arxiv: v1 [math.oc] 1 Apr 2012

Transcription

1 arxiv.tex; October 31, 2018 On the extreme points o moments sets arxiv: v1 [math.oc] 1 Apr 2012 Iosi Pinelis Department o Mathematical ciences Michigan Technological University Houghton, Michigan 49931, UA ipinelis@mtu.edu Abstract: Necessary and suicient conditions or a measure to be an extreme point o the set o measures (on an abstract measurable space) with prescribed generalized moments are given, as well as an application to extremal problems over such moment sets; these conditions are expressed in terms o atomic partitions o the measurable space. It is also shown that every such extreme measure can be adequately represented by a linear combination o k Dirac probability measures with nonnegative coeicients, where k is the number o restrictions on moments; moreover, when the measurable space has appropriate topological properties, the phrase can be adequately represented by here can be replaced simply by is. The proos are elementary and mainly sel-contained. AM 2000 subject classiications: Primary 49K30, 49K27, 52A40; secondary 26D15, 46A55, 46N10, 46N30, 60B05, 90C05, 90C25, 90C26, 90C48. Keywords and phrases: moment sets, measures, generalized moments, extreme points, optimization, extremal problems, atoms, convex sets. Let be an arbitrary set and let Σ be a σ-algebra over, so that (,Σ) is a measurable space. Let M denote the set o all(nonnegative) real-valued measures on Σ. For any µ M and any A Σ, deine the truncation µ A o the measure µ by A via the ormula µ A (B) := µ(a B) or all B Σ; it is then clear that µ A M. For any µ M and any A Σ, let us say that A is a µ-atom i µ A (B) {0,µ(A)} or all B Σ. For any n N and µ M, let us reer to an n-tuple (A 1,...,A n ) o members o Σ as a non-null (n,µ)-partition o i the sets A 1,...,A n are pairwise disjoint, A 1 A n =, and µ(a i ) > 0 or all i 1,n; let us say that such a partition (A 1,...,A n ) is atomic i A i is a µ-atom or each i 1,n; here and in what ollows, or any m and n in Z { } we let m,n := {j Z: m j n}. Let F stand or the set o all Σ-measurable real-valued unctions on. Take any k 1,. For each j 1,k, take any j F, and let := ( 1,..., k ). For any µ M, let us write L 1 (µ) i j L 1 (,Σ,µ) or all j 1,k, and also let ( ) dµ := 1 dµ,..., k dµ upported by NA grant H A A A 1

2 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 2 or all L 1 (µ) and A Σ. For any C R k, consider the moment set { M,C := µ M: L 1 (µ), } dµ C. In the case when C is a singleton set o the orm {c} or some c R k, let us write M,c in place o M,C. Let Λ denote a subset o M, and then consider the corresponding narrower moment sets Λ,C := Λ M,C and Λ,c := Λ M,c, (1) again or any C R k and c R k. Consider also Π := {µ Λ: µ() = 1}, the set o all probability measures in Λ. For any (not necessarily convex) subset K o M, let exk denote the set o all extreme points o K. Thus, µ exk i and only i µ K and or any (t,ν 0,ν 1 ) (0,1) K K such that (1 t)ν 0 +tν 1 = µ one has ν 0 = ν 1. The ollowing theorem presents a necessary condition or a measure to be an extreme point o the set Λ,C. Theorem 1. (Necessity). Take any C R k. uppose that the ollowing condition holds: Λ is a convex cone such that µ A Λ or all µ Λ and A Σ. (2) Take any µ exλ,c \{0}. Then or some m 1,k there is an atomic non-null (m,µ)-partition (A 1,...,A m ) o such that the vectors A 1 dµ,..., A m dµ are linearly independent. As usual, let us say that a measure µ M is a 0,1 measure i all its values are in the set {0,1}; so, any 0,1 measure in Λ is also in Π. In the case when k = 1, 1 = 1 on, and C = {1} R 1, Theorem 1 turns into Corollary 2. uppose that condition (2) holds. Then any measure in exπ is a 0,1 measure. Proo o Theorem 1. uppose that or some n k +1, there is a non-null (n,µ)-partition (A 1,...,A n ) o, so that µ(a i ) > 0 or all i 1,n. ince n > k, the n vectors A 1 dµ,..., A n dµ in R k are linearly dependent, so that ε 1 A 1 dµ + + ε n A n dµ = 0 or some nonzero vector ε = (ε 1,...,ε n ) ( 1,1) n.foranysuchvectorε,letν ± := (1±ε 1 )µ A1 + +(1±ε n )µ An.Then,by (2), ν ± Λ. Moreover, dν ± = n 1 (1±ε i) A i dµ = n 1 A i dµ = dµ C, so that ν ± Λ,C. Also, 1 2 (ν + +ν ) = µ and (ν + ν )(A i ) = 2ε i µ(a i ) 0 or some i 1,n. o, µ / exλ,c, which is a contradiction. Thereore, N µ 1,k, where N µ denotes the set o all n N or which there is a non-null (n,µ)-partition o. On the other hand, the condition µ 0 implies

