are independent, so

P⁢(Ak∩Dk)=P⁢(Ak)⁢P⁢(Dk).

But

Ak∩(Ck⁢△⁢Dk)=(Ak∩Ck)⁢△⁢(Ak∩Dk),

so, because P⁢(Ck⁢△⁢Dk)=0,

P⁢(Ak∩Ck)=P⁢(Ak∩Dk)=P⁢(Ak)⁢P⁢(Dk)=P⁢(Ak)⁢P⁢(Ck).

We had already established that P⁢(C)≤∑k=1nP⁢(Ak∩Ck). Using this with the above, and the fact that A is the disjoint union of A1,…,An, we obtain

P⁢(C) ≤∑k=1nP⁢(Ak∩Ck)
=∑k=1nP⁢(Ak)⁢P⁢(Ck)
≤(∑k=1nP⁢(Ak))⁢max1≤k≤n⁡P⁢(Ck)
=P⁢(⋃k=1nAk)⁢max1≤k≤n⁡P⁢(Ck)
=P⁢(A)⁢max1≤k≤n⁡P⁢(Ck).

As we stated before, we have from Lévy’s inequality that P⁢(A)≤2⁢P⁢(B), with which

P⁢(C)≤2⁢P⁢(B)⁢max1≤k≤n⁡P⁢(Ck).

To prove the claim it thus suffices to show that

max1≤k≤n⁡P⁢(Ck)≤2⁢P⁢(B).

Let 1≤k≤n. For δ=(δ1,…,δk-1)∈{+1,-1}k-1, let let Hk,δ,+ be those (t1,…,tn)∈ℝn such that (i) for each 1≤j≤k-1, tj=δj, (ii) ∥∑j=kntj⁢xj∥≥a, and (iii)

∥∑j=1ntj⁢xj∥≥a,

and let Hk,δ,- be those (t1,…,tn)∈ℝn satisfying (i) and (ii) and

∥∑j=1k-1tj⁢xj-∑j=kntj⁢xj∥≥a.

Let

X=(ϵ1,…,ϵn):Ω→ℝn

and let

Xk=(ϵ1,…,ϵk-1,-ϵk,…,-ϵn):Ω→ℝn,

which have the same distribution because ϵ1,…,ϵn are independent and symmetric. Then

P⁢(X-1⁢(Hk,δ,+)) =(X*⁢P)⁢(Hk,δ,+)
=(Xk*⁢P)⁢(Hk,δ,+)
=P⁢(Xk-1⁢(Hk,δ,+))
=P⁢(X-1⁢(Hk,δ,-)).

Set

Ck,δ,+={X∈Hk,δ,+},Ck,δ,-={X∈Hk,δ,-},

for which we thus have

P⁢(Ck,δ,+)=P⁢(Ck,δ,-).

We can write Ck,δ,+ and Ck,δ,- as

Ck,δ,+=(⋂0≤j<k{ϵj=δj})∩Ck∩{∥Sn∥≥a}

and

Ck,δ,-=(⋂0≤j<k{ϵj=δj})∩Ck∩{∥Sn-2Sk-1∥≥a}.

If ω∈Ck then, because ∥Sn⁢(ω)-Sk-1⁢(ω)∥≥a,

2⁢a ≤2⁢∥Sn⁢(ω)-Sk-1⁢(ω)∥
=∥Sn⁢(ω)+(Sn⁢(ω)-2⁢Sk-1⁢(ω))∥
≤∥Sn⁢(ω)∥+∥Sn⁢(ω)-2⁢Sk-1⁢(ω)∥,

so at least one of the inequalities ∥Sn⁢(ω)∥≥a and ∥Sn⁢(ω)-2⁢Sk-1⁢(ω)∥≥a is true, and hence

Ck⊂{∥Sn∥≥a}∪{∥Sn-2Sk-1∥≥a}.

It follows that

Ck∩(⋂0≤j<k{ϵj=δj})=Ck,δ,+∪Ck,δ,-.

