What does convergence in distribution “in the Gromov–Hausdorff” sense mean?












9












$begingroup$


I am trying to understand this survey article by Le Gall on Brownian geometry, especially the statement of Theorem 1.



The basic statement of the theorem is
$$(m_n,d_n) to (m_{infty}, d_{infty})$$
"in the Gromov–Hausdorff sense" as $n to infty$, where the convergence is in distribution.



Here $(m_n,d_n)$ and $(m_{infty},d_{infty})$ are both random compact metric spaces. So how do we interpret this? We might hope for a statement along the lines of the following.



For every compact metric space $(X,d)$ and $R > 0$, we have
$$(*) , , , mathbb{P} left[ d_{GH}[ (m_n,d_n), (X,d) ] < R right] to mathbb{P} left[ d_{GH}[ (m_{infty},d_{infty}), (X,d) ] < R right]$$
as $n to infty$.



But even when we talk about convergence in distribution for real random variables (instead of compact-metric-space-valued random variables), we have to be careful to restrict our attention to points where the cumulative distribution function is continuous. So I wonder if (*) is too strong?






pr.probability mg.metric-geometry







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    9












    $begingroup$


    I am trying to understand this survey article by Le Gall on Brownian geometry, especially the statement of Theorem 1.



    The basic statement of the theorem is
    $$(m_n,d_n) to (m_{infty}, d_{infty})$$
    "in the Gromov–Hausdorff sense" as $n to infty$, where the convergence is in distribution.



    Here $(m_n,d_n)$ and $(m_{infty},d_{infty})$ are both random compact metric spaces. So how do we interpret this? We might hope for a statement along the lines of the following.



    For every compact metric space $(X,d)$ and $R > 0$, we have
    $$(*) , , , mathbb{P} left[ d_{GH}[ (m_n,d_n), (X,d) ] < R right] to mathbb{P} left[ d_{GH}[ (m_{infty},d_{infty}), (X,d) ] < R right]$$
    as $n to infty$.



    But even when we talk about convergence in distribution for real random variables (instead of compact-metric-space-valued random variables), we have to be careful to restrict our attention to points where the cumulative distribution function is continuous. So I wonder if (*) is too strong?






    pr.probability mg.metric-geometry







    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      9












      9








      9


      1



      $begingroup$


      I am trying to understand this survey article by Le Gall on Brownian geometry, especially the statement of Theorem 1.



      The basic statement of the theorem is
      $$(m_n,d_n) to (m_{infty}, d_{infty})$$
      "in the Gromov–Hausdorff sense" as $n to infty$, where the convergence is in distribution.



      Here $(m_n,d_n)$ and $(m_{infty},d_{infty})$ are both random compact metric spaces. So how do we interpret this? We might hope for a statement along the lines of the following.



      For every compact metric space $(X,d)$ and $R > 0$, we have
      $$(*) , , , mathbb{P} left[ d_{GH}[ (m_n,d_n), (X,d) ] < R right] to mathbb{P} left[ d_{GH}[ (m_{infty},d_{infty}), (X,d) ] < R right]$$
      as $n to infty$.



      But even when we talk about convergence in distribution for real random variables (instead of compact-metric-space-valued random variables), we have to be careful to restrict our attention to points where the cumulative distribution function is continuous. So I wonder if (*) is too strong?






      pr.probability mg.metric-geometry







      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      I am trying to understand this survey article by Le Gall on Brownian geometry, especially the statement of Theorem 1.



      The basic statement of the theorem is
      $$(m_n,d_n) to (m_{infty}, d_{infty})$$
      "in the Gromov–Hausdorff sense" as $n to infty$, where the convergence is in distribution.



      Here $(m_n,d_n)$ and $(m_{infty},d_{infty})$ are both random compact metric spaces. So how do we interpret this? We might hope for a statement along the lines of the following.



      For every compact metric space $(X,d)$ and $R > 0$, we have
      $$(*) , , , mathbb{P} left[ d_{GH}[ (m_n,d_n), (X,d) ] < R right] to mathbb{P} left[ d_{GH}[ (m_{infty},d_{infty}), (X,d) ] < R right]$$
      as $n to infty$.



      But even when we talk about convergence in distribution for real random variables (instead of compact-metric-space-valued random variables), we have to be careful to restrict our attention to points where the cumulative distribution function is continuous. So I wonder if (*) is too strong?






      pr.probability mg.metric-geometry




      pr.probability mg.metric-geometry






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Mar 29 at 16:00









      Matthew KahleMatthew Kahle

      4,5722950




      4,5722950






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          11












          $begingroup$

          Following the notation of the paper, let $mathbb{K}$ be the metric space of all compact metric spaces, equipped with the Gromov-Hausdorff metric $mathrm{d_{GH}}$. Then we can express convergence in distribution in the usual way: for every bounded continuous $F : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$, we have $mathbb{E}[F((m_n, d_n))] to mathbb{E}[F((m_infty, d_infty))]$. The portmanteau theorem gives you several other equivalent statements.



          In other words, this is just the usual notion of convergence in distribution for random variables taking their values in a metric space $S$, where that metric space happens to be $S = (mathbb{K}, mathrm{d_{GH}})$, the metric space of all compact metric spaces.



          In particular, if $(X,d)$ is a fixed compact metric space, the function $mathrm{d_{GH}}(cdot, (X,d)) : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function. So if we let $Y_n = mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_n, d_n), (X, d))$, then the scalar-valued random variables $Y_n$ converge in distribution to $Y$. So your formula (*) holds, but as you say, only for values of $R$ at which the function $R mapsto mathbb{P}[mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_infty, d_infty), (X,d)) < R]$ is continuous.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$














            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "504"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f326678%2fwhat-does-convergence-in-distribution-in-the-gromov-hausdorff-sense-mean%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            11












            $begingroup$

            Following the notation of the paper, let $mathbb{K}$ be the metric space of all compact metric spaces, equipped with the Gromov-Hausdorff metric $mathrm{d_{GH}}$. Then we can express convergence in distribution in the usual way: for every bounded continuous $F : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$, we have $mathbb{E}[F((m_n, d_n))] to mathbb{E}[F((m_infty, d_infty))]$. The portmanteau theorem gives you several other equivalent statements.



            In other words, this is just the usual notion of convergence in distribution for random variables taking their values in a metric space $S$, where that metric space happens to be $S = (mathbb{K}, mathrm{d_{GH}})$, the metric space of all compact metric spaces.



            In particular, if $(X,d)$ is a fixed compact metric space, the function $mathrm{d_{GH}}(cdot, (X,d)) : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function. So if we let $Y_n = mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_n, d_n), (X, d))$, then the scalar-valued random variables $Y_n$ converge in distribution to $Y$. So your formula (*) holds, but as you say, only for values of $R$ at which the function $R mapsto mathbb{P}[mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_infty, d_infty), (X,d)) < R]$ is continuous.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$


















              11












              $begingroup$

              Following the notation of the paper, let $mathbb{K}$ be the metric space of all compact metric spaces, equipped with the Gromov-Hausdorff metric $mathrm{d_{GH}}$. Then we can express convergence in distribution in the usual way: for every bounded continuous $F : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$, we have $mathbb{E}[F((m_n, d_n))] to mathbb{E}[F((m_infty, d_infty))]$. The portmanteau theorem gives you several other equivalent statements.



              In other words, this is just the usual notion of convergence in distribution for random variables taking their values in a metric space $S$, where that metric space happens to be $S = (mathbb{K}, mathrm{d_{GH}})$, the metric space of all compact metric spaces.



              In particular, if $(X,d)$ is a fixed compact metric space, the function $mathrm{d_{GH}}(cdot, (X,d)) : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function. So if we let $Y_n = mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_n, d_n), (X, d))$, then the scalar-valued random variables $Y_n$ converge in distribution to $Y$. So your formula (*) holds, but as you say, only for values of $R$ at which the function $R mapsto mathbb{P}[mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_infty, d_infty), (X,d)) < R]$ is continuous.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$
















                11












                11








                11





                $begingroup$

                Following the notation of the paper, let $mathbb{K}$ be the metric space of all compact metric spaces, equipped with the Gromov-Hausdorff metric $mathrm{d_{GH}}$. Then we can express convergence in distribution in the usual way: for every bounded continuous $F : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$, we have $mathbb{E}[F((m_n, d_n))] to mathbb{E}[F((m_infty, d_infty))]$. The portmanteau theorem gives you several other equivalent statements.



                In other words, this is just the usual notion of convergence in distribution for random variables taking their values in a metric space $S$, where that metric space happens to be $S = (mathbb{K}, mathrm{d_{GH}})$, the metric space of all compact metric spaces.



                In particular, if $(X,d)$ is a fixed compact metric space, the function $mathrm{d_{GH}}(cdot, (X,d)) : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function. So if we let $Y_n = mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_n, d_n), (X, d))$, then the scalar-valued random variables $Y_n$ converge in distribution to $Y$. So your formula (*) holds, but as you say, only for values of $R$ at which the function $R mapsto mathbb{P}[mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_infty, d_infty), (X,d)) < R]$ is continuous.






                share|cite|improve this answer











                $endgroup$



                Following the notation of the paper, let $mathbb{K}$ be the metric space of all compact metric spaces, equipped with the Gromov-Hausdorff metric $mathrm{d_{GH}}$. Then we can express convergence in distribution in the usual way: for every bounded continuous $F : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$, we have $mathbb{E}[F((m_n, d_n))] to mathbb{E}[F((m_infty, d_infty))]$. The portmanteau theorem gives you several other equivalent statements.



                In other words, this is just the usual notion of convergence in distribution for random variables taking their values in a metric space $S$, where that metric space happens to be $S = (mathbb{K}, mathrm{d_{GH}})$, the metric space of all compact metric spaces.



                In particular, if $(X,d)$ is a fixed compact metric space, the function $mathrm{d_{GH}}(cdot, (X,d)) : mathbb{K} to mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function. So if we let $Y_n = mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_n, d_n), (X, d))$, then the scalar-valued random variables $Y_n$ converge in distribution to $Y$. So your formula (*) holds, but as you say, only for values of $R$ at which the function $R mapsto mathbb{P}[mathrm{d_{GH}}((m_infty, d_infty), (X,d)) < R]$ is continuous.







                share|cite|improve this answer














                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer








                edited Mar 29 at 19:44

























                answered Mar 29 at 16:34









                Nate EldredgeNate Eldredge

                20.3k371117




                20.3k371117






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f326678%2fwhat-does-convergence-in-distribution-in-the-gromov-hausdorff-sense-mean%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    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







                    -

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Plaza Victoria

                    Image
                    Plaza Victoria Plaza Victoria en 2017 Otros nombres Plaza de La Victoria Localización El Almendral, Valparaíso, Chile Vías adyacentes Chacabuco, Molina, Plaza Victoria y Edwards Creación 1841 Metro Bellavista Ubicación 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 Coordenadas: 33°02′46″S 71°37′11″O  /  -33.04624167, -71.61980833 [editar datos en Wikidata] La Plaza Victoria , también llamada Plaza de la Victoria , [ 1 ] ​ es una plaza ubicada en el sector El Almendral del plan de la ciudad de Valparaíso, Chile, de importancia patrimonial, que incluye valiosas estatuas y especies vegetales. [ 2 ] ​ La plaza se creó como tal en la primera mitad del siglo XIX, tomando previamente los nombres de Plaza Nueva y Plaza de Orrego . Si bien desde sus inicios tuvo relevancia histórica, no fue sino a partir de fines de los años 1860 cuando comenzó a cobrar mayor importancia y se convirtió en uno de los principales centros sociales de l
                    Read more

                    In PowerPoint, is there a keyboard shortcut for bulleted / numbered list?

                    Image
                    .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box; } 2 OneNote has two useful keyboard shortcuts for bulleted and numbered lists, namely Ctrl + . and Ctrl + - . Is there something similar for PowerPoint where the work with lists is also very common? Haven't found anything here: Use keyboard shortcuts in PowerPoint. keyboard-shortcuts microsoft-powerpoint share | improve this question edited Aug 14 '14 at 14:49 Linger 2,826 10 28 40
                    Read more

                    How to put 3 figures in Latex with 2 figures side by side and 1 below these side by side images but in...

                    Image
                    1 0 I want to put 3 images in LateX such as 2 figures are side by side horizotally and 3rd figure below these 2 side by side figures but in middle. I have following code: begin{figure}[H] centering begin{minipage}{.5textwidth} centering includegraphics[width=.50linewidth]{Text/Images/Genelec_8010_AP.jpg} captionof{figure}{Genelec 8010 AP} label{fig:Genelec 8010} end{minipage}% begin{minipage}{.5textwidth} centering includegraphics[width=.69linewidth]{Text/Images/Genelec_8020_CPM.jpg} captionof{figure}{Genelec 8020 CPM} label{fig:Genelec 8020} end{minipage}% end{figure} %%Here is my 3rd picture code begin{figure} centering includegraphics[width=5cm]{Text/Images/Genelec_8030_BPM.jpg} caption{Genelec 8030 BPM} label{fig:Genelec 8030} end{figure} I want to ask ho
                    Read more