3 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 3 that 1 N µ, so that N µ. Thus, m := maxn µ 1,k. ince m N µ, there is a non-null (m,µ)-partition (A 1,...,A m ) o, and the reasoning in the previous paragraph shows that the vectors A 1 dµ,..., A m dµ are necessarily linearly independent. It remainsto show that the non-null (m,µ)-partition (A 1,...,A m ) o is atomic. Indeed, suppose the contrary, so that, without loss o generality, A 1 is not a µ-atom. Then or some B Σ one has B A 1 and 0 < µ(b) < µ(a 1 ), and so, (B,A 1 \B,A 2,...,A m ) is a non-null (m +1,µ)-partition o, which contradicts the deinition m := maxn µ. Now the proo o Theorem 1 is complete. Assuming the conditions o Theorem 1 and using it, we shall show that every measure µ exλ,c can be represented, in a certain sense suicient or applications, by a linear combination o Dirac probability measures with nonnegative coeicients. Recall that the Dirac probability measure δ s with the mass at a point s is deined by the ormula δ s (A) = I{s A} or all A Σ, where I{ } is the indicator unction. Introduce indeed the ollowing sets o (discrete) measures on Σ: and (k) := { m a i δ si : m 0,k,(a 1,...,a m ) (0, ) m,(s 1,...,s m ) m, 1 } (s 1 ),...,(s m ) are linearly independent, { k (k) := a i δ si : (a 1,...,a k ) [0, ) k,(s 1,...,s k ) k}. 1 In the above deinition o (k), in the case when m = 0 it is assumed that m 1 a iδ si is (the) zero (measure) and that the condition ollowing m 0,k between the braces is trivially satisied. In particular, 0 (k) (k) M. Note that or any g F and or any ν = k a i δ si (k), one has To obtain Corollary 4 below, we shall need 1 gdν = k a i g(s i ). Lemma 3. Take any µ M. I A is a µ-atom and g F, then there is a real number α such that g = α µ-almost everywhere (a.e.) on A. Proo o Lemma 3. For all β [, ], let A β := {s A: g(s) < β}. Then µ(a β ) is nondecreasing in β R and takes values in the set {0,µ(A)}. Let β := sup{β R: µ(a β ) = 0} [, ]. Then µ(a β ) = 0 or all β [,β ) and µ(a β ) = µ(a)orallβ (β, ].Iβ > thenµ(a β ) = lim β β µ(a β ) = 0; i β = then A β = and hence again µ(a β ) = 0. Thus, in all cases µ(a β ) = 0 or, equivalently, g β µ-a.e. on A. imilarly, i β < then 1

4 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 4 µ(a β +) = lim β β µ(a β ) = µ(a), where A β+ := {s A: g(s) β}; i β = then A β + = A and hence again µ(a β ) = µ(a). Thus, in all cases g β µ-a.e. on A. We conclude that g = β µ-a.e. on A. In particular, it ollows that, i µ(a) > 0, then necessarily β R, because g is real-valued; and i µ(a) = 0 then g = α µ-a.e. on A or any given real number α. From now on, take any C R k and take g to be any unction in F such that the integral gdµ exists in [, ] or each µ Λ,C. Corollary 4. uppose that condition (2) holds. Take any µ exλ,c. Then (i) there is a measure µ such that µ (k) M,C, d µ = (ii) I, in addition, then it ollows that µ (k) Λ,C. In this corollary, one can replace (k) dµ, and gd µ = gdµ. (3) (k) Λ, (4) by (k) throughout. Proo o Corollary 4. I µ = 0 then, as discussed above, µ (k), so that (3) will hold with µ = µ. It remains to consider the case µ exλ,c \{0}. Then, by Theorem 1, or some m 1,k there is an atomic non-null (m,µ)-partition (A 1,...,A m ) o such that the vectors A 1 dµ,..., A m dµ are linearly independent. Let now 0 := g. By Lemma 3, or each pair (i,j) 1,m 0,k there exist a subset B i,j o A i and a real number a i,j such that B i,j Σ, µ(b i,j ) = µ(a i ), and j (s) = a i,j or all s B i,j. Fix, in this paragraph, any i 1,m, and let B i := k j=0 B i,j. Then B i A i, µ(b i ) = µ(a i ) > 0 and j (s) = a i,j or all s B i and j 0,k. ince µ(b i ) > 0, there is some s i B i. For any such s i and each j 0,k, j dµ = a i,j µ(a i ) = j (s i )µ(a i ) = j d µ, A i A i where µ := µ(a 1 )δ s1 + +µ(a m )δ sm. Now (3) immediately ollows, and then part (ii) o Corollary 4 immediately ollows by (1). The last sentence o the corollary now ollows immediately as well, because (k) (k). Corollary 5. uppose that condition (2) holds and { } { sup gdµ: µ Λ,C = sup gdµ: µ exλ,c }. (5) Then { } { sup gdµ: µ Λ,C sup gdµ: µ (k) M,C }. (6)

