Convergence rates in the central limit theorem for weighted sums of Bernoulli random fields
Davide Giraudo

TL;DR
This paper establishes convergence rates in the central limit theorem for weighted sums of Bernoulli random fields by deriving moment inequalities and using approximation techniques.
Contribution
It introduces new moment inequalities for functionals of i.i.d. random fields and provides explicit convergence rates for weighted sums of Bernoulli random fields.
Findings
Derived moment inequalities for functionals of i.i.d. random fields
Established convergence rates in the CLT for weighted sums of Bernoulli random fields
Used approximation by m-dependent random fields to achieve results
Abstract
We prove moment inequalities for a class of functionals of i.i.d. random fields. We then derive rates in the central limit theorem for weighted sums of such randoms fields via an approximation by -dependent random fields.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Convergence rates in the central limit theorem for weighted
sums of Bernoulli random fields
Davide Giraudo
Ruhr-Universität Bochum Fakultät für Mathematik NA 3/32 Universitätsstraße 150 44780 Bochum‚ Germany.
Abstract.
We prove moment inequalities for a class of functionals of i.i.d. random fields. We then derive rates in the central limit theorem for weighted sums of such randoms fields via an approximation by -dependent random fields.
Key words and phrases:
random fields; moment inequalities; central limit theorem.
1. Introduction and main results
1.1. Goal of the paper
In its simplest form, the central limit theorem states that if is an independent identically distributed (i.i.d.) sequence of centered random variables having variance one, then the sequence converges in distribution to a standard normal random variable. If has a finite moment of order three, Berry [Ber41] and Esseen [Ess42] gave the following convergence rate:
[TABLE]
where is a numerical constant and has a standard normal distribution. The question of extending the previous result to a larger class of sequence have received a lot of attention. When can be represented as a function of an i.i.d. sequence, optimal convergence rates are given in [Jir16].
In this paper, we will focus on random fields, that is, collection of random variables indexed by and more precisely in Bernoulli random fields, which are defined as follows.
Definition 1.1**.**
Let be an integer. The random field is said to be Bernoulli if there exist an i.i.d. random field and a measurable function such that for each .
We are interested in the asymptotic behavior of the sequence defined by
[TABLE]
where is an element of . Under appropriated conditions on the dependence of the random field and the sequence of weights that will be specified later, the sequence converges in law to a normal distribution [KVW16]. The goal of this paper is to provide bounds of the type Berry-Esseen in order to give convergence rates in the central limit theorem.
This type of question has been addressed for the so-called -dependent random fields [BK06], martingale differences random fields [NP04], positively and negatively dependent random fields [Bul96, Pav93] and mixing random fields [BS07, BD90].
In order to establish this kind of results, we need several ingredients. First, we need convergence rates for -dependent random fields. Second, a Bernoulli random field can be decomposed as the sum of an -dependent random field and a remainder. The control of the contribution of the remainder is done by a moment inequality in the spirit of Rosenthal’s inequality [Ros70]. One of the main applications of such an inequality is the estimate of the convergence rates in the central limit theorem for random fields that can be expressed as a functional of a random field consisting of i.i.d. random variables. The method consists in approximating the considered random field by an -dependent one, and in controlling the approximation with the help of the established moment inequality. In the one dimensional case, probability and moment inequalities have been established in [LXW13] for maxima of partial sums of Bernoulli sequences. The techniques used therein permit to derive results for weighted sums of such sequences.
The paper is organized as follows. In Subsections 1.2, we give the material which is necessary to understand the moment inequality stated in Theorem 1.4. We then give the results on convergence rates in Subsection 1.3 (for weighted sums, sums on subsets of and in a regression model) and compare the obtained results in the case of linear random fields with some existing ones. Section 2 is devoted to the proofs.
1.2. Backgroud
The following version of Rosenthal’s inequality is due to Johnson, Schechtman and Zinn [JSZ85]: if are independent centered random variables with a finite moment of order , then
[TABLE]
where for .
It was first estalish without explicit constant in Theorem 3 of [Ros70].
Various extension of Rosenthal-type inequalities have been obtained under mixing conditions [Sha95, Rio00] or projective conditions [PUW07, Rio09, MP13]. We are interested by extensions of (1.2.1) to the setting of dependent random fields.
Throughout the paper, we shall use the following notations.
