The point-sampling half of the First Sampling Lemma (scaffold) #
Target (PR #11):
point_sampling_event_of_large_k : ∀ ε η > 0, ∃ K, ∀ k ≥ K, ∀ [NeZero k], ∀ W : Graphon α μ, PointSamplingEvent W k ε η
matching the shape of rounding_event_of_large_k, so that PR #12 can pick one k
for both events and close first_sampling_lemma via sampleGoodMassOn_of_events.
Design notes (recorded 2026-07-07) #
- The rounding-style union bound does NOT work here. For a fixed index cut
A, B ⊆ Fin k, the statistic(1/k²) ∑_{i∈A,j∈B} D(xᵢ, xⱼ)is a function of theksampled points with bounded differences≤ 2/k, so vertex-exposure Azuma gives onlyexp(−c ε² k)tails — which loses against the4^kcut pairs. This is the genuine extra difficulty of point sampling versus rounding (where independence overk²edges gaveexp(−c k²)). - The classical route (Lovász, Large Networks and Graph Limits, Lemma 10.6;
BCLSV "Convergent sequences I" §4.3) therefore bounds the EXPECTATION of the sup
first —
E_x[d_□(W, H_{W,x})] → 0uniformly inW— by the ghost-sample / quadratic-form argument, and only then concentrates the (bounded-differences) random variablex ↦ d_□(W, H_{W,x})around its expectation via McDiarmid/Azuma. - Step reduction helps but does not dodge the core. With Frieze–Kannan
(
regularity, PROVED) one may reduceWto a step graphonUwithm(ε)parts:d(W,H_{W,x}) ≤ d(W,U) + d(U,H_{U,x}) + d(H_{U,x},H_{W,x}). The middle term is finite (cell-frequency concentration,mcells, honest union bound). The last term is the empirical matrix of the small-cut-norm kernelD := W − U, and bounding ITS cut norm is exactly the hard expectation step — sampling does not commute with cut-norm smallness pointwise. - Mathlib support:
Mathlib.Probability.Moments.SubGaussianprovidesHasSubgaussianMGF, Hoeffding for independent sums, and the conditionally sub-Gaussian Azuma (measure_sum_ge_le_of_HasCondSubgaussianMGF); there is no off-the-shelf McDiarmid, so the bounded-differences step will go through the conditional sub-Gaussian route (Doob/vertex-exposure decomposition off(x) − E f) or a bespoke finite version in the style ofSamplingRounding. - Measurability of the witness set (
PointSamplingEventcarries it as data): the plan is to takeX := {x | discretized majorant of d_□(W, H_{W,x}) < ε}for a FINITE discretization of the cut-norm sup (cell-cuts on theH-side suffice for a 2-sided estimate up to constants), makingXa finite intersection/union of preimages of measurable coordinate functions. If this still turns ugly, a narrowed named lemma for the measurable bad set stays inside thefirst_sampling_lemmaaccounting — NOT a new live input.
Layer plan (per the PR #11 decomposition) #
discretized cut norm approximation— reduced_□(W, H_{W,x})to finitely many cut predicates in the sampled coordinates, with controlled error.bounded-differences / Azuma scaffold— the vertex-exposure decomposition for functionals of the sampled point sequence.uniform tail bound— the expectation bound (Lovász 10.6 core) + concentration, uniform inW.event packaging— the measurable witness set forPointSamplingEvent.
PR #11A architecture (settled 2026-07-07, after literature check) #
Reference mechanisms: Lovász Lemmas 10.6/10.7 (bounded kernels); the modern generalization arXiv:2203.07581 confirms the split into systematic error (expectation bound; Q-subsample ghost argument, their §6.2) and dispersion (vertex-exposure martingale + Azuma — deferred to PR #11B).
Majorant + triangle decomposition. Fix ε; let P be the Frieze–Kannan partition
of W at quality ε' := ε/8 with m = m(ε') parts (uniform in W — PROVED
regularity), U := stepify P W. Then
d_□(W, H_{W,x}) ≤ ε' + d_□(U, H_{U,x}) + maxcut((W−U)[x])
- Frequency term
d_□(U, H_{U,x}):H_{U,x}is the equipartition step graphon with entriesU(xᵢ,xⱼ); comparing toUis a pure weight-perturbation problem — bounded by2·∑_cells |empirical frequency − μ(cell)|(repo tooling:cutDistance_step_weight_le-style). Its expectation is elementary:E|freq − μ| ≤ 1/(2√k)per cell via Cauchy–Schwarz + the iid variance computation (E(freq−μ)² = μ(1−μ)/k) — no concentration inequality needed,mcells total. - Core term
maxcut(D[x]),D := W − U,‖D‖_□ ≤ ε',|D| ≤ 1: THE deep step —E_x[max_{S,T ⊆ [k]} (1/k²)|∑_{i∈S,j∈T} D(xᵢ,xⱼ)|] ≤ ‖D‖_□ + O(k^{−1/4}). Mechanism (Q-subsample cut guessing; AFKK / book 10.7): naive union over4^kcuts fails (onlyexp(−cε²k)per-cut tails). Instead: for the maximizer(S*,T*), the optimalTgivenSis the sign set ofr_j := (1/k)∑_{i∈S*} D(xᵢ,xⱼ); estimater_jby a random subsampleQof sizeq(errorO(1/√q)per point in expectation), so the near-optimal cut is DETERMINED by(x_Q, S* ∩ Q)— only2^qselection rules. For each FIXED rule, the cut becomes a genuine measurable set determined by theQ-coordinates, independent of the fresh coordinates, so the fresh-sample expectation of the rectangle sum is≤ ‖D‖_□ + O((q + √k)/k). Union over2^qrules with second-moment control;q := ⌈√k⌉givesO(k^{−1/4}). Both±directions by applying toDand−D.
PR #11A execution notes (2026-07-07 survey of repo APIs) #
- Deliverable shape (
point_sampling_expectation_bound): ∃K, ∀ k ≥ K, ∀ W, ∃ a measurable nonnegative integrable majorantMwith∀ᵐ x, cutDistance W (sampleWeightedGraphonOn W x) ≤ M xand∫ M < ε. - KEY SIMPLIFICATION — PR #11B is just Markov. Given the expectation bound at
accuracy
ε·η, Markov's inequality on the nonnegative majorant givesπ{M ≥ ε} ≤ η, andX := {M < ε} \ N(N a measurable null superset of the domination-failure set) is the measurable witness forPointSamplingEvent W k ε η. NO Azuma / bounded differences needed for the qualitative statement — concentration would only improve η-rates. regularity W ε hε : ∃ P, P.parts.card ≤ regularityBound ε ∧ cutNormDiff W (stepify P W) ≤ ε(proved) — them(ε)source.cutDistance_step_weight_le(InverseCounting, PRIVATE — de-privatize likeexists_partition_with_measures; carries the Rokhlin trace, acceptable): needs the SAME cell count on both sides via injective enumerations. For the frequency term (d(U, H_{U,x})), the coarsened partition (equicells grouped by the P-cell of their sample point) can have EMPTY groups, which break enumeration injectivity — pad empty groups with distinct measure-zero decorated cells (singleton-point technique fromexists_partition_with_measures's proof). This is the main construction cost of the frequency layer.- The coefficient alignment (
U(xᵢ,xⱼ) = c_P(cell of xᵢ, cell of xⱼ)at sampled points, clamps invisible) is a.e.-x, via thegraphonEvaltransfer machinery (as inae_edge_params_aligned) applied to BOTHWandU := stepify P W.
References #
- L. Lovász, Large Networks and Graph Limits, AMS Colloq. Publ. 60 (2012), Lemmas 10.6, 10.7, 10.16 (First Sampling Lemma).
