# 3.4.1. Examples of Sufficiencies of the Uniform Law


The ULLN under finite bracketing entropy condition (lemma 3.1) and vanishing random entropy condition (theorem 3.7) paves the way to the uniform law of frequently used function classes. Here, three examples from lemma 3.1 will be presented. An example from theorem 3.7 will be covered in the next article.

## 1. Class of monotone functions

Given a fixed function $F \ge 0,$ define the class of interest.

$\tilde{\mathcal G} := \{\tilde g:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R \text{ is increasing},~ \|\tilde g\|_\infty \le 1\} \\ \mathcal G := \{\tilde g F:~ \tilde g \in \tilde{\mathcal G}\}$

Then the followings hold.

(1) For all $1\le p<\infty,$ there exists a constant $A>0$ such that $$H_{B,p,Q}(\delta,\mathcal G) \le A\frac{\|F\|_{p,Q}}\delta,~ \forall \delta>0,~ \forall \text{ probability measure }Q$$

(2) If $F \in L^1(P),$ then $\mathcal G$ satisfies the ULLN.

(1) Let $[\tilde \ell, \tilde u]$ be a bracket of $\tilde{\mathcal G}.$ Then clearly $[\tilde \ell F, \tilde u F]$ is a bracket of $\mathcal G.$ \begin{aligned} &\int \left| \tilde u F - \tilde\ell F \right|^p dQ \\ &= \int \left| \tilde u - \tilde\ell \right|^p |F|^p dQ \\ &= \int \left| \tilde u - \tilde\ell \right|^p \frac{|F|^p}{\|F\|_{p,Q}^p} dQ \cdot \|F\|_{p,Q}^p \\ &= \int \left| \tilde u - \tilde\ell \right|^p d\tilde Q \cdot \|F\|_{p,Q}^p \end{aligned} where $\tilde Q$ is a push-forward probability measure such that $$d\tilde Q := \frac{|F|^p}{\|F\|_{p,Q}^p} dQ.$$ From this formulation, we get $$\|\tilde\ell F - \tilde u F\|_{p,Q} = \|\tilde\ell - \tilde u\|_{p,Q}\cdot \|F\|_{p,Q}.$$ Hence, \begin{aligned} &H_{B,p,Q}(\delta,\mathcal G) \\ &= H_{B,p,\tilde Q}(\delta/\|F\|_{p,Q}, \tilde{\mathcal G}) \\ &\le A\frac{\|F\|_{p,Q}}{\delta}. \end{aligned} The last inequality is from the first result of entropy inequalities.

(2) The result (1) implies the bracketing entropy be finite. Apply lemma 3.1.

## 2. The Sobolev-Hilbert class

For a fixed $m\in\mathbb N$ and $R>0,$ define the Sobolev-Hilbert class of $m$

$\mathcal G := \left\{ g:[0,1]\to\mathbb R,~ \int\left( g^{(m)}(x) \right)^2dx\le 1,~ \|g\|_{2,Q} \le R \right\}.$

Let

$\Sigma_Q := \int \Psi\Psi^\intercal dQ, \\ \Psi=(\psi_1,\cdots,\psi_m)^\intercal, \\ \psi_k(x) = x^{k-1},~ k=1,\cdots,m.$
If $\Sigma_Q$ is invertible, then there exists a constant $A$ such that $$H_\infty(\delta,\mathcal G) \le A \frac{1}{\delta^{1/m}}$$ so that the ULLN holds for $\mathcal G.$

It suffices to show the condition of theorem 2.4. The proof uses the Taylor’s theorem together with upper bound by eigenvalue so I will not cover it.

## 3. Class of functions parametrized by $\theta$

Consider a parameter space $\Theta$ which is a compact metric space. Let

$\mathcal G := \{g_\theta:~ \theta\in\Theta\}$

where the map $\theta \mapsto g_\theta$ is continuous for $P$-almost all $x$’s.

van de Geer (2000) mentions that the ULLN for this class is “more or less classical”.

Suppose the envelop condition $G := \sup_{\theta\in\Theta}|g_\theta|\in L^1(P)$ holds. Then $$H_{B,1,P}(\delta,\mathcal G) < \infty,~ \forall \delta>0$$ so that the ULLN holds for $\mathcal G.$

Let $w$ be the modulus of continuity of $\mathcal G.$ That is, $$w(\theta,r)(x) := \sup_{\theta' \in B(\theta,r)} |g_\theta(x) - g_{\theta'}(x)|$$ so that $$\{g_{\theta'}:~ \theta'\in B(\theta,r)\} \subset [g_\theta-w(\theta,r),~ g_\theta+w(\theta,r)].$$ By continuity of $\theta\mapsto g_\theta,$ $w(\theta,r) \to 0$ as $r\to0$ for $P$-almost all $x$'s. In addition, \begin{aligned} |w(\theta,r)(x)| &\le \sup_{\theta'\in B(\theta,r)}|g_\theta(x)| + g_{\theta'}(x) \\ &\le 2G(x) \in L^1(P) \end{aligned} thus by the dominated convergence theorem, $$\int w(\theta,r)dP \to 0 \text{ as } r \to 0.$$ Now, given $\delta>0,$ for all $\theta\in\Theta$ there exists $r_\theta$ such that $$\int w(\theta, r_\theta) < \delta.$$ Hence $\{B(\theta,r_\theta):~ \theta\in\Theta\}$ is an open cover of $\Theta.$ Since $\Theta$ is compact, there exists a finite subcover $\{B(\theta_i, r_{\theta_i}\}_{i=1}^N$ and $$\left\{ [g_{\theta_i}-w(\theta_i, r_{\theta_i}),~ g_{\theta_i}+w(\theta_i, r_{\theta_i})] \right\}_{i=1}^N$$ becomes a $2\delta$-bracketing set of $\mathcal G,$ since $$\int \left( g_{\theta_i}+w(\theta_i, r_{\theta_i}) \right) - \left( g_{\theta_i}-w(\theta_i, r_{\theta_i}) \right) dP \\ =2\int w(\theta_i, r_{\theta_i}) dP \le 2\delta.$$ The proposed result directly follows.

References

• van de Geer. 2000. Empirical Processes in M-estimation. Cambridge University Press.
• Theory of Statistics II (Fall, 2020) @ Seoul National University, Republic of Korea (instructor: Prof. Jaeyong Lee).