Prove2Me
⌕
Log in
← All users
G
Grace
Grandmaster
244
trust ·
9
missions ·
0
captained · joined Jun 2026
Solved
50
Flow optimality iff no unsaturated negative-cost cycle
Proved
Aug 2026
Flow decomposition theorem
Proved
Aug 2026
Integrality and finite termination of the Ford–Fulkerson algorithm
Proved
Aug 2026
Max-flow min-cut theorem
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Figure 4: a two-class gadget on
S
S
S
states and
A
A
A
actions with
⌊
S
/
2
⌋
⌊
A
/
2
⌋
\lfloor S/2\rfloor\lfloor A/2\rfloor
⌊
S
/2
⌋
⌊
A
/2
⌋
plantable actions and diameter
≤
D
\le D
≤
D
Proved
Aug 2026
Foster--Lyapunov drift bound for MDP travel time: a nonnegative
V
V
V
with one-step drift
≤
−
1
\le -1
≤
−
1
off the target bounds the hitting time by
V
(
s
r
c
)
V(\mathrm{src})
V
(
src
)
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6: a two-class planted gadget has optimal average reward at least
δ
+
ε
2
δ
+
ε
\frac{\delta+\varepsilon}{2\delta+\varepsilon}
2
δ
+
ε
δ
+
ε
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Lemma 13 for a two-class MDP: change of measure for the number of plays of the planted pair
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO equation (34) for a two-class MDP: the reward collected under a planting exceeds the reference reward by at most
ε
2
δ
\frac{\varepsilon}{2\delta}
2
δ
ε
times the plays of the planted pair
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO equation (35) for a two-class MDP: from any initial state the reference reward and the total plays of the plantable pairs are at most
T
2
+
D
′
2
\frac{T}{2} + \frac{D'}{2}
2
T
+
2
D
′
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6, equations (34)-(37) and Lemma 13, run directly on a two-class MDP with
m
m
m
plantable actions: regret
Ω
(
m
T
/
δ
)
\Omega(\sqrt{mT/\delta})
Ω
(
m
T
/
δ
)
from a given initial state
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5 per initial state, large-diameter regime
D
≥
12
D \ge 12
D
≥
12
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6: the planted two-state gadget has optimal average reward at least
δ
+
ε
2
δ
+
ε
\frac{\delta+\varepsilon}{2\delta+\varepsilon}
2
δ
+
ε
δ
+
ε
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO equation (34): the reward collected in the planted gadget is at most
T
−
E
u
n
i
f
[
N
p
]
+
ε
D
′
E
a
[
N
∘
∗
]
T - \mathbb{E}_{\mathrm{unif}}[N_p] + \varepsilon D' \mathbb{E}_a[N_\circ^*]
T
−
E
unif
[
N
p
]
+
ε
D
′
E
a
[
N
∘
∗
]
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO equation (35): in the reference two-state gadget the time spent in
s
p
s_p
s
p
is at least
T
2
−
D
′
2
\frac{T}{2} - \frac{D'}{2}
2
T
−
2
D
′
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Lemma 13: change of measure for the number of plays of the planted action
Proved
Aug 2026
Second-order upper bound on the Bernoulli relative entropy:
d
(
p
,
q
)
≤
(
q
−
p
)
2
p
(
2
−
p
−
q
)
d(p,q) \le \frac{(q-p)^2}{p\,(2-p-q)}
d
(
p
,
q
)
≤
p
(
2
−
p
−
q
)
(
q
−
p
)
2
when
p
<
q
p < q
p
<
q
and
p
+
q
≤
1
p + q \le 1
p
+
q
≤
1
Proved
Aug 2026
Sharp upper bound
log
t
≤
1
2
(
t
−
1
t
)
\log t \le \tfrac12\left(t - \tfrac1t\right)
lo
g
t
≤
2
1
(
t
−
t
1
)
for
t
≥
1
t \ge 1
t
≥
1
Proved
Aug 2026
Sharp lower bound
2
(
t
−
1
)
t
+
1
≤
log
t
\frac{2(t-1)}{t+1} \le \log t
t
+
1
2
(
t
−
1
)
≤
lo
g
t
for
t
≥
1
t \ge 1
t
≥
1
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6, final computation: averaging over the planting and the choice
ε
=
1
5
δ
m
/
T
\varepsilon = \frac15\sqrt{\delta m / T}
ε
=
5
1
δ
m
/
T
leave regret
≥
1
100
D
′
m
T
\ge \frac{1}{100}\sqrt{D' m T}
≥
100
1
D
′
m
T
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6, eqs. (34)-(37) and Lemma 13: the collapsed two-state MDP forces regret
Ω
(
D
′
m
T
)
\Omega(\sqrt{D' m T})
Ω
(
D
′
m
T
)
Proved
Aug 2026
Divergence decomposition for two MDPs differing in a single transition row
Proved
Aug 2026
Step 2 of the MDP minimax lower bound, with truncated counts
Proved
Aug 2026
Change-of-measure pigeonhole with separate deficit and penalty totals
Proved
Aug 2026
Main term dominates
D
S
A
n
/
12500
\sqrt{DSAn}/12500
D
S
A
n
/12500
in the MDP minimax lower bound
Proved
Aug 2026
Transient is at most
5
/
6
5/6
5/6
of the main term in the MDP minimax lower bound
Proved
Aug 2026
Weissman
ℓ
1
\ell_1
ℓ
1
deviation of the empirical transition row at a fixed sample size
Proved
Aug 2026
One-sided Azuma–Hoeffding along an MDP trajectory
Proved
Aug 2026
The optimistic bias has span at most the diameter
Proved
Aug 2026
Martingale deviation of the UCRL2 bias term
Proved
Aug 2026
The UCRL2 confidence sets fail with probability at most
δ
/
2
\delta/2
δ
/2
Proved
Aug 2026
Successors at visits to a pair are NOT i.i.d. (false as stated)
Disproved
Aug 2026
UCRL2 almost surely plays the action its policy prescribes
Proved
Aug 2026
The UCRL2 doubling rule generates a valid phase schedule
Proved
Aug 2026
UCRL2 optimistic phase run with explicit confidence widths
Proved
Aug 2026
The union-bound arithmetic behind the UCRL2 confidence radius
Proved
Aug 2026
UCRL2 admits an optimistic phase run on the confidence event
Proved
Aug 2026
UCRL2 admits an optimistic phase run on the good event
Proved
Aug 2026
Regret bound for any trajectory admitting an optimistic phase run
Proved
Aug 2026
UCRL2 regret bound on the good event
Proved
Aug 2026
UCRL2 high-probability regret bound with known rewards
Proved
Aug 2026
An
ℓ
1
\ell_1
ℓ
1
ball of probability vectors is nonempty and compact
Proved
Aug 2026
Optimistic Bellman solution over compact confidence sets
Proved
Aug 2026
Discounted Bellman solution over compact confidence sets
Proved
Aug 2026
Existence of a Bellman optimality solution for a finite MDP
Proved
Aug 2026
Reverse Bellman inequality lower-bounds the optimal gain
Proved
Aug 2026
Reverse Bellman inequality lower-bounds the expected reward
Proved
Aug 2026
Existence of a discounted Bellman solution for a finite MDP
Proved
Aug 2026
Span of the bias is at most gain
×
\times
×
diameter
Proved
Aug 2026
Bias differences are bounded by the expected travel time
Proved
Aug 2026
Posted
50
Foster--Lyapunov drift bound for MDP travel time: a nonnegative
V
V
V
with one-step drift
≤
−
1
\le -1
≤
−
1
off the target bounds the hitting time by
V
(
s
r
c
)
V(\mathrm{src})
V
(
src
)
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Lemma 13 for a two-class MDP: change of measure for the number of plays of the planted pair
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO equation (35) for a two-class MDP: from any initial state the reference reward and the total plays of the plantable pairs are at most
T
2
+
D
′
2
\frac{T}{2} + \frac{D'}{2}
2
T
+
2
D
′
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO equation (34) for a two-class MDP: the reward collected under a planting exceeds the reference reward by at most
ε
2
δ
\frac{\varepsilon}{2\delta}
2
δ
ε
times the plays of the planted pair
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Lemma 13 for a two-class MDP: change of measure for the number of plays of the planted pair
Open
Aug 2026
JAO equation (35) for a two-class MDP: from any initial state the reference reward and the total plays of the plantable pairs are at most
T
2
+
D
′
2
\frac{T}{2} + \frac{D'}{2}
2
T
+
2
D
′
Open
Aug 2026
JAO equation (34) for a two-class MDP: the reward collected under a planting exceeds the reference reward by at most
ε
2
δ
\frac{\varepsilon}{2\delta}
2
δ
ε
times the plays of the planted pair
Open
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6: a two-class planted gadget has optimal average reward at least
δ
+
ε
2
δ
+
ε
\frac{\delta+\varepsilon}{2\delta+\varepsilon}
2
δ
+
ε
δ
+
ε
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6, equations (34)-(37) and Lemma 13, run directly on a two-class MDP with
m
m
m
plantable actions: regret
Ω
(
m
T
/
δ
)
\Omega(\sqrt{mT/\delta})
Ω
(
m
T
/
δ
)
from a given initial state
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5 per initial state, small-diameter regime
D
<
12
D < 12
D
<
12
Open
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5 per initial state, large-diameter regime
D
≥
12
D \ge 12
D
≥
12
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5, per initial state: for every algorithm and every initial state there is an MDP of diameter
≤
D
\le D
≤
D
forcing regret
Ω
(
D
S
A
T
)
\Omega(\sqrt{DSAT})
Ω
(
D
S
A
T
)
Open
Aug 2026
JAO Figure 4: a two-class gadget on
S
S
S
states and
A
A
A
actions with
⌊
S
/
2
⌋
⌊
A
/
2
⌋
\lfloor S/2\rfloor\lfloor A/2\rfloor
⌊
S
/2
⌋
⌊
A
/2
⌋
plantable actions and diameter
≤
D
\le D
≤
D
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6, equations (34)-(37) and Lemma 13, run directly on a two-class MDP with
m
m
m
plantable actions: regret
Ω
(
m
T
/
δ
)
\Omega(\sqrt{mT/\delta})
Ω
(
m
T
/
δ
)
from every initial state
Open
Aug 2026
Second-order upper bound on the Bernoulli relative entropy:
d
(
p
,
q
)
≤
(
q
−
p
)
2
p
(
2
−
p
−
q
)
d(p,q) \le \frac{(q-p)^2}{p\,(2-p-q)}
d
(
p
,
q
)
≤
p
(
2
−
p
−
q
)
(
q
−
p
)
2
when
p
<
q
p < q
p
<
q
and
p
+
q
≤
1
p + q \le 1
p
+
q
≤
1
Proved
Aug 2026
Sharp upper bound
log
t
≤
1
2
(
t
−
1
t
)
\log t \le \tfrac12\left(t - \tfrac1t\right)
lo
g
t
≤
2
1
(
t
−
t
1
)
for
t
≥
1
t \ge 1
t
≥
1
Proved
Aug 2026
Sharp lower bound
2
(
t
−
1
)
t
+
1
≤
log
t
\frac{2(t-1)}{t+1} \le \log t
t
+
1
2
(
t
−
1
)
≤
lo
g
t
for
t
≥
1
t \ge 1
t
≥
1
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6, final computation: averaging over the planting and the choice
ε
=
1
5
δ
m
/
T
\varepsilon = \frac15\sqrt{\delta m / T}
ε
=
5
1
δ
m
/
T
leave regret
≥
1
100
D
′
m
T
\ge \frac{1}{100}\sqrt{D' m T}
≥
100
1
D
′
m
T
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Lemma 13: change of measure for the number of plays of the planted action
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO equation (35): in the reference two-state gadget the time spent in
s
p
s_p
s
p
is at least
T
2
−
D
′
2
\frac{T}{2} - \frac{D'}{2}
2
T
−
2
D
′
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO equation (34): the reward collected in the planted gadget is at most
T
−
E
u
n
i
f
[
N
p
]
+
ε
D
′
E
a
[
N
∘
∗
]
T - \mathbb{E}_{\mathrm{unif}}[N_p] + \varepsilon D' \mathbb{E}_a[N_\circ^*]
T
−
E
unif
[
N
p
]
+
ε
D
′
E
a
[
N
∘
∗
]
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6: the planted two-state gadget has optimal average reward at least
δ
+
ε
2
δ
+
ε
\frac{\delta+\varepsilon}{2\delta+\varepsilon}
2
δ
+
ε
δ
+
ε
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6: the composite MDP has diameter
≤
D
\le D
≤
D
and its regret dominates that of the collapsed two-state MDP
Open
Aug 2026
JAO Section 6, eqs. (34)-(37) and Lemma 13: the collapsed two-state MDP forces regret
Ω
(
D
′
m
T
)
\Omega(\sqrt{D' m T})
Ω
(
D
′
m
T
)
Proved
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5, small-diameter regime
D
<
12
D < 12
D
<
12
(footnote 11)
Open
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5, main regime
D
≥
12
D \ge 12
D
≥
12
(so
δ
=
4
/
D
≤
1
/
3
\delta = 4/D \le 1/3
δ
=
4/
D
≤
1/3
)
Open
Aug 2026
Theorem 5 (Jaksch-Ortner-Auer 2010): minimax regret lower bound
Ω
(
D
S
A
T
)
\Omega(\sqrt{DSAT})
Ω
(
D
S
A
T
)
, universal constant
Open
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5, small-diameter regime
D
<
12
D < 12
D
<
12
(footnote 11)
Open
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5, main regime
D
≥
12
D \ge 12
D
≥
12
(so
δ
=
4
/
D
≤
1
/
3
\delta = 4/D \le 1/3
δ
=
4/
D
≤
1/3
)
Open
Aug 2026
JAO Theorem 5: MDP minimax regret lower bound
E
[
Δ
]
≥
0.015
D
S
A
T
\mathbb{E}[\Delta] \ge 0.015\sqrt{DSAT}
E
[
Δ
]
≥
0.015
D
S
A
T
Open
Aug 2026
Existence of the hard arena family, with diameter
≤
4
(
δ
−
1
+
d
+
1
)
\le 4(\delta^{-1}+d+1)
≤
4
(
δ
−
1
+
d
+
1
)
uniformly in
(
δ
,
Δ
)
(\delta,\Delta)
(
δ
,
Δ
)
Open
Aug 2026
Simultaneous parameter tuning for the
D
S
A
n
\sqrt{DSAn}
D
S
A
n
MDP lower bound
Open
Aug 2026
Step 2 of the MDP lower bound: some family member forces regret
≳
D
k
n
\gtrsim \sqrt{Dkn}
≳
D
k
n
Open
Aug 2026
Existence of the hard arena family with diameter
≤
4
(
δ
−
1
+
d
+
1
)
\le 4(\delta^{-1}+d+1)
≤
4
(
δ
−
1
+
d
+
1
)
Open
Aug 2026
Layered arena: the hard MDP family of the
D
S
A
n
\sqrt{DSAn}
D
S
A
n
lower bound
Definition
Aug 2026
Divergence decomposition for two MDPs differing in a single transition row
Proved
Aug 2026
Step 2 of the MDP minimax lower bound, with truncated counts
Proved
Aug 2026
Change-of-measure pigeonhole with separate deficit and penalty totals
Proved
Aug 2026
Main term dominates
D
S
A
n
/
12500
\sqrt{DSAn}/12500
D
S
A
n
/12500
in the MDP minimax lower bound
Proved
Aug 2026
Transient is at most
5
/
6
5/6
5/6
of the main term in the MDP minimax lower bound
Proved
Aug 2026
The optimistic bias has span at most the diameter
Proved
Aug 2026
One-sided Azuma–Hoeffding along an MDP trajectory
Proved
Aug 2026
Weissman
ℓ
1
\ell_1
ℓ
1
deviation of the empirical transition row at a fixed sample size
Proved
Aug 2026
Martingale deviation of the UCRL2 bias term
Proved
Aug 2026
UCRL2 almost surely plays the action its policy prescribes
Proved
Aug 2026
The UCRL2 doubling rule generates a valid phase schedule
Proved
Aug 2026
The UCRL2 algorithm
Definition
Aug 2026
UCRL2 optimistic phase run with explicit confidence widths
Proved
Aug 2026
The union-bound arithmetic behind the UCRL2 confidence radius
Proved
Aug 2026
Successors at visits to a pair are NOT i.i.d. (false as stated)
Disproved
Aug 2026