5 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 5 I condition (4) holds as well, then { } { sup gdµ: µ Λ,C = sup gdµ: µ (k) Λ,C }. (7) In (6), one can replace (k) by (k) ; one can do so in (7) too i such a replacement is done in condition (4) as well. Proo o Corollary 5. By part (i) o Corollary 4, the right-hand side o (5) is no greater than the right-hand side o (6). Hence, by (5), the let-hand side o (6) is no greater than its right-hand side. Now, i (4) holds, then (k) M,C = (k) Λ,C, and hence the right-hand sideo (6) equalsthe right-handsideo (7), which in turn isobviouslyno greater than the let-hand side o (7). o, (7) ollows. The last sentence o Corollary 5 is proved quite similarly, using the last sentence o Corollary 4. Applications o equalities o the orm (7) can be ound e.g. in [10]. Let us now indicate a number o generic cases when condition (5) holds: Proposition 6. Condition (5) is satisied in each o the ollowing cases: (i) when there exists an extreme point o the set { Λ maxg;,c := ν Λ,C : gdν gdµ or all µ Λ,C }; (ii) when Λ maxg;,c is a nonempty compact convex subset o a locally convex space; (iii) when Λ maxg;,c is a nonempty compact inite-dimensional set; (iv) when Λ maxg;,c is a singleton set ( that is, when the maximum o gdµ over all µ Λ,C is attained at a unique measure µ Λ,C ) ; (v) when the set is endowed with the structure o a Hausdor topological space, the σ-algebra Σ coincides with the corresponding Borel σ-algebra B, Λ = M, and C = {1} I 2 I k, where I 2,...,I k are arbitrary closed convex subsets o R ( so that all measures in Λ,C are probability measures ). Proo o Proposition 6. (i): uppose that condition (i) o Proposition 6 holds, so that there exists an extreme point o the set Λ maxg;,c. Then it is easy to see that any such point (say µ max ) is in exλ,c. At that, gdµ max equals the let-hand side o (5). Thus, (5) ollows. (ii, iii, iv): uppose that condition (ii) o Proposition 6 holds. Then, by the Krein Milman theorem (see e.g. [8]), condition (i) o the proposition holds as well. Thus, (5) ollows. Note also that condition (iv) o Proposition 6 implies condition (iii), which in turn implies (ii). (v): uppose that condition(v) o Proposition 6 holds. Then, by the arguments in [15, Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 and Proposition 3.1] (which in turn rely mainly on [14]), (5) ollows.

