For what sets does the Lebesgue Differentiation Theorem hold in one dimension?
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
Lebesgue's differentiation theorem states that if $x$ is a point in $mathbb{R}^n$ and $f:mathbb{R}^nrightarrowmathbb{R}$ is a Lebesgue integrable function, then the limit of $frac{int_B f dlambda}{lambda(B)}$ over all balls $B$ centered at $x$ as the diameter of $B$ goes to $0$ is equal almost everywhere to $f(x)$. But if you replace balls with other kinds of set with diameter going to $0$, this need not be true. For instance it need not be true if you replace balls with rectangles.
But my question is, what is known about what collections of sets the Lebesgue Differentiation Theorem holds for in one dimension? We know it holds for bounded intervals. Does it hold for finite unions of bounded open intervals? What about bounded Borel sets? What about bounded Lebesgue measurable sets in general?
Or are all these open problems?
real-analysis measure-theory integration open-problems lebesgue-measure
add a comment |
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
Lebesgue's differentiation theorem states that if $x$ is a point in $mathbb{R}^n$ and $f:mathbb{R}^nrightarrowmathbb{R}$ is a Lebesgue integrable function, then the limit of $frac{int_B f dlambda}{lambda(B)}$ over all balls $B$ centered at $x$ as the diameter of $B$ goes to $0$ is equal almost everywhere to $f(x)$. But if you replace balls with other kinds of set with diameter going to $0$, this need not be true. For instance it need not be true if you replace balls with rectangles.
But my question is, what is known about what collections of sets the Lebesgue Differentiation Theorem holds for in one dimension? We know it holds for bounded intervals. Does it hold for finite unions of bounded open intervals? What about bounded Borel sets? What about bounded Lebesgue measurable sets in general?
Or are all these open problems?
real-analysis measure-theory integration open-problems lebesgue-measure
add a comment |
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
Lebesgue's differentiation theorem states that if $x$ is a point in $mathbb{R}^n$ and $f:mathbb{R}^nrightarrowmathbb{R}$ is a Lebesgue integrable function, then the limit of $frac{int_B f dlambda}{lambda(B)}$ over all balls $B$ centered at $x$ as the diameter of $B$ goes to $0$ is equal almost everywhere to $f(x)$. But if you replace balls with other kinds of set with diameter going to $0$, this need not be true. For instance it need not be true if you replace balls with rectangles.
But my question is, what is known about what collections of sets the Lebesgue Differentiation Theorem holds for in one dimension? We know it holds for bounded intervals. Does it hold for finite unions of bounded open intervals? What about bounded Borel sets? What about bounded Lebesgue measurable sets in general?
Or are all these open problems?
real-analysis measure-theory integration open-problems lebesgue-measure
Lebesgue's differentiation theorem states that if $x$ is a point in $mathbb{R}^n$ and $f:mathbb{R}^nrightarrowmathbb{R}$ is a Lebesgue integrable function, then the limit of $frac{int_B f dlambda}{lambda(B)}$ over all balls $B$ centered at $x$ as the diameter of $B$ goes to $0$ is equal almost everywhere to $f(x)$. But if you replace balls with other kinds of set with diameter going to $0$, this need not be true. For instance it need not be true if you replace balls with rectangles.
But my question is, what is known about what collections of sets the Lebesgue Differentiation Theorem holds for in one dimension? We know it holds for bounded intervals. Does it hold for finite unions of bounded open intervals? What about bounded Borel sets? What about bounded Lebesgue measurable sets in general?
Or are all these open problems?
real-analysis measure-theory integration open-problems lebesgue-measure
real-analysis measure-theory integration open-problems lebesgue-measure
edited Nov 24 at 8:07
YCor
27k380132
27k380132
asked Nov 19 at 7:39
Keshav Srinivasan
1,52811228
1,52811228
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
For bounded unions of intervals it of course does not hold: take two disjoint mesaurable subsets $A,B$ of $mathbb{R}$ such that $lambda(Acap E)$ and $lambda (Bcap E)$ are positive for any interval $E$. Then for $ain A$ any interval $delta ni a$ contains a density point $bin B$ and you may take the union of an interval $delta_1subset delta$ consisting mostly of points of $B$ and define $B=delta_1 cup (a-lambda(delta_1)/5,a+lambda(delta_1)/5)$. This set is a small union of at most two intervals, contains $a$, but contains many points from $B$. So for $f=chi_A$ the Lebesgue ratio is far from 1.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Perhaps Doob's martingale convergence theorem can help. Suppose that $newcommand{bR}{mathbb{R}}$ $Csubset bR^n$ is a cube and $fin L^1 (C)$. Suppose that $newcommand{eP}{mathscr{P}}$
$$
eP_1prec eP_2prec cdots
$$
is a sequence of finite partitions of $C$ into Borel subsets such that for any $BineP_{i+1}$ there exists $B'in eP_i$, $B'supset B$. Assume that the $sigma$-algebra generated by
$$
bigcup_{igeq 1}eP_i
$$
coincides with the Borel $sigma$-algebra of $C$. For example this happens if for any open subset $Usubset bR^n$ and any $xin Ccap U$ there exists $igeq 1$ and $B_iineP_i$ such that
$$
xin B_isubset Ucap C.
$$
For any $xin C$ there exists a unique sequence of Borel sets $B_i(x)ineP_i$ such that $B_i(x)ni x$, $forall i$. Then Doob's martingale convergence theorem implies that for almost any $xin C$ we have
$$
f(x) =lim_{ito infty}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B_i(x))}int_{B_i(x)} f(y)dy.
$$
A bit more is true. If we define
$$
f_i(x)=sum_{Bin eP_i}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B)}left(int_B f(y) dyright) I_B(x),
$$
where $I_B$ denotes the indicator functio of the subset $B$, then $f_ito f$ in $L^1$ as $itoinfty$.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
The classic reference on differeniation theorems (and, yes, martingales as Liviu mentions):
Hayes, C. A.; Pauc, C. Y., Derivation and martingales, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 49. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag. VII, 203 p. (1970). ZBL0192.40604.
a plug
Some more modern results may be found in
G. A. Edgar & L. Sucheston, Stopping Times and Directed Processes, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications 47, Cambridge University Press, 1992
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
For bounded unions of intervals it of course does not hold: take two disjoint mesaurable subsets $A,B$ of $mathbb{R}$ such that $lambda(Acap E)$ and $lambda (Bcap E)$ are positive for any interval $E$. Then for $ain A$ any interval $delta ni a$ contains a density point $bin B$ and you may take the union of an interval $delta_1subset delta$ consisting mostly of points of $B$ and define $B=delta_1 cup (a-lambda(delta_1)/5,a+lambda(delta_1)/5)$. This set is a small union of at most two intervals, contains $a$, but contains many points from $B$. So for $f=chi_A$ the Lebesgue ratio is far from 1.
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
For bounded unions of intervals it of course does not hold: take two disjoint mesaurable subsets $A,B$ of $mathbb{R}$ such that $lambda(Acap E)$ and $lambda (Bcap E)$ are positive for any interval $E$. Then for $ain A$ any interval $delta ni a$ contains a density point $bin B$ and you may take the union of an interval $delta_1subset delta$ consisting mostly of points of $B$ and define $B=delta_1 cup (a-lambda(delta_1)/5,a+lambda(delta_1)/5)$. This set is a small union of at most two intervals, contains $a$, but contains many points from $B$. So for $f=chi_A$ the Lebesgue ratio is far from 1.
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
For bounded unions of intervals it of course does not hold: take two disjoint mesaurable subsets $A,B$ of $mathbb{R}$ such that $lambda(Acap E)$ and $lambda (Bcap E)$ are positive for any interval $E$. Then for $ain A$ any interval $delta ni a$ contains a density point $bin B$ and you may take the union of an interval $delta_1subset delta$ consisting mostly of points of $B$ and define $B=delta_1 cup (a-lambda(delta_1)/5,a+lambda(delta_1)/5)$. This set is a small union of at most two intervals, contains $a$, but contains many points from $B$. So for $f=chi_A$ the Lebesgue ratio is far from 1.