- (N.1)
For a positive integer , the set is denoted by . 2. (N.2)
The coordinatewise order is denoted by , that is, for and , means that for any . 3. (N.3)
For , denotes the element of whose th coordinate is and all the others are zero. Moreover, we write and . 4. (N.4)
For , we write the product as . 5. (N.5)
The cardinality of a set is denoted by . 6. (N.6)
For a real number , we denote by the unique integer such that . 7. (N.7)
We write for the cumulative distribution function of a standard normal law. 8. (N.8)
If is a subset of and , then is defined as . 9. (N.9)
For , we denote by the space of sequences such that . 10. (N.10)
For , the quantity is defined as .
Let be a random field. The sum is understood as the -limit of the sequence where .
Following [Wu05] we define the physical dependence measure.
Definition 1.2**.**
Let be a Bernoulli random field, and be an i.i.d. random field which is independent of the i.i.d. random field and has the same distribution as . For , we introduce the physical dependence measure
[TABLE]
where and if , .
In [EVW13, BD14], various examples of Bernoulli random fields are given, for which the physical dependence measure is either computed or estimated. Proposition 1 of [EVW13] also gives the following moment inequality: if is a finite subset of , is a family of real numbers and , then for any Bernoulli random field ,
[TABLE]
This was used in [EVW13, BD14] in order to establish functional central limit theorems. Truquet [Tru10] also obtained an inequality in this spirit. If is i.i.d. and centered, (1.2.1) would give
[TABLE]
while Rosenthal’s inequality (1.2.1) would give
[TABLE]
a better result in this context.
In the case of linear processes, equality holds for a constant which does not depend on . However, there are processes for which such an inequality does not hold.
Example 1.3*.*
We give an example of a random field such that there is no constant such that holds for all . Let and let be an i.i.d. random field and for each , let be a function such that the random variable is centered and has a finite moment of order , and . Define , where the limit is taken in . Then hence is of order while is of order .
Consequently, having the -norm instead of the -norm of the is more suitable.
1.3. Mains results
We now give a Rosenthal-like inequality for weighted sums of Bernoulli random fields in terms of the physical dependence measure.
Theorem 1.4**.**
Let be an i.i.d. set of random variables. Then for any measurable function such that has a finite moment of order and is centered, and any ,
[TABLE]
where for ,
[TABLE]
and .
We can formulate a version of inequality (1.3.1) where the right hand side is expressed in terms of the coefficients of physical dependence measure. The obtained result is not directly comparable to (1.2.3) because of the presence of the -norm of the coefficients.
Corollary 1.5**.**
Let be an i.i.d. set of random variables. Then for any measurable function such that has a finite moment of order and is centered, and any ,
[TABLE]
Let be a centered square integrable Bernoulli random field and for any positive integer , let be an element of . We are interested in the asymptotic behavior of the sequence defined by
[TABLE]
Let us denote for the map defined by .
In [KVW16], Corollary 2.6 gives the following result: under a Hannan type condition on the random field and under the following condition on the weights: for any ,
[TABLE]
the series converges and with
[TABLE]
the sequence converges in distribution to a centered normal distribution with variance . The argument relies on an approximation by an -dependent random field.
The purpose of the next theorem is to give a general speed of convergence. In order to measure it, we define
[TABLE]
The following quantity will also play an important role in the estimation of convergence rates.
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.6**.**
Let , and let be a centered Bernoulli random field with a finite moment of order and for any positive integer , let be an element of such that for any , the set is finite and nonempty, and (1.3.5) holds for any . Assume that for some positive and , the following series are convergent:
[TABLE]
Let be defined by (1.3.4),
Assume that is finite and that be given by (1.3.6) is positive. Let and let
[TABLE]
Then for each ,
[TABLE]
In particular, there exists a constant such that for all ,
[TABLE]
Remark 1.7*.*
If (1.3.5), and the family is summable, then the sequence converges to [math] hence is well-defined. However, it is not clear to us whether the finiteness of combined with (1.3.5) and imply that is finite. Nevertheless, we can show an analogous result in terms of coefficients by changing the following in the statement of Theorem 1.6:
- (1)
the definition of should be replaced by
[TABLE] 2. (2)
the definition of should be replaced by
[TABLE]
In this case, the convergence of holds (cf. Proposition 2 in [EVW13]).