6 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 6 Let us nowsupplement the resultspresentedabovebyaew otherones,which are perhaps o lesser interest, in that they are not needed or applications such as Corollary 5. The ollowing theorem supplements Theorem 1, as it presents a suicient conditionorameasuretobeextremeinthemomentset.notethatcondition(2) is not needed in Theorem 7; on the other hand, here C is taken to be a singleton set. Theorem 7. (uiciency). Take any c R k. Take any µ Λ,c such that or some m 1,k there is an atomic non-null (m,µ)-partition (A 1,...,A m ) o and at that the vectors A 1 dµ,..., A m dµ are linearly independent. Then µ exλ,c. In the case when k = 1, 1 = 1 on, and c = 1, Theorem 7 turns into Corollary 8. Any 0,1 measure in Π is in exπ (c. Corollary 2). Proo o Theorem 7. Take any (t,ν +,ν ) (0,1) Λ,c Λ,c such that (1 t)ν + +tν = µ. We need to show that then ν + = ν. tep 1. Let us note here that ν ± (B) = 0 or all B Σ such that µ(b) = 0; thatis,themeasuresν ± areabsolutelycontinuouswithrespecttoµ.thisollows because 1 t > 0, t > 0, and or all B Σ one has 0 (1 t)ν + (B) µ(b) and 0 tν (B) µ(b). tep 2. Here we note that, i A is a µ-atom and a measure ν M is absolutely continuous with respect to µ, then A is a ν-atom as well and, moreover, ν A = aµ A or some a [0, ). Indeed, take any B Σ such that B A. I µ(b) = 0 then ν(b) = 0, by the absolute continuity. Otherwise, µ(b) > 0 and µ(a\b) = 0, whence ν(a\b) = 0; so, ν(b) = ν(a) and µ(b) = µ(a) > 0. Thus, A is a ν-atom and ν A = aµ A, where a := 0 i µ(a) = 0 and a := ν(a)/µ(a) otherwise. tep 3. From teps 1 and 2 it ollows that (ν ± ) Ai = a ±;i µ Ai or every i 1,m and some a ±;i [0, ). Thereore and because ν ± Λ,c, one has 0 = c c = d(ν + ν ) = m 1 (a +;i a ;i ) A i dµ. Thereore and because the vectors A 1 dµ,..., A m dµ are linearly independent, a +;i a ;i = 0 and hence (ν + ) Ai = (ν ) Ai or all i 1,m, which implies that indeed ν + = ν. Now the proo o Theorem 7 is complete. When the measurable space (,Σ) has to do with a topology, usually one can somewhat simpliy the condition in Theorems 1 and 7 o the existence o an atomic partition. More speciically, recall that by Corollary 4 under condition (2) any measure µ exλ,c can be represented by a discrete measure µ (k) in the sense o (3). That was enough or applications presented in Corollary 5. Yet, it may be o interest to know under what conditions any measure in the set exλ,c is (not just represented by but) equal to a discrete measure in (k). To address this matter, suppose rom now on to the rest o the paper that the set is endowed with a Hausdor topology, and let then the σ-algebra Σ contain the corresponding Borel σ-algebra B.

7 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 7 Proposition 9. Take any µ M and A Σ. Then the ollowing statements hold. (i) I A is a µ-atom then cardsuppµ A 1. (ii) ( I cardsuppµ A 1, A, and the measure µ A is support-concentrated that is, µa (suppµ A ) = µ(a) ), then µ A = aδ s or some s A and a [0, ). (iii) For the measure µ A to be support-concentrated, it is enough that the measure µ be a Radon one: µ(e) = sup{µ(k): K E,K is compact} or all E Σ. (iv) In turn, or every measure in M to be a Radon one, it is enough that Σ = B and be a Polish space (that is, a separable completely metrizable topological space); or instance, R d or, more generally, any separable Banach space is Polish. (v) I µ A = aδ s or some s A and a [0, ), then A is a µ-atom. Here, as usual, card stands or the cardinality and supp or the support. Recall that the support, suppµ, o a measure µ M is the set o all points s such that µ(g) > 0 or all open subsets G o such that G s; equivalently, suppµ is the intersection o all closed subsets o o ull measure µ(). An immediate corollary o parts (i) (iii) o Proposition 9 is the well-known act that every 0,1-valued regular Borel measure on a Hausdor space is a Dirac measure; see e.g. [1, Corollary 2.4]. As seen rom [7, Example 2.3], part (iii) o Proposition 9 would be alse in general i the condition that µ be a Radon measure were relaxedto it being regular;that is, i closed sets were used in place o compact sets K. For a urther study o properties o support sets, see e.g. [12]. Proo o Proposition 9. For brevity, let A := suppµ A. (i): uppose that A is a µ-atom, whereas A contains two distinct points, say s 1 and s 2. Let G 1 and G 2 be open sets in such that s 1 G 1, s 2 G 2, and G 1 G 2 =. Then µ A (G 1 ) > 0 and µ(a) µ A (G 1 ) = µ A (\G 1 ) µ A (G 2 ) > 0, so that µ A (G 1 ) ( 0,µ(A) ), which contradicts the condition that A is a µ-atom. Thus, part (i) o Proposition 9 is proved. (ii): uppose that indeed card A 1, A, and µ A ( A ) = µ(a). I at that µ(a) = 0 then µ A = aδ s or a = 0 and any s A. uppose now that µ(a) > 0. Then 0 < µ(a) = µ A ( A ), whence A, card A = 1, A = {s} or some s, µ A ({s}) = µ A ( A ) = µ(a) > 0, and hence s A. Also, µ A ( \{s}) = µ A () µ A ({s}) = µ A () µ A ( A ) = 0, whence µ A (B) = 0 or all B Σ such that s / B. On the other hand, or all B Σ such that s B one has µ(a) µ A (B) µ A ({s}) = µ A ( A ) = µ(a), whence µ A (B) = µ(a). Thus, or any B Σ one has µ A (B) = 0 i s / B and µ A (B) = µ(a) i s B. That is, µ A = aδ s or a := µ(a), which proves part (ii) o Proposition 9. (iii): Note that, i µ is a Radon measure then µ A is so too: i B Σ and K is a compact subset o B, then 0 µ A (B) µ A (K) = µ A (B \K) µ(b \K) = µ(b) µ(k). o, in the case when Σ = B, part (iii) o Proposition 9 ollows rom the well known act that any Radon measure on B is support-concentrated;