- C. Borgs, J.T. Chayes, L. Lovász, V.T. Sós, K. Vesztergombi, Convergent sequences of dense graphs I, Adv. Math. 219 (2008), §4.3.
- N. Alon, W. Fernandez de la Vega, R. Kannan, M. Karpinski, Random sampling and approximation of MAX-CSPs, J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 67 (2003) — the Q-subsample cut-guessing mechanism.
- M. Borbényi, B. Ráth, S. Rokob, The cut norm and sampling lemmas for unbounded kernels, arXiv:2203.07581 — modern treatment; confirms the systematic-error / dispersion split.
PR #11A Layers 1+2: the point-sampling majorant and its frequency accounting #
This section builds the nonnegative, measurable, integrable majorant
pointSamplingMajorant W ε' k x dominating cutDistance W (H_{W,x}) a.e., and bounds the
expectation of its frequency term. The deep core term (Layer 3, the AFKK Q-subsample
ghost argument) is isolated in the private lemma coreTerm_expectation_bound (fully proved;
this section's layering dates from when it was the last open obligation).
The triangle decomposition through U := stepify P W (P the Frieze–Kannan partition of
W at quality ε') is
d_□(W, H_{W,x}) ≤ d_□(W, U) + d_□(U, H_{U,x}) + d_□(H_{U,x}, H_{W,x})
≤ ε' + freqTerm + coreTerm.
d_□(W, U) ≤ cutNormDiff W U ≤ ε'—cutDistance_le_cutNormDiff+regularity.d_□(H_{U,x}, H_{W,x}) ≤ coreTerm— the PR #10 cut certificatecutNormDiff_mkStepGraphon_le_of_cuts, pointwise inx.d_□(U, H_{U,x}) ≤ freqTerm— the weight-perturbation construction (seecutDistance_chosenStep_sampleWeighted_le_freqTerm).
The chosen Frieze–Kannan partition of W at quality ε' (junk trivialPartition
when ε' ≤ 0; all theorems below carry 0 < ε').
Equations
- W.chosenPartition ε' = if hε' : 0 < ε' then ⋯.choose else Graphon.trivialPartition
Instances For
The chosen step-graphon approximation U := stepify P W.
Equations
- W.chosenStep ε' = Graphon.stepify (W.chosenPartition ε') W
Instances For
The clamped, (min,max)-ordered evaluation of a graphon V at the sampled pair
(x_i, x_j) — matching the coefficient shape of sampleWeightedGraphonOn.
Instances For
The frequency term: 2·∑_cells |empirical frequency − μ(cell)|, plus a 1/k
slack absorbing the diagonal mismatch between H_{U,x} and the coarsened comparison
graphon (see the domination proof).
Equations
Instances For
The core term: the maximum, over vertex cuts A, B ⊆ [k], of the weighted cut sum
of the empirical matrix clampEval W − clampEval U on the equipartition. Its summand shape
matches cutNormDiff_mkStepGraphon_le_of_cuts exactly (weights (μ cell)·(μ cell)), so the
certificate applies to d_□(H_{U,x}, H_{W,x}) directly.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The point-sampling majorant ε' + freqTerm + coreTerm.
Instances For
Bounds and nonnegativity #
Crude uniform bound on the core term: coreTerm ≤ 1.
The frequency deviation of a single cell is at most 1.
The nonnegativity of the majorant (given 0 ≤ ε').
Measurability and integrability #
Crude uniform bound on the frequency term.
A.e. domination #
Part a (deterministic): W is ε'-close to its step approximation.
Part b (pointwise cut certificate): the two weighted sampled graphons differ by at
most the core term. Applies cutNormDiff_mkStepGraphon_le_of_cuts on the equipartition.
chosenStep W ε' is definitionally the step graphon on chosenPartition W ε' with the
rectangle-average coefficients rectAverage W.
For a.e. sampled x, every sampled point lies in some part of P.
Graphons with a.e.-equal kernels are at cut-norm difference zero (every rectangle integral of the difference vanishes).
A step-graphon coefficient function built from a symmetric matrix M indexed through an
injective enumeration ι : Fin n → Set α (matching the dite-shape of
sampleWeightedGraphonOn).
Equations
Instances For
A.e. domination of the cut distance by the point-sampling majorant. Assembles the
triangle d_□(W, H_{W,x}) ≤ d_□(W, U) + d_□(U, H_{U,x}) + d_□(H_{U,x}, H_{W,x}) from parts
a (cutDistance_W_chosenStep_le), c (cutDistance_chosenStep_sampleWeighted_le_freqTerm) and
b (cutDistance_sampleWeighted_le_coreTerm).
Layer 2: the frequency expectation bound #
Layer 2 — the frequency expectation bound. The expectation of the frequency term is at
most m/√k + 1/k, where m is the number of Frieze–Kannan cells; both terms vanish as
k → ∞ (with m = m(ε') fixed). Elementary: linearity of the integral plus the per-cell
integral_abs_empFreq_sub_le.
Frieze–Kannan control of the chosen step approximation. By construction
chosenStep W ε' = stepify P W for the regularity partition P at quality ε', so the
cut-norm difference ‖W − U‖_□ is at most ε'. This is the systematic-error budget of
the core term: the a.e. entries of the empirical difference matrix are the sampled values of
W − U, whose continuous cut norm the AFKK core compares against.
AFKK cut-guessing apparatus (private) #
The proof of guessBlock_integral_le_cutNormDiff follows docs/afkk-cut-guessing.md
(= arXiv:2203.07581 §6.2 + Appendix §10; AFKK, JCSS 67 (2003), Lemma 3; Lovász,
Large Networks, Lemma 10.7). Everything here is private. The subsections marked
(I) hypergeometric moments, (II) product-space McDiarmid MGF, and
(III) finite soft-max are self-contained infrastructure, candidates for later
extraction.
(H4) ⌈√k⌉₊ arithmetic #
(I) Hypergeometric moments of the subsample estimator #
Purely finite averages over Finset.powersetCard q Finset.univ — sampling q of k
fixed real numbers without replacement. Reusable infrastructure.
Conditioning on a block (Layer 2) #
(II) McDiarmid at MGF level on finite product measures #
The bounded-differences implementation (coordinate-peeling induction, one application of
Hoeffding's lemma per peeled coordinate) lives in Graphon/McDiarmid.lean, packaged as
ProbabilityTheory.hasSubgaussianMGF_of_bounded_differences' (arbitrary finite index
type) and its Fin n special case. Here we only unpack the HasSubgaussianMGF form back
into the integral-form MGF bound (H13b) consumed by the soft-max/assembly layer below.
(III) Finite soft-max #
Per-block assembly and rate arithmetic (Layers 2+3+4) #
Layer 4 — event packaging (Markov) and the uniform target theorem #
The frequency term is integrable: it is bounded by a constant on the finite-measure
product space (crude uniform bound freqTerm_le).
The core term is integrable: it is bounded by 1 on the finite-measure product space
(coreTerm_le_one).
The point-sampling half of the First Sampling Lemma (PR #11 target; PROVED).
With W-uniform K: for all k ≥ K, the weighted sampled graphon H_{W,x} is within
cut distance ε of W outside a bad set of measure ≤ η.
Proof: at accuracy ε' := εη/4, the majorant's expectation is
≤ 2ε' + regularityBound ε'/√k + 1/k + 8·k^{-1/4} < εη for all large k — uniformly in
W, since regularityBound is W-free; Markov applied to the nonnegative integrable
majorant plus the a.e. domination ae_cutDistance_le_pointSamplingMajorant packages the
measurable event set.
Together with rounding_event_of_large_k and sampleGoodMassOn_of_events, this
closes first_sampling_lemma (the PR #12 recombination).