Recall notation (N.8). Let be a sequence of subsets of . The choice if and [math] otherwise yields the following corollary for set-indexed partial sums.
Corollary 1.8**.**
Let be a centered Bernoulli random field with a finite moment of order , and let be a sequence of subset of such that and for any , . Assume that the series defined in (1.3.9) are convergent for some positive and , that is finite and that defined by (1.3.6) is positive. Let and be defined by (1.3.10). There exists a constant such that for any ,
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
We consider now the following regression model:
[TABLE]
where is an unknown smooth function and is a zero mean stationary Bernoulli random field. Let be a probability kernel defined on and let be a sequence of positive numbers which converges to zero and which satisfies
[TABLE]
We estimate the function by the kernel estimator defined by
[TABLE]
We make the following assumptions on the regression function and the probability kernel :
- (A)
The probability kernel fulfills , is symmetric, non-negative, supported by . Moreover, there exist positive constants , and such that for any , and .
We measure the speed of convergence of to a normal distribution by the use of the quantity
[TABLE]
Two other quantities will be involved, namely,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.9**.**
Let , and let be a centered Bernoulli random field with a finite moment of order . Assume that for some positive and , the following series are convergent:
[TABLE]
Let be defined by (1.3.19), be a sequence which converges to [math] and satisfies (1.3.18),
Assume that is finite and that . Let be such that for each ,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Let be the smallest integer for which for all ,
[TABLE]
Then there exists a constant such that for each ,
[TABLE]
Lemma 1 in [EMS10] shows that under (1.3.18), the sequence goes to as goes to infinity and that the integer is well-defined.
We now consider the case of linear random fields in dimension , that is,
[TABLE]
where and is i.i.d., centered and has a finite variance. We will focus on the case where the weights are of the form if and otherwise.
Mielkaitis and Paulauskas [MP11] established the following convergence rate. Denoting
[TABLE]
and assuming that is finite and
[TABLE]
the following estimate holds for :
[TABLE]
In the context of Corollary 1.8, the condition on the coefficients reads as follows:
[TABLE]
where . Let us compare (1.3.30) with (1.3.32). Let . When , (1.3.32) implies (1.3.30). However, this implication does not hold if . Indeed, let and define if and otherwise. Then (1.3.32) holds whereas (1.3.30) does not.
Let us discuss the convergence rates in the following example. Let and let , where . In our context,
[TABLE]
hence the convergence of guarantees that in Corollary 1.8 is of order . Moreover, since (1.3.32) holds for all and , the choice of allows to reach rates of the form for any fixed . In particular, when , one can reach for any fixed rates of the form . In comparison, with the same assumptions, the result of [MP11] gives .
2. Proofs
2.1. Proof of Theorem 1.4
We define for and ,
[TABLE]
In this way, by the martingale convergence theorem,
[TABLE]
hence
[TABLE]
Let us fix . We divide into blocks. For , we define
[TABLE]
and if is a subset of , we define
[TABLE]
Therefore, the following inequality takes place
[TABLE]
Observe that the random variable is measurable for the -algebra generated by , where satisfies for all . Since the family is independent, the family is independent for each fixed . Using inequality (1.2.1), it thus follows that
[TABLE]
By stationarity, one can see that for , hence the triangle inequality yields
[TABLE]
By Jensen’s inequality, for ,
[TABLE]
and using , it follows that
[TABLE]
Combining (2.1.3), (2.1.6) and (2.1.10), we derive that
[TABLE]
In order to control the last term, we use inequality (1.2.1) and bound by for . This ends the proof of Theorem 1.4.
Proof of Corollary 1.5.
The following lemma gives a control of the -norm of in terms of the physical measure dependence.
Lemma 2.1**.**
For and , the following inequality holds
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be fixed. Let us write the set of elements of whose infinite norm is equal to as where . We also assume that for all .
Denote
[TABLE]
and . Then , from which it follows, by Theorem 2.1 in [Rio09], that
[TABLE]
Then using similar arguments as in the proof of Theorem 1 (i) in [Wu05] give the bound . This ends the proof of Lemma 2.1. ∎
Now, Corollary 1.5 follows from an application of Lemma 2.1 with and respectively. ∎
2.2. Proof of Theorem 1.6
Denote for a random variable the quantity
[TABLE]
We say that a random field is -dependent if the collections of random variables and are independent whenever . The proof of Theorem 1.6 will use the following tools.
