Computational Framework for Bézier Distributions

Proof of Lemma 1. The boundary conditions hold by definition of \mathcal{C}_n. Non-negativity of P_z' on [0,1] follows from P_z'(t; n, \mathbf{z}) = n \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} B_{n-1,i}(t)\, \Delta z_i. For P_x', the boundary conditions give \Delta x_j > 0 for some j\in \{0,...,n-1\}; since B_{n-1,i}(t) > 0 on (0,1), it follows that P_x'(t; n, \mathbf{x}) = n \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} B_{n-1,i}(t)\, \Delta x_i \ge n\, B_{n-1,j}(t)\, \Delta x_j > 0 on (0,1).

Proof of Theorem 1. By the endpoint interpolation property, ({\mathbf{x}}, {\mathbf{z}}) inherits the boundary conditions from \mathcal{S}_{\tilde{n}}. Since P_x(\,\cdot\,;\, \tilde{n},\, \tilde{\mathbf{x}}) is strictly increasing and P_z(\,\cdot\,;\, \tilde{n},\, \tilde{\mathbf{z}}) is non-decreasing on [0,1], we have that for i = 0, \ldots, n-1, \tfrac{i}{n} \leq \tfrac{i+1}{n} yields

which combined with the boundary values gives ({\mathbf{x}}, {\mathbf{z}}) \in \mathcal{C}_n. To prove (1), observe that by construction {\mathbf{p}}_i = ({x}_i,\, {z}_i)^\top = \tilde{\mathbf{P}}(\tfrac{i}{n}), so {\mathbf{P}}(t) \;=\; \sum_{i=0}^{n} B_{n,i}(t)\, \tilde{\mathbf{P}}\!\left(\tfrac{i}{n}\right). Since each coordinate of \tilde{\mathbf{P}} is a polynomial in t, \tilde{\mathbf{P}} \in C^\infty([0,1];\, \mathbb{R}^2), and the extreme value theorem provides that

Fix t \in [0,1] and apply Taylor’s theorem with integral remainder to P_x(\,\cdot\,;\, \tilde{n},\, \tilde{\mathbf{x}}) at t:

where the remainder is given by R_i(t) \;:=\; \int_t^{i/n}\!\! P_x''(s;\, \tilde{n},\, \tilde{\mathbf{x}})\bigl(\tfrac{i}{n} - s\bigr)\, ds and satisfies

Multiplying (Proof) by B_{n,i}(t) and summing over i=0,...,n, and using the Bernstein moment identities

it follows that P_x(t;\, n,\, {\mathbf{x}}) - P_x(t;\, \tilde{n},\, \tilde{\mathbf{x}} ) = \sum_{i=0}^{n} B_{n,i}(t)\, R_i(t). Moreover, using the bound (Proof) and the third Bernstein moment identity we obtain

An analogous argument applied to P_z(\,\cdot\,;\, \tilde{n},\, \tilde{\mathbf{z}}) yields \bigl| P_z(t;\, n,\, {\mathbf{z}})- P_z(t;\, \tilde{n},\, \tilde{\mathbf{z}})\bigr| \leq \tfrac{\kappa}{2}\tfrac{t(1-t)}{n}, so we obtain

The results then follows by taking the supremum over t \in [0,1] in (Proof).

Proof of Corollary 1. Fix j\in\{1,...,m\}. By the triangle inequality and Theorem 1,

For the remaining term, the mean value theorem applied to P_z(\cdot;\tilde n,\tilde{\mathbf{z}}) and then to P_x(\cdot;\tilde n,\tilde{\mathbf{x}}) (using P_x'\geq\tilde{\delta} and P_x(\tilde{t}_{(j)};\tilde n,\tilde{\mathbf{x}})=X_{(j)}=P_x(t_{(j)};n,\mathbf{x})), together with Theorem 1, yields

Hence \big| P_z(t_{(j)};n,\mathbf{z})-P_z(\tilde{t}_{(j)};\tilde{n},\tilde{\mathbf{z}}) \big|\leq \tfrac{(1+\rho)\kappa}{8n} for every j=1,...,m. Since F_m and P_z take values in [0,1], factoring each squared difference gives

where the last inequality uses \big|2F_m(X_{(j)})-P_z(t_{(j)};n,\mathbf{z})-P_z(\tilde{t}_{(j)};\tilde{n},\tilde{\mathbf{z}})\big|\leq 2.

Proof of Proposition 2. Let \mathbf{w} \in \mathrm{int}(\Delta^{n-1}) and consider \nabla^2 l(\mathbf{w}) = \sum_{j=1}^m \frac{\mathbf{a}_j\mathbf{a}^\top_j}{(\mathbf{a}^\top_j \mathbf{w})^2} and \nabla^2 h(\mathbf{w}) = \mathrm{diag}(\frac{1}{w_0^2},...,\frac{1}{w_{n-1}^2}), which are well defined since \mathbf{w}>\mathbf{0}. For any \mathbf{v} \in \mathbb{R}^n it holds that

where the first inequality follows from Jensen’s inequality and the second inequality from a_{ji}w_i \leq \mathbf{a}^\top_j \mathbf{w} for j=1,...,m. Thus, we conclude that \mathbf{v}^\top\nabla^2 l(\mathbf{w})\mathbf{v} \leq m\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \frac{ v_i^2}{w_i^2} = m\left[ \mathbf{v}^\top\nabla^2h(\mathbf{w})\mathbf{v}\right].