Therefore, using the fact that for almost all ω∈Ω,

(ϵ1⁢(ω),…,ϵk-1⁢(ω))∈{+1,-1}k-1,

and

Ck,δ,+=(⋂0≤j<k{ϵj=δj})∩Ck∩B,

we get

P⁢(Ck) =∑δP(Ck∩⋂0≤j<k{ϵj=δj})
=∑δP⁢(Ck,δ,+∪Ck,δ,-)
=2⁢∑δP⁢(Ck,δ,+)
≤2∑δP(B∩⋂0≤j<k{ϵj=δj})
=2⁢P⁢(B),

and thus

max1≤k≤n⁡P⁢(Ck)≤2⁢P⁢(B),

which proves the claim. ∎

3 Kahane’s inequality

By E⁢(X)r we mean (E⁢(X))r. The following is Kahane’s inequality.44 4 Joe Diestel, Hans Jarchow, and Andrew Tonge, Absolutely Summing Operators, p. 211, Theorem 11.1.

Theorem 3 (Kahane’s inequality).

For 0<p,q<∞, there is some Kp,q>0 such that if X is a real or complex Banach space and xk∈X, k≥1, then for each n,

E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢xk∥q)1/q≤Kp,q⋅E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢xk∥p)1/p.
Proof.

Suppose that 0<p<q<∞; when p≥q the claim is immediate with Kp,q=1. Let

M=E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢xk∥p)1/p;

if M=0 we check that the claim is 0≤Kp,q⋅0, which is true for, say, Kp,q=1. Otherwise, M>0, and let uk=xkM, 1≤k≤n, for which

E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢uk∥p)=E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢xkM∥p)=1. (1)

Using Chebyshev’s inequality,

P(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥≥81/p)=P(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥p≥8)≤18E(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥p)=18.

Assume for induction that for some l≥0 we have

P(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥≥2l⋅81/p)≤14⋅2-2l; (2)

the above shows that this is true for l=0. Applying Theorem 2 and then (2),

P(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥≥2l+1⋅81/p)≤4(P(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥≥2l⋅81/p))2≤14⋅2-2l+1,

which shows that (2) is true for all l≥0.

Generally, for 0<q<∞, if X:Ω→ℝ is a random variable for which P(X≥0)=1, then

E(Xq)=∫0∞qsq-1P(X≥s)ds;

the right-hand side is finite if and only if X∈Lq⁢(P). Using this,

E(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥q)=∫0∞qsq-1P(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥≥s)ds. (3)

Let α0= and for l≥1 let αl=2l-1⋅81/p, and define

f(s)=qsq-1P(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥≥s),s≥0.

Using (3) and then (2),

E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢uk∥q) =∫0∞f⁢(s)⁢𝑑s
=∫0α1f⁢(s)⁢𝑑s+∑l=0∞∫αl+1αl+2f⁢(s)⁢𝑑s
≤∫0α1qsq-1ds+∑l=0∞∫αl+1αl+2qsq-1P(∥∑k=1nϵkuk∥≥αl+1)ds
≤α1q+∑l=0∞∫αl+1αl+2q⁢sq-1⁢14⋅2-2l⁢𝑑s
=8q/p+14⁢∑l=0∞2-2l⁢(αl+2q-αl+1q),

and we define Kp,q by taking Kp,qq to be equal to the above. Thus

E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢uk∥q)1/q≤Kp,q,

and therefore, by (1),

E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢uk∥q)1/q≤Kp,q⋅E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢uk∥p)1/p.

Finally, as uk=xkM,

E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢xk∥q)1/q≤Kp,q⋅E⁢(∥∑k=1nϵk⁢xk∥p)1/p,

which proves the claim. ∎

In the above proof of Kahane’s inequality, for p=1 and q=2 we have

K1,22 =82+14⁢∑l=0∞2-2l⁢(αl+22-αl+12)
=64+16⁢∑l=0∞2-2l⁢(22⁢l+2-22⁢l)
=64+48⁢∑l=0∞2-2l⁢22⁢l,

for which

K1,2=14.006⁢….

In fact, the inequality is true with K1,2=2=1.414⁢….55 5 R. Latała and K. Oleszkiewicz, On the best constant in the Khinchin-Kahane inequality, Studia Math. 109 (1994), no. 1, 101–104.