- (T.1)
By Theorem 2.6 in [CS04], if is a finite subset of , an -dependent centered random field such that for each and some and , then
[TABLE] 2. (T.2)
By Lemma 1 in [EMO07], for any two random variables and and ,
[TABLE]
Let be an i.i.d. random field and let be a measurable function such that for each , . Let and defined by (1.3.10).
Let and let us define
[TABLE]
Since the random field is independent, the following properties hold.
- (P.1)
The random field is -dependent. 2. (P.2)
The random field is identically distributed and . 3. (P.3)
For any and , the following inequality holds:
[TABLE]
In order to prove (2.2.5), we follow the proof of Theorem 1.4 and start from the decomposition instead of (2.1.2).
Define . An application of (T.2) to and yields
[TABLE]
Moreover,
[TABLE]
hence, by (P.1) and (T.1) applied with , instead of and instead of , we derive that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
By (P.2) and the reversed triangular inequality, the term can be bounded in the following way
[TABLE]
and by (P.3) with , we obtain that
[TABLE]
By (1.3.8), we have
[TABLE]
and we eventually get
[TABLE]
Since , we derive, in view of (1.3.10),
[TABLE]
In order to bound , we argue as in [YWLH12] (p. 456). Doing similar computations as in [EM14] (p. 272), we obtain that
[TABLE]
where . Observe that for any , by (P.3),
[TABLE]
and using again (P.3) combined with Theorem 1.4 for ,
[TABLE]
This leads to the estimate
[TABLE]
and since , we derive, in view of (1.3.10),
[TABLE]
The estimate of relies on (P.3):
[TABLE]
hence
[TABLE]
The combination of (2.2.10), (2.2.17), (2.2.26) and (2.2.28) gives (1.3.11).
2.3. Proof of Theorem 1.9
Since the random variables are centered, we derive by definition of that
[TABLE]
We define
[TABLE]
and otherwise. Denote and . In this way, by (2.3.1) and (1.3.21),
[TABLE]
Applying (T.2) to and and using Theorem 1.4, we derive that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
We then use Theorem 1.6 to handle (which is allowed, by (A)). Using boundedness of , we control the and norms by a constant times the -norm. This ends the proof of Theorem 1.9.
Acknowledgments This research was supported by the grand SFB 823.
The author would like to thank the referees for many suggestions which improved the presentation of the paper.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[BD 90] Alexandre V. Bulinskii and Paul Doukhan, Vitesse de convergence dans le théorème de limite centrale pour des champs mélangeants satisfaisant des hypothèses de moment faibles , C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math. 311 (1990), no. 12, 801–805. MR 1082637
- 2[BD 14] Hermine Biermé and Olivier Durieu, Invariance principles for self-similar set-indexed random fields , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 366 (2014), no. 11, 5963–5989. MR 3256190
- 3[Ber 41] Andrew C. Berry, The accuracy of the Gaussian approximation to the sum of independent variates , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 49 (1941), 122–136. MR 0003498
- 4[BK 06] Alexander Bulinski and Natalya Kryzhanovskaya, Convergence rate in CLT for vector-valued random fields with self-normalization , Probab. Math. Statist. 26 (2006), no. 2, 261–281. MR 2325308
- 5[BS 07] Vidmantas Bentkus and Jonas Kazys Sunklodas, On normal approximations to strongly mixing random fields , Publ. Math. Debrecen 70 (2007), no. 3-4, 253–270. MR 2310650
- 6[Bul 96] A. V. Bulinski, On the convergence rates in the CLT for positively and negatively dependent random fields , Probability theory and mathematical statistics (St. Petersburg, 1993), Gordon and Breach, Amsterdam, 1996, pp. 3–14. MR 1661688
- 7[CS 04] Louis H. Y. Chen and Qi-Man Shao, Normal approximation under local dependence , Ann. Probab. 32 (2004), no. 3A, 1985–2028. MR 2073183
- 8[EM 14] Mohamed El Machkouri, Kernel density estimation for stationary random fields , ALEA Lat. Am. J. Probab. Math. Stat. 11 (2014), no. 1, 259–279. MR 3225977