8 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 8 see e.g. [7, page 222] ( where the terminology µ has a strong support is used in place o µ is support-concentrated ). For the readers convenience, let us present here an easy proo o the latter act, which works whenever Σ B. By the deinition o the support o a measure, or any s \ A there is a set G s such that G s is open, s G s, and µ A (G s ) = 0. Take now any compact K \ A. ince s K G s K, there is some inite subset F o K such that s F G s K. o, µ A (K) s F µ A(G s ) = 0. Thus, µ A (K) = 0 or all compact K \ A, and so, since µ A is a Radon measure, µ A ( \ A ) = 0 or, equivalently, µ A ( A ) = µ(a). This proves part (iii) o Proposition 9. (iv): For part (iv) o the proposition, see e.g. [13, P16, page XIII]. (v): Part (v) o the proposition is trivial. Proposition 9 immediately yields Corollary 10. uppose that is a Polish space and Σ = B. Take any µ M and A Σ. Then A is a µ-atom i µ A = aδ s or some s A and a [0, ). Now Theorems 1 and 7 immediately imply Corollary 11. uppose that is a Polish space, Σ = B, and Λ = M. Then exλ,c = (k) Λ,c or all c R k. This latter result should be enough or most applications. Yet, one may want to compare it with equality (7) in Corollary 5, which holds without any topological assumptions. In conclusion, let us briely discuss existing literature. The present paper was mainly motivated by the work o Winkler [15], especially by the principal result there: Theorem 12. ([15, Theorem 2.1]). uppose that the set Π o all probability measures in Λ is a Choquet-simplex and exπ (1). Then the ollowing conclusions hold. (a) I C = (,c 1 ] (,c k ] or some (c 1,...,c k ) R k, then ex(π Λ,C ) (1+k) (1,), where (1,) := (1, 1,..., k ). (b) For any c R k, one has ex(π Λ,c ) = Π Λ,c (1+k) (1,). By a remark in [8, ection 9], the meaning o the condition that Π is a Choquet-simplex can be expressed as ollows: Π is a convex set o probability measures such that or the cone Γ := [0, )Π generated by Π and any µ 1 and µ 2 in Γ there is some ν Γ such that µ 1 ν and µ 2 ν are in Γ and or any ν Γ such that µ 1 ν and µ 2 ν are in Γ one has ν ν Γ. To an extent, our Theorems 1 and 7 (c. also Proposition 9 and Corollaries10 and 11) correspond to parts (a) and (b), respectively, o Theorem 12. One may note that the second condition, exπ (1), in Theorem 12 is o the same orm (corresponding to k = 0 aine restrictions on the measure in addition to the requirement that it be a probability measure) as the conclusion ex(π Λ,C ) (1+k) (1,) in part (a) o the theorem, where k additional aine restrictions on the measure are present. That is in distinction with Theorems 1 and 7 o this paper

9 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 9 (c. also Corollaries 2 and 8). Moreover, the set C in Theorem 1 may be any subset o R k and not necessarily o the orthant orm assumed in part (a) o Theorem 12. Also in distinction with Theorem 12, the measures in this paper are not required to be probability ones; or instance, the set Λ may coincide with the set M o all measures on Σ. Condition (2) in Theorem 1 appears to be easier to check than the conditions in Theorem 12 that Π be a Choquet-simplex and exπ (1). In particular, (2) is trivially satisied in the just mentioned case when Λ = M, which appears to be o main interest in applications; condition (2) holds as well in the examples (a), (b), (c) in [15, page 585] i one replaces there the sets P o probability measures by the corresponding cones [0, )P. At this point one may also recall that condition (2) (or, in act, any other special condition) is not needed or used to establish Theorem 7; however, the latter theorem appears not nearly as useul as Theorem 1 in such applications as Corollary 5. One might also want to compare condition (4) that Λ contain the set (k) (or (k) ) odiscrete measureswith the condition in Theorem12 that the set exπ be contained in (1), even though these two conditions go in opposite directions. It appears that (4) is generally easier to satisy and check. Note also that condition (4) is used in this paper only to obtain the equality (7). OnecanconstructanexamplewhenΠisaChoquet-simplexwithexΠ (1) while condition (2) ails to hold or the corresponding cone Λ = [0, )Π. For instance, one may let Π be the set o all mixtures o the discrete probability distributions on R and the absolutely continuous probability distributions on R with everywhere continuous densities. It is also easy to give an example when conditions (2) and (4) both hold while exπ (1). For instance, suppose that is any uncountable set, Σ is the σ-algebra over generated by all countable subsets o, and Λ = M, so that Π is the set o all probability measures on Σ. Then (2) and (4) are both trivially satisied. On the other hand, consider the 0,1 measure (say π) on Σ that takes the value 0 precisely on all countable sets in Σ. Then π exπ, by Corollary 8. Yet, \{s} Σ and π( \{s}) = 1 or any s and hence π / (1). However, these two examples may seem rather artiicial. It appears that the results given here will be about as eective as those in [15] in most applications. The methods presented in this paper seem dierent rom and more elementary than those o [15]. In particular, the present paper is sel-contained, except or quoting [15] and [13] concerning part (v) o Proposition 6 and part (iv) o Proposition 9, respectively. As pointed out in [15], the results there generalize ones in Richter [11] (or R and piecewise-continuous j s), Mulholland and Rogers [6] (or = R), and Karr [4] (or compact metric spaces ). An equality similar to (7) was given by Hoeding [2] or = R; in act, the result there holds or product measures on R n. When is an interval in R and the unctions 1,..., k,g orm a Tchebyche system, such results can be considerably improved: in that case, the support o extremal measures consists

10 Iosi Pinelis/Extreme points o moments sets 10 o only about k/2, rather than k, points; see e.g. [3, 5, 9]. Reerences [1] W. Adamski. Complete spaces and zero-one measures. Manuscripta Math., 18(4): , [2] W. Hoeding. The extrema o the expected value o a unction o independent random variables. Ann. Math. tatist., 26: , [3]. Karlin and W. J. tudden. Tchebyche systems: With applications in analysis and statistics. Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. XV. Interscience Publishers John Wiley & ons, New York-London-ydney, [4] A. F. Karr. Extreme points o certain sets o probability measures, with applications. Math. Oper. Res., 8(1):74 85, [5] M. G. Kreĭn and A. A. Nudel man. The Markov moment problem and extremal problems. American Mathematical ociety, Providence, R.I., Ideas and problems o P. L. Čebyšev and A. A. Markov and their urther development, Translated rom the Russian by D. Louvish, Translations o Mathematical Monographs, Vol. 50. [6] H. P. Mulholland and C. A. Rogers. Representation theorems or distribution unctions. Proc. London Math. oc. (3), 8: , [7]. Okada. upports o Borel measures. J. Austral. Math. oc. er. A, 27(2): , [8] R. R. Phelps. Lectures on Choquet s theorem. D. Van Nostrand Co., Inc., Princeton, N.J.-Toronto, Ont.-London, [9] I. Pinelis. Tchebyche systems and extremal problems or generalized moments: a brie survey, preprint, [10] I. F. Pinelis and. A. Utev. harp exponential estimates or sums o independent random variables. Theory Probab. Appl., 34(2): , [11] H. Richter. Parameterreie Abschätzung und Realisierung von Erwartungswerten. Bl. Deutsch. Ges. Versicherungsmath., 3: , [12] W. eidel. upports o Borel measures. Fund. Math., 133(1):67 80, [13] F. Topsøe. Topology and measure. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol pringer-verlag, Berlin, [14] H. von Weizsäcker and G. Winkler. Integral representation in the set o solutions o a generalized moment problem. Math. Ann., 246(1):23 32, 1979/80. [15] G. Winkler. Extreme points o moment sets. Math. Oper. Res., 13(4): , 1988.