The whole proof is the sandwich pattern: upper-bound a potential, lower-bound the same potential, compare.
The potential
w(t)= weight vector at the beginning of dayt22:10.Φ(t) = Σᵢ₌₁ⁿ wᵢ(t)— the total weight22:36.- Base case:
Φ(1) = n, since all weights start at 122:36.
Upper bound (shrinkage on mistake days)
- If we are wrong on day
t, then by definition of a weighted majority at least half the total weight sat on the wrong answer24:0524:37. - That half shrinks by
(1 − ε); the other half certainly does not grow, so bound it pessimistically as unchanged24:5725:18. - Result:
Φ(t+1) ≤ (1 − ε/2)·Φ(t)on any day we make a mistake25:18. - By induction over the
M(T)mistake days:Φ(T+1) ≤ n·(1 − ε/2)^{M(T)}26:0526:56. - Applying the standing trick
1 − x ≤ e^{−x}(and1 + x ≤ e^{x}):Φ(T+1) ≤ n · e^{−ε·M(T)/2}26:56.
Lower bound (the weakest one imaginable)
- All weights are non-negative, so the total is at least any single weight:
Φ(T+1) ≥ wᵢ(T)for any experti, in particular the best one28:0028:28. - And
wᵢ(T) = (1 − ε)^{mᵢ(T)}— one factor per mistake expertimade28:28.
Combining
Sandwiching gives 29:32:
(1 − ε)^{mᵢ(T)} ≤ n · (1 − ε/2)^{M(T)}
Take natural logs 29:59:
mᵢ(T)·ln(1 − ε) ≤ M(T)·ln(1 − ε/2) + ln n
The calculus ingredient
-
Taylor's theorem with remainder: expanding
faroundato the linear term leaves errorf''(z)/2 · x²for somezbetweenaandx30:3331:14. -
Expanding
ln(1 − x)about 0 and bounding the derivative on the relevant range yields, forx ∈ (0, ½)31:5332:3033:34:−x − x² ≤ ln(1 − x) ≤ −xThis two-sided bound is exactly why the theorem requires
ε ∈ (0, ½).
Finishing
- Right-hand side:
ln(1 − ε/2) ≤ −ε/234:09. - Left-hand side:
mᵢ(T)·ln(1 − ε) ≥ mᵢ(T)·(−ε − ε²/2)34:5135:13. - Multiply through by
−1, rearrange, and the theorem of the previous topic falls out35:13.
flowchart LR
P["Φ(t) = Σ wᵢ(t)<br/>Φ(1) = n"] --> U["Upper bound<br/>Φ(T+1) ≤ n·e^(−εM/2)"]
P --> L["Lower bound<br/>Φ(T+1) ≥ (1−ε)^(mᵢ)"]
U --> C["Sandwich → take ln"]
L --> C
C --> T["ln(1−x) bounds<br/>(Taylor, x ∈ (0,½))"]
T --> R["M ≤ 2(1+ε)·mᵢ + 2ln n/ε"]