arxiv: v5 [math.ca] 23 Jan 2016

Transcription

1 ariv: Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals by Using Uniformly Distributed Sequences ariv: v5 [math.ca] 23 Jan 206 Gogi Pantsulaia and Tengiz Kiria I.Vekua Institute of Applied Mathematics, Tbilisi - 043, Georgian Republic g.pantsulaia@gtu.ge Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi - 075, Georgian Republic t.kiria@gtu.ge Abstract: We present the proof of a certain modified version of Kolmogorov s strong law of large numbers for calculation of Lebesgue Integrals by using uniformly distributed sequences in (0, ). We extend the result of C. Baxa and J. Schoiβengeier (cf.[8], Theorem, p. 27) to a maximal set of uniformly distributed (in (0,)) sequences S f (0,) which strictly contains the set of sequences of the form ({αn}) n with irrational number α and for which l (S f) =, where l denotes the infinite power of the linear Lebesgue measure l in (0,). Primary 28xx, 03xx ; Secondary 28C0 62D05. Keywords and phrases: Uniformly distributed sequence, improper Riemann integral, Monte-Carlo algorithm.. Introduction In this note we show that the technique for numerical calculation of some onedimensional Lebesgue integrals is similar to the technique which was given by Hermann Weyl s [] celebrated theorem as follows. Theorem.. ([2], Theorem., p. 2) The sequence (x n ) n of real numbers is u.d. mod if and only if for every real-valued continuous function f defined on the closed unit interval [0,] we have n= f({x n}) = where { } denotes the fractional part of the real number. 0 f(x)dx, (.) Main corollaries of this theorem successfully were used in Diophantine approximations and have applications to Monte-Carlo integration (see, for example, [2],[3], [4]). During the last decades the methods of the theory of uniform distribution modulo one have been intensively used for calculation of improper Riemann integrals(see, for example, [6], [8]). The research for this paper was partially supported by Shota Rustaveli ational Science Foundation s Grant no FR/6/5-00/4

2 G.Pantsulaia and T.Kiria/Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals 2 In this note we are going to consider some applications of Kolmogorov strong law of large numbers which can be considered as a certain extension of the Hermann Weyl s above mentioned theorem from the class of Riemann s integrable functions to the class of Lebesgue integrable functions. We present our proof of this century theorem which differs from Kolmogorov s original proof. Further, by using this theorem we present a certain improvement of the following result of C. Baxa and J. Schoiβengeier Theorem.2. ([8], Theorem, p. 27)Let α ne an irrational number, Q be a set of all rational numbers and F [0,] Q be finite. Let f : [0,] R be an integrable, continuous almost everywhere and locally bounded on [0, ] \ F. Assume further that for every β F there is some neighbourhood U of β such that f is either bounded or monotone in [0,β) U and in (β,] U as well. Then the following conditions are equivalent: f(x ) n) = 0; 2) k= f(x k) exists; 3) k= f(x k) = (0,) f(x)dx; are equivalent More precisely, we will extend the result of Theorem.2 to a maximal set S f (0,) of uniformly distributed (in (0,))sequences strictly containing all sequences of the form ({αn}) n where α is an irrational numbers and for which l (S f) =, where l denotes the infinite power of the linear Lebesgue measure l in (0,). The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we consider some auxiliary notions and facts from the theory of uniformly distributed sequences and probability theory. In Section 3 we present our main results. 2. Some auxiliary facts from probability theory Definition 2.. A sequence s,s 2,s 3, of real numbers from the interval [0,] is said to be uniformly distributed in the interval [0,] if for any subinterval [c,d] of the [0,] we have #({s,s 2,s 3,,s n } [c,d]) = d c, where # denotes the counting measure. Example 2.. ([2], Exercise.2, p. 6) The sequence of all multiples of an irrational α 0,{α},{2α},{3α} is uniformly distributed in (0, ), where { } denotes the fractional part of the real number.

3 G.Pantsulaia and T.Kiria/Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals 3 Lemma 2.. ([2] Theorem 2.2, p.83) Let S be a set of all elements of [0,] which are uniformly distributed in the interval [0,]. Then l (S) =, where l denotes the infinite power of the standard linear Lebesgue measure l in [0,]. We need some auxiliary fact from mathematical analysis and probability theory. Lemma 2.2. (Kolmogorov-Khinchin ([7], Theorem, p.37)) Let (, S, µ) be a probability space and let (ξ n ) n be the sequence of independent random variables for which ξ n(x)dµ(x) = 0. If n= ξ2 n (x)dµ(x) <, then the series n= ξ n converges with probability. Lemma 2.3. (Toeplitz Lemma ([7], Lemma, p. 377) ) Let (a n ) n be a sequence of non-negative numbers, b n = n i= a i,b n > 0 for each n and b n, when n. Let (x n ) n be a sequence of real numbers such that n x n = x. Then n a j x j = x. n b n j= In particular, if a n = for n, then n x k = x. k= Lemma 2.4. (Kroneker Lemma ([7], Lemma 2, p.378)) Let (b n ) n be an increasing sequence of positive numbers such that b n, when n, and let (x n ) n be a sequence of real numbers such that the series k x k converges. Then n b n j= n b j x j = 0. In particular, if b n = 0, x n = yn n and the series y nn n= converges then n k= y k = 0. Below we give the proof of a certain modification of the Kolmogorov Strong Law of Large umbers ([7],Theorem 3, p.379). Lemma 2.5. Let (,F,µ) be a probability space and let L() be a class of all real-valued Lebesgue measurable functions on. Let µ be an infinite power of the probability measure µ. Then for f L() we have µ ({(x k ) k : (x k ) k & f(x n ) = n= f(x)dx}) =. Proof. Without loss of generality, we can assume that f is non-negative. We put ξ k ((x i ) i ) = f(x k ) for k and (x i ) i. We put also η k ((x i ) i ) =

4 G.Pantsulaia and T.Kiria/Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals 4 [ ξk ((x i ) i )χ {ω:ξk (ω)<k}((x i ) i ) ξ k ((x i ) i )χ {ω:ξk (ω)<k}((x i ) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) ] k for (x i ) i. ote that (η k ) k is the sequence of independent random variable for which η k dµ = 0. We have ηn 2 ((x i) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) = n= n 2 ξn((x 2 i ) i )χ {(yi) i :ξ n((y i) i )<n}dµ ((x i ) i ) n= n 2( ξ n ((x i ) i )χ {(yi) i :ξ n((y i) i )<n}dµ ((x i ) i )) 2 = n= Since n= n 2 2 n= n= n 2 n 2( f(x n ) 2 χ {(yi) i :f(y n)<n}dµ ((x i ) i ) f(x n )χ {(yi) i :f(y n)<n}dµ ((x i ) i )) 2 = n 2( f(x)χ {ω:f(ω)<n} dµ(x)) 2 n= n 2 f 2 (x)χ {ω:f(ω)<n} dµ(x) = n f 2 (x)χ {ω:k f(ω)<k} dµ(x) = f 2 (x)χ {ω:f(ω)<n} dµ(x) n= k= k= 2 n= n 2 k= f 2 (x)χ {ω:k f(ω)<k} dµ((x)) n=k n 2 f 2 (x)χ {ω:k f(ω)<k} dµ(x) k k= f(x)χ {ω:k f(ω)<k} dµ((x)) = 2 f(x)dµ(x). n= by using Lemma 2.2 we get µ{(x i ) i : k= η 2 n ((x i) i )dµ((x i ) i ) < +, [ f(xk )χ {(xi) k i :f(x k )<k}((x i ) i )

5 n= G.Pantsulaia and T.Kiria/Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals 5 ξ k ((x i ) i )χ {(xi) i :f(x k )<k}dµ ((x i ) i ) ] is convergent} =. On the other hand, we have µ ({(x i ) i : ξ ((x i ) i ) n}) = µ {(x i ) i : k ξ ((x i ) i < k+} = n=k n kµ {(x i ) i : k ξ ((x i ) i ) < k+} = [kχ {(xj) j :k ξ ((x i) i )<k+}] k= k=0 [ξ ((x i ) i )χ {(xj) j :k ξ ((x j) j )<k+}] = ξ ((x i ) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) < +. k=0 Since (ξ k ) k is a sequence of equally distributed random variables on, we have µ ({(x i ) i : ξ k ((x i ) i ) n}) ξ ((x i ) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) < +, n= which by the well-known Boreli-Cantely lemma implies that The last relation means that µ ({(x i ) i : ξ n ((x i ) i ) n} i.m.) = 0. µ ({(x i ) i : ( ((x i ) i ))( n ((x i ) i ) ξ n ((x i ) i ) < n}) =. Thus, we have obtained the validity of the following condition µ {(x i ) i : k= [ f(xk )χ {(yi) k i :f(y k )<k}((x i ) i ) ξ k ((x i ) i )χ {(yi) i :f(y k )<k}((x i ) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) ] is convergent & ( ((x i ) i ))( n ((x i ) i ) ξ n ((x i ) i ) < n)} =. By Lemma 2.4 we get that µ (D) =, where D = {(x i ) i : [ f(xk )χ {(yi) i :f(y k )<k}((x i ) i ) k= ξ k ((x i ) i )χ {(yi) i :f(y k )<k}((x i ) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) ] = 0 & ( ((x i ) i ))( n > ((x i ) i ) ξ n ((x i ) i ) < n)}.

6 G.Pantsulaia and T.Kiria/Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals 6 ow it is obvious that for (x i ) i D, we have Since 0 = [ f(xk )χ {(yi) i :f(y k )<k}((x i ) i ) k= ξ k ((x i ) i )χ {(yi) i :f(y k )<k}((x i ) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) ] = k=((x i) i [ f(xk )χ {(yi) i :f(y k )<k}((x i ) i ) ξ k ((x i ) i )χ {(yi) i :f(y k )<k}((x i ) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) ] = k=((x i) i [ [ f(xk ) ξ k ((x i ) i )dµ ((x i ) i ) ] = f(x k ) k=((x i) i by Lemma 2.3 we get [ k= f(x)χ {y:f(y)<k} (x)dµ(x) ] = f(x k ) f(x)χ {y:f(y)<k} (x)dµ(x) ]. f(x)χ {y:f(y)<k} dµ(x) = f(x)dµ(x), k k= f(x)χ {y:f(y)<k} (x)dµ(x) = f(x)χ {y:f(y)<k} dµ(x) which implies that f(x k ) = k= f(x)dµ(x) for each (x i ) i D. This ends the proof of theorem. Remark 2.. Formulation of Lemma 2.4(cf. [5], p.285) needs a certain specification. More precisely, it should be formulated for sequences (x k ) k S D, where S comes from Lemma 2. and, D comes from Lemma 2.5 when (,F,µ) = ((0,),B(0,),l ). Since l (S D) =, such reformulated Lemma 2.4 can be used for the proof of Corollary 4.2(cf. p. 296).

7 3. Main Results G.Pantsulaia and T.Kiria/Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals 7 By using Lemmas 2. and 2.5, we get Theorem 3.. Let f be a Lebesgue integrable real-valued function on (0, ). Then we have l ({(x k) k : (x k ) k [0,] & (x k ) k is uniformly distributed in (0,)& f(x k ) = k= 0 f(x)dx}) =. Remark 3.. Let f : (0,) R be a Lebesgue integrable function. By Theorem 3. we have l (A f ) =, where A f = {(x k ) k : (x k ) k (0,) & f(x n ) = n= (0,) f(x)dx}. Corollary 3.. Let f : (0,) R be Lebesgue integrable function. Then we have l (B f) =, where B f = {(x k ) k : (x k ) k (0,) & Proof. Since A f B f, by Remark 3. we get f(x k ) exists}. k= = l (A f ) l (B f ) l ((0,) ) =. Corollary 3.2. Let f : (0,) R be Lebesgue integrable function. Then we have l (C f) =, where C f = {(x k ) k : (x k ) k (0,) f(x ) & = 0}. Proof. ote that A f C f. Indeed, let (x k ) k A f. Then we get f(x ) = k= k= ( k= f(x k ) k= f(x k )) = f(x k ) f(x k ) = k= f(x k ) ( f(x k )) = k= k= f(x k ) f(x k ) = 0. k=

8 G.Pantsulaia and T.Kiria/Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals 8 By Remark 3. we know that l (A f ) = which implies = l (A f ) l (C f) l ((0,) ) =. Remark 3.2. ote that for each Lebesgue integrable function f in (0, ), the following inclusion S A f S C f holds true, but the converse inclusion is not always valid. Indeed, let (x k ) k be an arbitrary sequence of uniformly distributed numbers in (0,). Then the function f : (0,) R, defined by f(x) = χ (0,)\{xk :k }(x) for x (0,), is Lebesgue integrable, (x k ) k C f S but (x k ) k / A f S because f(x n ) = 0 = n= (0,) f(x)dx. Theorem 3.2. Let f : (0,) R be Lebesgue integrable function. Then the set S f of all sequences (x k ) k (0,) for which the following conditions f(x ) n) = 0; 2) k= f(x k) exists; 3) k= f(x k) = (0,) f(x)dx; 4) (x k ) k is uniformly distributed in (0,) are equivalent, has l measure one. Proof. By Lemma 2. we know that l (S) =. By Remark 3. we have l (A f ) =. Following Corollaries 3. and 3.2 we have l (B f ) = and l (C f) =, respectively. Since S f = A f B f C f S, we get l (D) = l (A f B f C f S) =. The next corollary is a simple consequence of Theorem 3.. Corollary 3.3. Let Q be a set of all rational numbers of [0,] and F [0,] Q be finite. Let f : [0,] R be Lebesgue integrable, l -almost everywhere continuous and locally bounded on [0,]\F. Assume that for every β F there is some neighbourhood U β of β such that f is either bounded or monotone in [0,β) U β and in (β,] U β as well. Let S,A f,b f,c f come from Lemma 2., Remark 3., Corollary 3.,Corollary 3.2, respectively. We set S f = ( A f B f C f S) ((0,) \A f ) ( (0,) \B f ) ((0,) \C f ) S). Then for (x k ) k S f the following conditions are equivalent: ) n f(x n) n = 0; 2) k= f(x k) exists; 3) k= f(x k) = (0,) f(x)dx;

9 G.Pantsulaia and T.Kiria/Calculation of Lebesgue Integrals 9 Remark 3.3. ote that S f is maximal subset of the set S for which conditions )-3) of Corollary 3.3 are equivalent, provided that for each (x k ) k S f the sentences )-3) are true or false simultaneously, and for each (x k ) k S \ S f the sentences )-3) are not true or false simultaneously. This extends the main result of Baxa and Schoiβengeier [8] because, the sequence of the form ({nα}) n is in S f for each irrational number α, and no every element of S f can be presented in the same form. For example, ({(n+/2( χ {k:k 2} (n)))π χ {k:k 2}(n) }) n D \S, where { } denotes the fractional part of the real number and χ {k:k 2} denotes the indicator function of the set {k : k 2}. Similarly, setting D f = ( A f B f C f ) ((0,) \A f ) ) ( (0,) \B f ) ((0,) \C f ) ), we get a maximal subset of (0,) for which conditions )-3) of Corollary 3.3 are equivalent, provided that for each (x k ) k D f the sentences )-3) are true or true simultaneously, and for each (x k ) k (0,) \D f the sentences )-3) are not true or false simultaneously. References [] H. Weyl,Úber ein Problem aus dem Gebiete der diophantischen Approximation, Marchr. Ges. Wiss. Gótingen. Math-phys. K. (96), [2] L. Kuipers, H. iederreiter, Uniform distribution of sequences, Wiley- Interscience [John Wiley & Sons], ew York-London-Sydney (974). [3] G. Hardy, J. Littlewood, Some problems of diophantine approximation, Acta Math. 37 () (94), [4] G. Hardy, J. Littlewood, Some problems of diophantine approximation, Acta Math. 37 () (94), [5] G. R. Pantsulaia, Infinite-dimensional Monte-Carlo integration. Monte Carlo Methods Appl. 2 (205), no. 4, [6] I. M. Sobol, Computation of improper integrals by means of equidistributed sequences, (Russian) Dokl. Akad. auk SSSR. 20 (973), [7] Shiryaev A.., Probability (in Russian), Izd.auka, Moscow, 980. [8] C. Baxa, J. Schoiβengeier, Calculation of improper integrals using (nα)- sequences, Dedicated to Edmund Hlawka on the occasion of his 85 th birthday. Monatsh. Math. 35(4) (2002), [9] S.M. ikolski, Course of mathematical analysis (in Russian), no., Moscow (983).