For bounded unions of intervals it of course does not hold: take two disjoint mesaurable subsets $A,B$ of $mathbb{R}$ such that $lambda(Acap E)$ and $lambda (Bcap E)$ are positive for any interval $E$. Then for $ain A$ any interval $delta ni a$ contains a density point $bin B$ and you may take the union of an interval $delta_1subset delta$ consisting mostly of points of $B$ and define $B=delta_1 cup (a-lambda(delta_1)/5,a+lambda(delta_1)/5)$. This set is a small union of at most two intervals, contains $a$, but contains many points from $B$. So for $f=chi_A$ the Lebesgue ratio is far from 1.
edited Nov 23 at 23:38
answered Nov 19 at 10:58
Fedor Petrov
46.7k5110217
46.7k5110217
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Perhaps Doob's martingale convergence theorem can help. Suppose that $newcommand{bR}{mathbb{R}}$ $Csubset bR^n$ is a cube and $fin L^1 (C)$. Suppose that $newcommand{eP}{mathscr{P}}$
$$
eP_1prec eP_2prec cdots
$$
is a sequence of finite partitions of $C$ into Borel subsets such that for any $BineP_{i+1}$ there exists $B'in eP_i$, $B'supset B$. Assume that the $sigma$-algebra generated by
$$
bigcup_{igeq 1}eP_i
$$
coincides with the Borel $sigma$-algebra of $C$. For example this happens if for any open subset $Usubset bR^n$ and any $xin Ccap U$ there exists $igeq 1$ and $B_iineP_i$ such that
$$
xin B_isubset Ucap C.
$$
For any $xin C$ there exists a unique sequence of Borel sets $B_i(x)ineP_i$ such that $B_i(x)ni x$, $forall i$. Then Doob's martingale convergence theorem implies that for almost any $xin C$ we have
$$
f(x) =lim_{ito infty}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B_i(x))}int_{B_i(x)} f(y)dy.
$$
A bit more is true. If we define
$$
f_i(x)=sum_{Bin eP_i}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B)}left(int_B f(y) dyright) I_B(x),
$$
where $I_B$ denotes the indicator functio of the subset $B$, then $f_ito f$ in $L^1$ as $itoinfty$.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
Perhaps Doob's martingale convergence theorem can help. Suppose that $newcommand{bR}{mathbb{R}}$ $Csubset bR^n$ is a cube and $fin L^1 (C)$. Suppose that $newcommand{eP}{mathscr{P}}$
$$
eP_1prec eP_2prec cdots
$$
is a sequence of finite partitions of $C$ into Borel subsets such that for any $BineP_{i+1}$ there exists $B'in eP_i$, $B'supset B$. Assume that the $sigma$-algebra generated by
$$
bigcup_{igeq 1}eP_i
$$
coincides with the Borel $sigma$-algebra of $C$. For example this happens if for any open subset $Usubset bR^n$ and any $xin Ccap U$ there exists $igeq 1$ and $B_iineP_i$ such that
$$
xin B_isubset Ucap C.
$$
For any $xin C$ there exists a unique sequence of Borel sets $B_i(x)ineP_i$ such that $B_i(x)ni x$, $forall i$. Then Doob's martingale convergence theorem implies that for almost any $xin C$ we have
$$
f(x) =lim_{ito infty}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B_i(x))}int_{B_i(x)} f(y)dy.
$$
A bit more is true. If we define
$$
f_i(x)=sum_{Bin eP_i}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B)}left(int_B f(y) dyright) I_B(x),
$$
where $I_B$ denotes the indicator functio of the subset $B$, then $f_ito f$ in $L^1$ as $itoinfty$.
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Perhaps Doob's martingale convergence theorem can help. Suppose that $newcommand{bR}{mathbb{R}}$ $Csubset bR^n$ is a cube and $fin L^1 (C)$. Suppose that $newcommand{eP}{mathscr{P}}$
$$
eP_1prec eP_2prec cdots
$$
is a sequence of finite partitions of $C$ into Borel subsets such that for any $BineP_{i+1}$ there exists $B'in eP_i$, $B'supset B$. Assume that the $sigma$-algebra generated by
$$
bigcup_{igeq 1}eP_i
$$
coincides with the Borel $sigma$-algebra of $C$. For example this happens if for any open subset $Usubset bR^n$ and any $xin Ccap U$ there exists $igeq 1$ and $B_iineP_i$ such that
$$
xin B_isubset Ucap C.
$$
For any $xin C$ there exists a unique sequence of Borel sets $B_i(x)ineP_i$ such that $B_i(x)ni x$, $forall i$. Then Doob's martingale convergence theorem implies that for almost any $xin C$ we have
$$
f(x) =lim_{ito infty}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B_i(x))}int_{B_i(x)} f(y)dy.
$$
A bit more is true. If we define
$$
f_i(x)=sum_{Bin eP_i}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B)}left(int_B f(y) dyright) I_B(x),
$$
where $I_B$ denotes the indicator functio of the subset $B$, then $f_ito f$ in $L^1$ as $itoinfty$.
Perhaps Doob's martingale convergence theorem can help. Suppose that $newcommand{bR}{mathbb{R}}$ $Csubset bR^n$ is a cube and $fin L^1 (C)$. Suppose that $newcommand{eP}{mathscr{P}}$
$$
eP_1prec eP_2prec cdots
$$
is a sequence of finite partitions of $C$ into Borel subsets such that for any $BineP_{i+1}$ there exists $B'in eP_i$, $B'supset B$. Assume that the $sigma$-algebra generated by
$$
bigcup_{igeq 1}eP_i
$$
coincides with the Borel $sigma$-algebra of $C$. For example this happens if for any open subset $Usubset bR^n$ and any $xin Ccap U$ there exists $igeq 1$ and $B_iineP_i$ such that
$$
xin B_isubset Ucap C.
$$
For any $xin C$ there exists a unique sequence of Borel sets $B_i(x)ineP_i$ such that $B_i(x)ni x$, $forall i$. Then Doob's martingale convergence theorem implies that for almost any $xin C$ we have
$$
f(x) =lim_{ito infty}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B_i(x))}int_{B_i(x)} f(y)dy.
$$
A bit more is true. If we define
$$
f_i(x)=sum_{Bin eP_i}frac{1}{{rm vol};(B)}left(int_B f(y) dyright) I_B(x),
$$
where $I_B$ denotes the indicator functio of the subset $B$, then $f_ito f$ in $L^1$ as $itoinfty$.
edited Nov 19 at 13:07
answered Nov 19 at 10:24
Liviu Nicolaescu
25.1k256109
25.1k256109
add a comment |
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
The classic reference on differeniation theorems (and, yes, martingales as Liviu mentions):
Hayes, C. A.; Pauc, C. Y., Derivation and martingales, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 49. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag. VII, 203 p. (1970). ZBL0192.40604.
a plug
Some more modern results may be found in
G. A. Edgar & L. Sucheston, Stopping Times and Directed Processes, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications 47, Cambridge University Press, 1992
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
The classic reference on differeniation theorems (and, yes, martingales as Liviu mentions):
Hayes, C. A.; Pauc, C. Y., Derivation and martingales, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 49. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag. VII, 203 p. (1970). ZBL0192.40604.
a plug
Some more modern results may be found in
G. A. Edgar & L. Sucheston, Stopping Times and Directed Processes, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications 47, Cambridge University Press, 1992
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
The classic reference on differeniation theorems (and, yes, martingales as Liviu mentions):
Hayes, C. A.; Pauc, C. Y., Derivation and martingales, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 49. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag. VII, 203 p. (1970). ZBL0192.40604.
a plug
Some more modern results may be found in
G. A. Edgar & L. Sucheston, Stopping Times and Directed Processes, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications 47, Cambridge University Press, 1992
The classic reference on differeniation theorems (and, yes, martingales as Liviu mentions):
Hayes, C. A.; Pauc, C. Y., Derivation and martingales, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 49. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag. VII, 203 p. (1970). ZBL0192.40604.
a plug
Some more modern results may be found in
G. A. Edgar & L. Sucheston, Stopping Times and Directed Processes, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications 47, Cambridge University Press, 1992
edited Nov 24 at 12:38
answered Nov 24 at 11:47
Gerald Edgar
27.7k374154
27.7k374154
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f315664%2ffor-what-sets-does-the-lebesgue-differentiation-theorem-hold-in-one-dimension%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown