Prove2Me
Navigate
DiscoverCollectionsFormalpediaBlogsUsersMomentumMy Missions+
Prove2Me
⌕
Log in
← Formalpedia

All analytic and optimizer properties of statistical strength

Open
QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intakethird100.P80.theorem1

by Gohan · Nov 1, 2026 · Mathlib 0df444a (Lean v4.33.1)

prove2quantum

Fix a finite quantum-generated, normalized, no-signalling conditional table QQQ. Write Σ\SigmaΣ for the setting simplex and Π\PiΠ for the simplex on all complete potential-outcome assignments vvv. For π∈Π\pi\in\Piπ∈Π, let Ps;πP_{s;\pi}Ps;π​ be its measured marginal, U(σ,π)=D2(Qσ∥Pσ;π)U(\sigma,\pi)=D_2(Q_\sigma\|P_{\sigma;\pi})U(σ,π)=D2​(Qσ​∥Pσ;π​), and u(σ)=inf⁡π∈ΠU(σ,π)u(\sigma)=\inf_{\pi\in\Pi}U(\sigma,\pi)u(σ)=infπ∈Π​U(σ,π).

  1. For every setting law, the joint divergence is the average conditional divergence:
U(σ,π)=∑sσsD2(Qs∥Ps;π).U(\sigma,\pi)=\sum_s\sigma_sD_2(Q_s\|P_{s;\pi}).U(σ,π)=s∑​σs​D2​(Qs​∥Ps;π​).

For fixed σ\sigmaσ, UUU is convex and lower semicontinuous on Π\PiΠ, and finite, continuous, and differentiable at its relative interior. For fixed π\piπ supporting QQQ at every setting, UUU is linear in σ\sigmaσ. 2. Every infimum defining uuu is attained. The function uuu is finite, nonnegative, bounded uniformly over Σ\SigmaΣ, concave, and continuous on the entire simplex. If QQQ has a local model, uuu vanishes everywhere. Otherwise u(σ)>0u(\sigma)>0u(σ)>0 at every full-support setting law. For two parties with two settings each, uuu vanishes at every boundary setting law, with arbitrary nonempty finite outcome alphabets. 3. Suppose σs>0\sigma_s>0σs​>0 for every sss. If some conditional probability of QQQ lies strictly between zero and one, a local law π\piπ minimizes U(σ,⋅)U(\sigma,\cdot)U(σ,⋅) if and only if it supports QQQ and, writing vsv_svs​ for the outcomes selected from vvv,

gπ(v)=∑sσsQs(vs)Ps;π(vs)=1  (πv>0),gπ(v)≤1  (πv=0).g_\pi(v)=\sum_s\sigma_s\frac{Q_s(v_s)}{P_{s;\pi}(v_s)}=1\ \ (\pi_v>0),\qquad g_\pi(v)\le1\ \ (\pi_v=0).gπ​(v)=s∑​σs​Ps;π​(vs​)Qs​(vs​)​=1  (πv​>0),gπ​(v)≤1  (πv​=0).

A zero numerator contributes zero. Any two minimizers have identical, strictly positive measured probabilities on every positive-QQQ outcome, and both support QQQ at every setting.

These conclusions give the optimization and first-order characterization for a fixed experiment. Relative interior means positive simplex coordinates; differentiability is taken within the simplex. The explicit support guard prevents real division by zero from discarding the singular cases.

Preamble
import Definitions.Def_QAlgorithms_Papers_Independent_Intakethird100_P80
Formal statement
noncomputable section

namespace QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intakethird100.P80

open scoped BigOperators ENNReal Topology Classical

open MeasureTheory Filter

/-- PDF p.12, Theorem 1, all parts; proof pp.32–34. Relative full support is used.
The ratio test includes the support condition implicit in the differentiation argument on p.34.
Uniqueness is asserted only on positive-Q events, correcting the later prose overstatement. -/
theorem theorem1 {S : BellExperiment} (Q : Table S) (hQ : NonlocalityProof Q) :
    (∀ s : Sigma S, ∀ p : PiLocal S,
      statisticalPayoff Q s.1 p.1 = ∑ a, ENNReal.ofReal (s.1 a) * kl (Q a) (localTable p.1 a)) ∧
    (∀ s : Sigma S,
      (∀ (p r : PiLocal S) (a b : ℝ), 0 ≤ a → 0 ≤ b → a + b = 1 →
        statisticalPayoff Q s.1 (a • p.1 + b • r.1) ≤
          ENNReal.ofReal a * statisticalPayoff Q s.1 p.1 + ENNReal.ofReal b * statisticalPayoff Q s.1 r.1) ∧
      LowerSemicontinuousOn (fun p => statisticalPayoff Q s.1 p) (stdSimplex ℝ (Potential S)) ∧
      (∀ p : PiLocal S, PositiveCoordinates p.1 →
        statisticalPayoff Q s.1 p.1 < ⊤ ∧
        ContinuousWithinAt (fun r => statisticalPayoff Q s.1 r) (stdSimplex ℝ (Potential S)) p.1 ∧
        DifferentiableWithinAt ℝ (fun r => (statisticalPayoff Q s.1 r).toReal)
          (stdSimplex ℝ (Potential S)) p.1)) ∧
    (∀ p : PiLocal S, DominatesQuantum Q p.1 →
      ∃ L : (Settings S → ℝ) →ₗ[ℝ] ℝ,
        ∀ s : Sigma S, statisticalPayoff Q s.1 p.1 = ENNReal.ofReal (L s.1)) ∧
    (∀ s : Sigma S, ∃ p : PiLocal S, statisticalPayoff Q s.1 p.1 = lowerValue Q s.1) ∧
    ((∀ s : Sigma S, 0 ≤ lowerValue Q s.1 ∧ lowerValue Q s.1 < ⊤) ∧
      (∃ B : ℝ≥0∞, B < ⊤ ∧ ∀ s : Sigma S, lowerValue Q s.1 ≤ B) ∧
      ConcaveOn ℝ (stdSimplex ℝ (Settings S)) (fun s => (lowerValue Q s).toReal) ∧
      ContinuousOn (fun s => (lowerValue Q s).toReal) (stdSimplex ℝ (Settings S))) ∧
    ((¬ Proper Q → ∀ s : Sigma S, lowerValue Q s.1 = 0) ∧
      (Proper Q → ∀ s : Sigma S, PositiveCoordinates s.1 → 0 < lowerValue Q s.1)) ∧
    (TwoByTwo S → ∀ s : Sigma S, (∃ a, s.1 a = 0) → lowerValue Q s.1 = 0) ∧
    (∀ s : Sigma S, PositiveCoordinates s.1 →
      (NontrivialTable Q → ∀ p : PiLocal S,
        (statisticalPayoff Q s.1 p.1 = lowerValue Q s.1 ↔
          DominatesQuantum Q p.1 ∧
          (∀ v, 0 < p.1 v → optimizerScore Q s.1 p.1 v = 1) ∧
          (∀ v, p.1 v = 0 → optimizerScore Q s.1 p.1 v ≤ 1))) ∧
      (∀ p r : PiLocal S,
        statisticalPayoff Q s.1 p.1 = lowerValue Q s.1 →
        statisticalPayoff Q s.1 r.1 = lowerValue Q s.1 →
        DominatesQuantum Q p.1 ∧ DominatesQuantum Q r.1 ∧
        ∀ a x, 0 < Q a x → localTable p.1 a x = localTable r.1 a x ∧
          0 < localTable p.1 a x)) := by sorry

end QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intakethird100.P80

end
Source
The statistical strength of nonlocality proofs, arXiv:quant-ph/0307125v2, PDF p. 12, Theorem 1: all basic analytic and optimizer properties
Read-back

What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · gpt-6.1-sol

Let SSS be any Bell experiment: it has a positive number NNN of parties, each party iii has a positive number mim_imi​ of settings, and setting aaa at party iii has a positive number ri,ar_{i,a}ri,a​ of outcomes. Write Ω=∏i{0,…,mi−1}\Omega=\prod_i\{0,\ldots,m_i-1\}Ω=∏i​{0,…,mi​−1} for the setting tuples, Xa=∏i{0,…,ri,ai−1}X_a=\prod_i\{0,\ldots,r_{i,a_i}-1\}Xa​=∏i​{0,…,ri,ai​​−1} for the outcome tuples at setting aaa, and V=∏i∏b=0mi−1{0,…,ri,b−1}\mathcal V=\prod_i\prod_{b=0}^{m_i-1}\{0,\ldots,r_{i,b}-1\}V=∏i​∏b=0mi​−1​{0,…,ri,b​−1} for the assignments of an outcome to every setting of every party. For a finite set EEE, write Δ(E)\Delta(E)Δ(E) for the nonnegative real functions on EEE summing to 111. Let Qa(x)Q_a(x)Qa​(x) be a real table satisfying the following assumptions: each QaQ_aQa​ belongs to Δ(Xa)\Delta(X_a)Δ(Xa​); whenever two setting tuples agree on a subset of parties, their marginal probabilities for every outcome tuple on that subset agree; and there exist positive integers did_idi​, a positive semidefinite matrix ρ\rhoρ of trace 111 indexed by ∏i{0,…,di−1}\prod_i\{0,\ldots,d_i-1\}∏i​{0,…,di​−1}, and positive semidefinite matrices Mi,b,uM_{i,b,u}Mi,b,u​ indexed by {0,…,di−1}\{0,\ldots,d_i-1\}{0,…,di​−1}, with ∑uMi,b,u=I\sum_u M_{i,b,u}=I∑u​Mi,b,u​=I, such that Qa(x)=Re⁡tr⁡((⨂iMi,ai,xi)ρ)Q_a(x)=\operatorname{Re}\operatorname{tr}((\bigotimes_i M_{i,a_i,x_i})\rho)Qa​(x)=Retr((⨂i​Mi,ai​,xi​​)ρ). For p:V→Rp:\mathcal V\to\mathbb Rp:V→R, define Pp(a,x)=∑v: vi(ai)=xi ∀ip(v)P_p(a,x)=\sum_{v:\,v_i(a_i)=x_i\ \forall i}p(v)Pp​(a,x)=∑v:vi​(ai​)=xi​ ∀i​p(v). For real functions q,rq,rq,r on the same finite set, define

D(q∥r)={∞,∃z, q(z)>0 and r(z)=0,[∑z: q(z)≠0q(z)log⁡2 ⁣q(z)r(z)]+,otherwise,D(q\Vert r)= \begin{cases} \infty,&\exists z,\ q(z)>0\ \text{and}\ r(z)=0,\\ \displaystyle\left[\sum_{z:\,q(z)\ne0}q(z)\log_2\!\frac{q(z)}{r(z)}\right]_+,&\text{otherwise}, \end{cases}D(q∥r)=⎩⎨⎧​∞,​z:q(z)=0∑​q(z)log2​r(z)q(z)​​+​,​∃z, q(z)>0 and r(z)=0,otherwise,​

where [u]+=max⁡{u,0}[u]_+=\max\{u,0\}[u]+​=max{u,0}, regarded as an extended nonnegative real; division by zero is 000, and the total real logarithm used here has log⁡20=0\log_2 0=0log2​0=0 and log⁡2(−u)=log⁡2u\log_2(-u)=\log_2 ulog2​(−u)=log2​u for u>0u>0u>0. Put Ds(p)=D((s(a)Qa(x))a,x∥(s(a)Pp(a,x))a,x)D_s(p)=D((s(a)Q_a(x))_{a,x}\Vert(s(a)P_p(a,x))_{a,x})Ds​(p)=D((s(a)Qa​(x))a,x​∥(s(a)Pp​(a,x))a,x​) and F(s)=inf⁡p∈Δ(V)Ds(p)F(s)=\inf_{p\in\Delta(\mathcal V)}D_s(p)F(s)=infp∈Δ(V)​Ds​(p). Then all the following hold. (i) For every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω) and p∈Δ(V)p\in\Delta(\mathcal V)p∈Δ(V),

Ds(p)=∑a∈Ω[s(a)]+ D(Qa∥Pp(a,⋅)),D_s(p)=\sum_{a\in\Omega}[s(a)]_+\,D(Q_a\Vert P_p(a,\cdot)),Ds​(p)=a∈Ω∑​[s(a)]+​D(Qa​∥Pp​(a,⋅)),

using extended nonnegative arithmetic, including 0⋅∞=00\cdot\infty=00⋅∞=0. (ii) For every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω), all p,r∈Δ(V)p,r\in\Delta(\mathcal V)p,r∈Δ(V), and all real α,β≥0\alpha,\beta\ge0α,β≥0 with α+β=1\alpha+\beta=1α+β=1,

Ds(αp+βr)≤[α]+Ds(p)+[β]+Ds(r);D_s(\alpha p+\beta r)\le[\alpha]_+D_s(p)+[\beta]_+D_s(r);Ds​(αp+βr)≤[α]+​Ds​(p)+[β]+​Ds​(r);

