SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2604.08078

A systematic way of analysing proofs in probability theory

Abstract

Over extended systems of finite type arithmetic, we utilize a formal representation of the outer measure to define a translation which allows for the systematic formalization of probabilistic statements. As a main result, this translation gives rise to novel probabilistic logical metatheorems in the style of proof mining, guaranteeing the extractability of computable bounds from (non-effective) proofs of probabilistic existence statements. We further show how the set-theoretically false principle of uniform boundedness due to Kohlenbach can be used to replicate logically strong continuity properties of probability measures in the context of these bound extraction theorems in a tame way, i.e. without affecting the computational complexity of the resulting bounds in question, all the while guaranteeing the validity of those bounds even over finitely additive probability spaces. This in particular provides a formal perspective on the elimination of the principle of $\sigma$-additivity during bound extraction, as previously only observed ad hoc in the practice of proof mining. In that context, we for the first time provide a proof-theoretic treatment of higher-type uniform boundedness principles and related contra-collection principles via Kohlenbach's monotone variant of G\"odel's functional interpretation, which is of independent interest. All together, these new metatheorems provide a systematic proof-theoretic approach towards extracting various types of quantitative information for probabilistic theorems considered in the literature, justifying a range of recent applications to probability theory and stochastic optimization. This paper represents a major logical contribution to a recent advance of bringing the methods of proof mining to bear on probability theory, significantly extending previous work by the first and third author [Forum Math. Sigma, 13, e187 (2025)] in that direction.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Morenikeji Neri, Paulo Oliva, Nicholas Pischke. 2026-04-09. A systematic way of analysing proofs in probability theory. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.08078

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO