First of all this question has related answers here and here, but I am still struggling to understand the proof and the nuances that go along with it.

Show that a.s convergence of a sequence of random variables $X_k$ to a constant $\mu$ is equivalent to the condition that for all $\epsilon > 0$: $$ \lim_{n\to\infty}\mathbb{P}[\omega:\sup_{k>n}|X_k(\omega) - \mu|>\epsilon] = 0$$

I have interpreted the proof in the second link as follows. I fixed $\epsilon>0$ as given and defined,

$${A_k}: = \left\{ {\left| {{X_k} - \mu } \right| \geq \epsilon } \right\}\qquad {\text{and }}\qquad {B_n}: = \bigcup\limits_{k \geqslant n} {{A_k}} $$

Then if $B = \bigcap\limits_{n \geq 1} {{B_n}}$ we have $P\{B\} = 0$ since, $$P\left\{ {\mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } {X_n} = \mu } \right\} = 1\quad \Rightarrow \quad P\left\{ {\mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } {X_n} \ne \mu} \right\} = 0{\text{ }}\quad {\text{or}}\quad {\text{ }}\mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } {X_n}=\; \left({\text{D.N.E}}\right)$$ Then, $$\begin{aligned} P\left\{ B \right\} & = 0 \\ & = P\left\{ {\bigcap\limits_{n \geqslant 1} {\bigcup\limits_{k > n} {{A_k}} } } \right\} = P\left\{ {\mathop {\lim \sup }\limits_{k \to \infty } {A_k}} \right\} = P\left\{ {\mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } \mathop {\sup }\limits_{k > n} {A_k}} \right\} \\ &= \mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } P\left\{ {\mathop {\sup }\limits_{k > n} \left| {{X_k} - \mu } \right| \geqslant \varepsilon } \right\} \hfill \\ \end{aligned}$$ But I am not sure how the last step - pulling the limit out of the probability - is justified.

I understand that $B_n$ are decreasing sets, but the continuity of probability result tell us that the limit outside becomes a union or intersection when taken inside. But this seems to be a limit remaining a limit when taken outside. Is it true that we can always pull a limit outside?

As for the converse I do not understand it at all, and my attempts to define similar sets $A_k,B_n$ etc. have failed. I know that the condition gives us, $$ \mathop {\lim }\limits_{n \to \infty } P\left\{ {\mathop {\sup }\limits_{k > n} \left| {{X_k} - \mu } \right| < \varepsilon } \right\} = 1 \quad \forall \varepsilon > 0$$ But I don't know how to proceed from here. My attempts have been to take the limit inside and show somehow that $\mathop {\lim \sup }\limits_{k \to \infty } \left| {{X_k} - \mu } \right| \leq 0$. Since $\mathop {\lim \inf }\limits_{k \to \infty } \left| {{X_k} - \mu } \right| \geq 0$ if we show the previous, then the limit exists and the desired equality : $ {\mathop {\lim }\limits_{k \to \infty } \left| {{X_k}} \right| = \mu } $ is achieved.

Any help would be much appreciated. I have been mulling over this for three days, and I loathe to post questions that are similar to ones already I asked, but I really have not been able to crack it or find a source that enumerates and explains each step and why it is justified.

  • $\begingroup$ It's probably easier to understand the last line from the first equality. The inside is an intersection of a decreasing sequence of sets. By monotonicity properties of finite measures you can write the probability of the intersection as the limit of the probabilities. Now it's just a matter of showing that $\bigcup_{k\ge n}A_k = \{\sup_{k\ge n} |X_k-\mu| \ge \epsilon\}$ $\endgroup$ Feb 17 '17 at 4:58

As mentioned in the comment, the key is to show $$\lim \sup_{k \to \infty} A_k = \{\lim \sup_{k \to \infty} |X_k - \mu| \geq \epsilon \}$$ You can do that in a couple steps, showing $\cup_{k \geq n} A_k = \{\omega \, : \,\, \sup_{k \geq n} |X_k(\omega) - \mu| \geq \epsilon \}$ holds for all $n$ using a double-inclusion argument.

Then the step of pulling the limit outside the probability is OK, as you said, from monotone limit properties of probability measures.

For the other direction, take $U_N = \{\lim \sup_{k \to \infty} |X_k - \mu| \geq 1/N \}$. Then you get $$P(U_N) = \lim_n P(\sup_{k \geq n} |X_k - \mu| \geq 1/N) = 0$$ for any $N$ by assumption.

$U_N \uparrow \{\lim \sup_{k \to \infty} |X_k - \mu| > 0 \} = U$, so $P(U) = \lim_N P(U_N) = 0$. That means

$$0 \leq \lim \inf_{k \to \infty} |X_k - \mu| \leq \lim \sup_{k \to \infty} |X_k - \mu| = 0$$ with probability one, so the limit exists and is zero.

About your question in italics, it is always true that for a real-valued random variable sequence $\{f_k\}$ you have for any $a \geq 0$ $$\lim \sup_{k \to \infty} \{|f_k| \geq a \} = \{\lim \sup_{k \to \infty} |f_k| \geq a \}$$

which is what you would prove in the step mentioned in the comment. But if you switch the inequality direction it doesn't need to hold.

  • $\begingroup$ I didn't get why $\{\limsup_k X_k\ge a\}=\limsup\{X_k\ge a\}$. If I take $X_k=a-1/k$ we have $\limsup X_k=a\ge a$ so $\{\limsup X_k\ge a\}=\Omega$ but $\{X_k\ge a \text{ i.o.}\}=\emptyset$ no? $\endgroup$
    – edamondo
    Oct 22 at 12:50

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.