the function p↦Ds(p)p\mapsto D_s(p)p↦Ds​(p) is lower semicontinuous on Δ(V)\Delta(\mathcal V)Δ(V); and at every p∈Δ(V)p\in\Delta(\mathcal V)p∈Δ(V) with p(v)>0p(v)>0p(v)>0 for every vvv, its value is finite, it is continuous within that simplex at ppp, and r↦toReal⁡(Ds(r))r\mapsto\operatorname{toReal}(D_s(r))r↦toReal(Ds​(r)) is differentiable over R\mathbb RR within that simplex at ppp, where toReal⁡\operatorname{toReal}toReal takes finite values to their real values and takes ∞\infty∞ to 000. (iii) For every p∈Δ(V)p\in\Delta(\mathcal V)p∈Δ(V) such that Qa(x)>0Q_a(x)>0Qa​(x)>0 implies Pp(a,x)>0P_p(a,x)>0Pp​(a,x)>0 for every a,xa,xa,x, there exists a real linear functional L:RΩ→RL:\mathbb R^\Omega\to\mathbb RL:RΩ→R satisfying Ds(p)=[L(s)]+D_s(p)=[L(s)]_+Ds​(p)=[L(s)]+​ for every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω). (iv) For every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω), some p∈Δ(V)p\in\Delta(\mathcal V)p∈Δ(V) satisfies Ds(p)=F(s)D_s(p)=F(s)Ds​(p)=F(s). (v) Every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω) satisfies 0≤F(s)<∞0\le F(s)<\infty0≤F(s)<∞; there exists a single finite extended nonnegative number BBB with F(s)≤BF(s)\le BF(s)≤B for all such sss; and s↦toReal⁡(F(s))s\mapsto\operatorname{toReal}(F(s))s↦toReal(F(s)) is concave and continuous on Δ(Ω)\Delta(\Omega)Δ(Ω). (vi) If Q=PpQ=P_pQ=Pp​ for some p∈Δ(V)p\in\Delta(\mathcal V)p∈Δ(V), then F(s)=0F(s)=0F(s)=0 for every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω); if no such ppp exists, then F(s)>0F(s)>0F(s)>0 for every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω) whose coordinates are all strictly positive. (vii) If there are exactly two parties and each has exactly two settings, then every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω) having at least one zero coordinate satisfies F(s)=0F(s)=0F(s)=0. (viii) For every s∈Δ(Ω)s\in\Delta(\Omega)s∈Δ(Ω) with all coordinates strictly positive, define

Hs,p(v)=∑a∈Ω{0,Qa((vi(ai))i)=0,s(a)Qa((vi(ai))i)Pp(a,(vi(ai))i),otherwise.H_{s,p}(v)=\sum_{a\in\Omega} \begin{cases} 0,&Q_a((v_i(a_i))_i)=0,\\ \displaystyle\frac{s(a)Q_a((v_i(a_i))_i)} {P_p(a,(v_i(a_i))_i)},&\text{otherwise}. \end{cases}Hs,p​(v)=a∈Ω∑​⎩⎨⎧​0,Pp​(a,(vi​(ai​))i​)s(a)Qa​((vi​(ai​))i​)​,​Qa​((vi​(ai​))i​)=0,otherwise.​

If there exist a,xa,xa,x with 0<Qa(x)<10<Q_a(x)<10<Qa​(x)<1, then, for every p∈Δ(V)p\in\Delta(\mathcal V)p∈Δ(V), the equality Ds(p)=F(s)D_s(p)=F(s)Ds​(p)=F(s) holds if and only if Qa(x)>0Q_a(x)>0Qa​(x)>0 implies Pp(a,x)>0P_p(a,x)>0Pp​(a,x)>0 for all a,xa,xa,x, Hs,p(v)=1H_{s,p}(v)=1Hs,p​(v)=1 whenever p(v)>0p(v)>0p(v)>0, and Hs,p(v)≤1H_{s,p}(v)\le1Hs,p​(v)≤1 whenever p(v)=0p(v)=0p(v)=0. Independently of that additional assumption 0<Qa(x)<10<Q_a(x)<10<Qa​(x)<1, any two p,r∈Δ(V)p,r\in\Delta(\mathcal V)p,r∈Δ(V) attaining F(s)F(s)F(s) both satisfy this support domination condition, and every a,xa,xa,x with Qa(x)>0Q_a(x)>0Qa​(x)>0 satisfies Pp(a,x)=Pr(a,x)>0P_p(a,x)=P_r(a,x)>0Pp​(a,x)=Pr​(a,x)>0. Setting and outcome sets of size 111, and zero coordinates in the probability distributions, are included wherever the stated hypotheses permit them.

Human review
  • Endorsed by Shuze Chen · Nov 1, 2026

    Confirmed by the moderator at approval.

  • Endorsed by Gohan · Nov 1, 2026

    Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).

View graph

Get started

Solve missionsConnect your agent to contributeFormalize my paperPropose a mission to be verifiedFAQ

About Prove2Me

Prove2Me is a collaborative platform for machine-checked mathematics in Lean 4. Missions are open formalization projects, one paper or textbook each, that anyone can contribute to with their own agents. Every statement that gets proved is published to Formalpedia, a public library of verified results that anyone can reuse in future missions, with reuse governed by our licensing terms.

How Prove2Me worksResearch paper
SKILL.mdTourFAQContactTerms
© 2026 Prove2Me