Extreme points and faces in the moment problem

It suffices to prove that S_K(x) is a face of K, as F_K(x)\supset S_K(x) is implied by F_K(x) being an extreme set of K containing x. Let a,b,y\in K and \lambda\in(0,1) satisfy y=(1-\lambda)a+\lambda b.

• S_K(x) is convex. If a,b\in S_K(x), then there is \epsilon>0 such that a':=x+\epsilon(x-a) and b':=x+\epsilon(x-b) lie in K. Then (1-\lambda)a'+\lambda b'=x+\epsilon(x-y) shows y\in S_K(x).

• S_K(x) is an extreme set. If y\in S_K(x), then there is \epsilon>0 such that y':=x+\epsilon(x-y) lies in K. Let \lambda_a:=\epsilon \lambda/(1+\epsilon \lambda) and \epsilon_a:=\epsilon(1-\lambda)/(1+\epsilon \lambda). Then (1-\lambda_a)y'+\lambda_a b=x+\epsilon_a(x-a) shows a\in S_K(x). Similarly b\in S_K(x).

Proposition 2.2 shows that for every y\in F_K(x) there is \epsilon>0 such that y':=x+\epsilon(x-y) lies in K. Since F_K(x) is an extreme set of K containing x=\frac{\epsilon}{1+\epsilon}y+\frac{1}{1+\epsilon}y', it contains y'.

(1) Proceeding indirectly, we assume that \alpha|_{F_K(x)} fails to be injective. Let y,y'\in F_K(x) such that y'\neq y and \alpha(y')=\alpha(y). As depicted in Figure ?, there are \epsilon,\epsilon'>0 such that F_K(x) contains the points z:=x+\epsilon(x-y),

because x is a D-internal point of F_K(x) by Corollary 2.5. The constraint set H contains x' and x'' since \alpha(x'')=\alpha(x')=\alpha(x)\in C. The claim x\not\in\operatorname{ext} H then follows from x'\neq x.

(2) Let x=(1-\lambda)x'+\lambda x'' for some x',x''\in H and \lambda\in(0,1). Since F_K(x) is an extreme set of K containing x, we have x',x''\in F_K(x). As C is a singleton, \alpha(x'')=\alpha(x') holds, hence x''=x' follows from the injectivity of \alpha|_{F_K(x)}, which proves x\in\operatorname{ext} H.

(1) Let x\in\operatorname{ext} H and F:=F_K(x). Then \dim F\leq d as \alpha|_F is injective by Theorem 2.6 (1). Since F is a face of K, we have F=K\cap\operatorname{aff} F. As K is linearly compact and \dim\operatorname{aff} F<\infty, this implies that F is compact [kendall62, Section 4]. Thus, x\in\operatorname{co}\operatorname{ext} F by Minkowski’s theorem, so x is a convex combination of at most d+1 affinely independent extreme points x_1,\dots,x_k of F by Carathéodory’s theorem. The points x_1,\dots,x_k lie in \operatorname{ext} K, as F is a face of K. Since \alpha|_F is injective, the points \alpha(x_1),\dots,\alpha(x_k) are affinely independent.

(2) Let x\in H'. Then x is a convex combination of at most d+1 extreme points x_1,\dots,x_k of K. The affine independence of \alpha(x_1),\dots,\alpha(x_k) implies that \alpha restricted to F:=\operatorname{co}\{x_1,\dots,x_k\} is injective. Since F is a face of the (d+1)-neighborly set K we have F_K(x)\subset F. Thus \alpha restricted to F_K(x) is injective, so Theorem 2.6 (2) proves the claim.

(1) See [winkler88, Lemma 2.3]. (2) See part (2o) of the theorem in [kendall62]. (3a) See [winkler2000, Lemma 3.2]; see also [phelps01, Lemma 10.4]. (3b) and (3c) are easy to prove.

(1)\Rightarrow(2). Since Q is a face of P, we have \operatorname{ext} Q\subset\operatorname{ext} P. So \operatorname{ext} P=P_1 implies \operatorname{ext} Q\subset P_1. Since P is a simplex, its face Q is also a simplex, see Remark 4.2 (1) and Lemma 3.7 (3a).

(2)\Rightarrow(3). Every simplex is linearly compact by Lemma 3.7 (2).

(3)\Rightarrow(4). It is easy to see that P^\mathbf{p} is a face of P. Hence, Q^\mathbf{p} is a face of Q. This has two consequences. First, Q^\mathbf{p} is linearly compact and secondly, \operatorname{ext}[Q^\mathbf{p}]\subset\operatorname{ext} Q\subset P_1. The claim follows then from Proposition 3.2 (1) when K:=Q^\mathbf{p} and \alpha\colon Q^\mathbf{p}\to\mathbb{R}^d, \mu\mapsto\int\mathbf{p}\mathrm{d}\mu.

(1) First, G_\mathrm{a.i.}(C)\subset\operatorname{ext} G_\mathrm{fin}(C) follows from Proposition 3.2 (2) applied to K:=P\!_\mathrm{fin} and \alpha\colon P\!_\mathrm{fin}\to\mathbb{R}^d, \mu\mapsto\int\mathbf{p}\mathrm{d}\mu, because \operatorname{ext} P\!_\mathrm{fin}=P_1 and because P\!_\mathrm{fin} is (d+1)-neighborly by Remark 4.2 (3). Secondly, as P\!_\mathrm{fin} is a face of P, the set

is a face of Q^\mathbf{p}. Hence G_\mathrm{fin}(C)\cap Q is a face of G(C) as it follows from imposing the affine constraints. Combining the two, we have

Part (2) is a corollary of part (1) as P_1\subset Q implies G_\mathrm{a.i.}(C)\subset Q.

Part (1) is revealed in the proof of Theorem Theorem. Part (2) and (3) follow from Theorem Theorem (3) and Theorem Theorem (2) when Q=P_\mathrm{fin} by Remark 4.2 (3).

Let \mu,\eta,\xi\in P, \lambda\in(0,1), and \mu=(1-\lambda)\eta+\lambda\xi. Let ((A_i)_{i\in I},A)\in\mathcal{N}. Since (A_i)_{i\in I} is an increasing net, we have

Since A is an upper bound to (A_i)_{i\in I}, this implies that \mu(A)=\sup_{i\in I}\mu(A_i) is equivalent to the conjunction of

Part (1). That R is a face of P follows from Proposition 4.11 because the compact subsets of a Borel set are directed by inclusion, as the union of two compact sets is compact. Regarding the \tau-smooth measures, we note that every net of open sets is upper bounded by its union, which is open, hence Borel. The remaining statements follow from Remark 4.2 (1) and Lemma 3.7.

Part (2). Topsøe [topsoe70, Theorem 11.1] has shown \operatorname{ext} P\!_\tau=P_1. The set R of Radon measures is a face of P by (1). Hence R is a face of P_\tau. This shows \operatorname{ext} R\subset P_1, hence \operatorname{ext} R=P_1.

Part (3) follows from Theorem Theorem (1) as Q is a face of P and \operatorname{ext} Q=P_1, by part (1) and (2).

Part (4) is implied by part (3) and Theorem Theorem (2), because P_1\subset Q by part (2).

Part (5) follows from Corollary 4.7 (1) as P_1\subset Q by part (2).

The claim g_\mathrm{ext}(C)\leq g(C) follows by monotone convergence from the integral representation for Radon probability measures [weizsaecker-winkler79]. The proof is then completed by

as \operatorname{ext} G(C)\subset G_\mathrm{a.i.}(C) holds by Corollary 4.13 (3). See Figure ?.

In more detail, let f_1,f_2,\dots be a countable family of Borel measurable functions X\to\mathbb{R}. Let I be an index set, \tilde C\subset\mathbb{R}^I a closed convex set, and for every i\in I let g_i\colon X\to\mathbb{R} be continuous for the topology generated

( The topology on X generated by a family of subsets of X is the coarsest topology for which all members of this family are open. The initial topology of f_1,f_2,\dots is the topology on X generated by the preimages f_j^{-1}(U), where U is any open set in \mathbb{R} and j\in\mathbb{N}.)

by the given topology of X and the initial topology of f_1,f_2,\dots. To guarantee a certain degree of boundedness of the (possibly uncountably many) constraints g_i, we assume that for every i\in I there is j\in\mathbb{N} and a real constant K>0 such that |g_i|\leq K(1+|f_j|) pointwise. Here, |h|\colon X\to\mathbb{R} is defined by |h|(x)=|h(x)|, x\in X, for every h\colon X\to\mathbb{R}. Let

and let \Sigma(\operatorname{ext}\tilde H) be the smallest \sigma-algebra on \operatorname{ext}\tilde H such that \operatorname{ext}\tilde H\to\mathbb{R}, \mu\mapsto\mu(B) is measurable for every Borel set B in X. Then Corollary 2 in [weizsaecker-winkler79] shows that for every measure \mu\in\tilde H there exists a probability measure \Pi on \Sigma(\operatorname{ext}\tilde H), such that

The generalized moment problem (?) with Q=R fits into this setup when I:=\{1,\dots,d\}, f_i:=g_i:=p_i for every i\in I, and \tilde C:=C. Equation (?) shows that for every \mu\in G(C) there is a probability measure \Pi on \Sigma(\operatorname{ext} G(C)) such that

where f=1_B is the indicator function of a Borel set B\in\mathcal{B}(X), defined by 1_B(x):=\delta_x(B), x\in X. Equation (?) holds for every Borel measurable f\colon X\to(-\infty,+\infty] that is bounded below by a real constant, by monotone convergence, see for example [bauer01], Sections 11–12. Hence g_\mathrm{ext}(C)\leq g(C) as \mu\in G(C) is arbitrary and because the monotonicity of the integral shows

See Figure ? for a flowchart of the proof. First, we focus on finitely atomic measures. Let \mu\in G_\mathrm{fin}(C) be a finitely atomic measure concentrated on \{x_1,\dots,x_k\}\subset X. Since C is closed and the convex hull F' of the point measures at x_1,\dots,x_k is compact, it follows that the constrained set F:=F'\cap G_\mathrm{fin}(C) is compact. Bauer’s maximum principle then shows that \tilde\mu\mapsto\int f\mathrm{d}\tilde\mu attains a minimum on F at an extreme point \nu of F. Note that \nu is an extreme point of G_\mathrm{fin}(C), because F' is a face of the simplex P and so F is a face of G_\mathrm{fin}(C). Hence

The inclusion \operatorname{ext} G_\mathrm{fin}(C)\subset G_\mathrm{a.i.}(C), proved in Corollary 4.7 (2), implies g_\mathrm{a.i.}(C)\leq g_{\operatorname{ext},\mathrm{fin}}(C). Hence g_\mathrm{a.i.}(C)\leq g_\mathrm{fin}(C) by (Proof), hence g_\mathrm{a.i.}(C)=g_\mathrm{fin}(C).

Secondly, to study arbitrary measures in P, we assume that \mathbf{p} and f are measurable and f is bounded below. Let \mathbf{q}\in\mathbb{R}^d and \mu\in G(\mathbf{q}). Then \mu\in Q and \mathbf{q}=\int\mathbf{p}\mathrm{d}\mu. If c:=\int f\mathrm{d}\mu is finite, then the Richter-Tchakaloff theorem [schmuedgen17, Theorem 1.24], [shapiro01, Lemma 3.1] shows that there is a finitely atomic measure \nu\in P\!_\mathrm{fin} such that \mathbf{q}=\int\mathbf{p}\mathrm{d}\nu and c=\int f\mathrm{d}\nu. Hence,

The converse inequality g_\mathrm{fin}(\mathbf{q})\geq g(\mathbf{q}) holds, as P_1\subset Q implies P\!_\mathrm{fin}\subset Q, so g(\mathbf{q})=g_\mathrm{fin}(\mathbf{q}). Taking the infimum over all points \mathbf{q}\in C shows g(C)=g_\mathrm{fin}(C).

Now, the set G_\mathrm{fin}(C) of finitely atomic measures is a face of G(C) by Corollary 4.7 (1) because P_1\subset Q. This shows \operatorname{ext} G_\mathrm{fin}(C)\subset\operatorname{ext} G(C) and g_\mathrm{ext}(C)\leq g_{\operatorname{ext},\mathrm{fin}}(C). Hence g_\mathrm{ext}(C)\leq g_\mathrm{fin}(C) by (Proof). Finally,

Note that \mu\mapsto\int f\mathrm{d}\mu and \mu\mapsto\int p_i\mathrm{d}\mu, i=1,\dots,d are real affine maps on the convex set \tilde P\!_\mathrm{fin}:=\{\mu\in P\!_\mathrm{fin}:\int f\mathrm{d}\mu<\infty\}. Hence, \tilde g_\mathrm{fin}\colon \mathbb{R}^d\to[-\infty,+\infty],

is convex by Theorem 1 and Example 1 in [rockafellar74]. And so is g_\mathrm{fin}=\tilde g_\mathrm{fin}. The equality g_\mathrm{a.i.}=g_\mathrm{fin} is shown in Theorem 4.21 as the singletons \{\mathbf{q}\} are closed for all \mathbf{q}\in\mathbb{R}^d.

Let f be bounded below by a \mathbf{p}-convex function, say h\circ\mathbf{p}\leq f and h\colon\mathbb{R}^d\to(-\infty,+\infty] is convex. Jensen’s inequality [rockafellar70, Theorem 4.3] shows that for every \mu\in P\!_\mathrm{fin} we have

Minimizing for a fixed \mathbf{q}\in\mathbb{R}^d the right-hand side of h(\mathbf{q})\leq\int f\mathrm{d}\mu over all \mu\in P\!_\mathrm{fin} that satisfy \mathbf{q}=\int\mathbf{p}\mathrm{d}\mu, we get -\infty<h\leq g_\mathrm{fin} pointwise. For every x\in X, the constraint \mathbf{p}(x)=\int\mathbf{p}\mathrm{d}\mu is satisfied by the point measure \mu=\delta_x, hence

Thus, g_\mathrm{fin}\circ\mathbf{p} is a \mathbf{p}-convex lower bound to f, so g_\mathrm{fin}\circ\mathbf{p}\leq \operatorname{env}_\mathbf{p} f. Maximizing for a fixed x\in X the left-hand side of h\circ\mathbf{p}(x)\leq g_\mathrm{fin}\circ\mathbf{p}(x) over all convex functions h\colon\mathbb{R}^d\to(-\infty,+\infty] that satisfy h\circ\mathbf{p}\leq f, we conclude \operatorname{env}_\mathbf{p} f\leq g_\mathrm{fin}\circ\mathbf{p}.

This follows immediately from Proposition 4.26 and Theorem 4.21.