Wikipedia claims, if $\sigma$-finite the Dominated convergence theorem is still true when pointwise convergence is replaced by convergence in measure, does anyone know where to find a proof of this? Many thanks!

Statement of the theorem:

Let $\mu$ be $\sigma$-finite, $|f_n|\leq g$ and $f_n\rightarrow f$ in measure, then we must have

$\int f_n \rightarrow \int f$ and $\int|f_n-f| \rightarrow 0$


Let $(X,\mathcal B,\mu)$ be a measure space, $\{f_n\}$ a sequence of functions which converges to $f$ in measure, and for almost every $x$ and all $n$, $|f_n(x)|\leqslant g(x)$, where $g$ is integrable. Then $\lVert f_n-f\rVert_{L^1}\to 0$.

Let $A_k:=\{g\gt 1/k\}$; then $A:=\bigcup_k A_k =\{g\neq 0\}$ and $X\setminus A\subset\bigcap_n\{f_n=0\}\cap\{f=0\}$. We have for each $k$, $$\int_X|f_n(x)-f(x)|d\mu\leqslant 2\int_{X\setminus A_k}|g(x)|\mathrm d\mu(x)+\int_{A_k}|f_n(x)-f(x)|\mathrm d\mu(x).$$ If $\lVert f_n-f\rVert_{L^1}$ doesn't converge to $0$, we can find a $\delta>0$ and a subsequence $\{f_{n'}\}$ such that $\lVert f_{n'}-f\rVert_{L^1}\geqslant 2\delta$. We fix $k$ such that $2\int_{X\setminus A_k}|g(x)|\mathrm d\mu(x)\leqslant\delta$ (such a $k$ exists by the dominate convergence theorem, since $\lim_{k\to\infty}\int_{X\setminus A_k}|g(x)|\mathrm d\mu(x)= \int_{X\setminus A}|g(x)|\mathrm d\mu(x)$ ). Then $$\delta\leqslant \int_{A_k}|f_{n'}(x)-f(x)|\mathrm d\mu(x).$$ Now, as $A_k$ has a finite measure, we can extract a subsequence $\{f_{n''}\}$ of $\{f_{n'}\}$ which converges almost everywhere on $A_k$. Applying the classical dominated convergence theorem to this sequence, we get a contradiction.

  • $\begingroup$ Hi Davide, I don't understand two points in your proof: when you said We fix $k$ such that $2\int_{X\setminus A_k}|g(x)|d\mu(x)\leq\delta$, what gurantees the existence of such a $k$? Also, since $A_k$ has finite measure, why can we then extract a subsequence $\{f_{n''}\}$ of $\{f_{n'}\}$ which converges a.e. on $A_k$? I'm probably missing something quite important here, and thanks for your help! $\endgroup$ – anegligibleperson Oct 5 '12 at 12:03
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ For the first point, I apply monotone convergence theorem. For the second one, we use the fact that one a finite measure space, if a sequence converges in measure, we can extract a subsequence which converges almost everywhere. $\endgroup$ – Davide Giraudo Oct 5 '12 at 12:11
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! I finally understand it now. $\endgroup$ – anegligibleperson Oct 5 '12 at 12:18
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Davide, I think in a general measure space (not neccessarily finite) if we have a sequence of functions converge in measure, then we can always extract a subsequence that converges almost everywhere. $\endgroup$ – Soylent Green Dec 9 '12 at 23:37
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It could be useful to observe that the assumption of $\sigma$-finiteness is not actually needed. Since every integrable function vanishes outside of a $\sigma$-finite set, we know $g \equiv 0$ outside of $X' =\bigcup_n A_n$ with each $A_n$ of finite measure. Because of $|f_n| \leq g$ almost everywhere, we also get $f_n \equiv 0$ outside of $X'$ (maybe after adding a set of measure zero). Now, we can restrict to $X'$, apply your proof and thus get the claim for the whole space. $\endgroup$ – PhoemueX May 16 '15 at 20:53

I think there is a point of reviving this post because I think this is also a nice proof pointed out to me when I posted this question by Chris Janjigian.

I have seen this question posted numerous times on this site, so I think there is a point of writing this out.

Let us consider the sequence $\int |f_n-f|$. then consider the following, take a subsequence $\int |f_{n_j}-f|$

For $f_{n_j}$, there must exist a sub-subsequence $f_{n_{j_k}}$ such that $f_{n_{j_k}}$ converges to $f(x)$ almost everywhere. (Since $f_n$, hence $f_{n_j}$ converges to $f(x)$ in measure)

It must also be the case $|f_{n_{j_k}}-f| \leq 2g$, we now apply dominated convergence to see that $\int|f_{n_{j_k}}-f| \rightarrow 0$

What we have shown is that, for every subsequence of $\int |f_n-f|$, we have a further subsequence, which converges to 0. Now using the lemma:

If for every subsequence of $x_n$, there exists a sub-subsequence which converges to 0, then $x_n$ converges to 0.

We are done.

The proof of the last lemma can be found Sufficient condition for convergence of a real sequence

  • $\begingroup$ This is an elegant one. $\endgroup$ – Sam Wong Dec 2 '20 at 14:14

I don't know why this question is reopened. However, given none of the proofs really pleasing me, I'll present one.
So just by interchanging the integral signs, we see that:
$$\int |f-f_n| = \int_{0}^{\infty} \underbrace{ \mu\left( |f_n-f|>t\right) }_{=:A_n(t)}dt \text{ (1) }$$ And under the condition of boudedness of $f_n$, we have : $$0 \le A_n(t) \le \mu( 2g >t) := G(t)$$ Note that $$\int_{0}^{\infty} G(t)= \int 2g < \infty$$ Thus the DCT conditions for the first integrals are fulfilled, so :
$$ \lim_{n \rightarrow + \infty} \int |f-f_n| = \lim_{n \rightarrow + \infty} \int_{0}^{\infty} \mu\left( |f_n-f|>t\right) = \int_{0}^{\infty} \lim_{n \rightarrow + \infty} \mu\left( |f_n-f|>t\right) = 0 $$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ thanks ,Nice proof $\endgroup$ – yi li Nov 12 '20 at 15:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.