In mathematics, Fatou's lemma establishes an inequality relating the Lebesgue integral of the limit inferior of a sequence of functions to the limit inferior of integrals of these functions.  The lemma is named after Pierre Fatou. 
Fatou's lemma can be used to prove the Fatou–Lebesgue theorem and Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem. 
  Standard statement
 In what follows, 
 denotes the 
-algebra of Borel sets on 
. 
  Theorem—Fatou's lemma. Given a measure space 
 and a  set 
 let 
 be a sequence of 
-measurable non-negative functions 
. Define the function 
 by 
 for every 
. Then 
 is 
-measurable, and 
 
 where the integrals and the Limit inferior may be infinite. 
   Fatou's lemma remains true if its assumptions hold 
-almost everywhere. In other words, it is enough that there is a null set 
 such that the values 
 are non-negative for every 
  To see this, note that the integrals appearing in Fatou's lemma are unchanged if we change each function on 
. 
 Proof
 Fatou's lemma does not require the monotone convergence theorem, but the latter can be used to provide a quick and natural proof.  A proof directly from the definitions of integrals is given further below. 
 Via the Monotone Convergence Theorem
 let 
.  Then: 
 - the sequence 
 is pointwise non-decreasing at any x and  
, 
.
 Since  
 
,
 and infima and suprema of measurable functions are measurable we see that 
 is measurable. 
By the Monotone Convergence Theorem and property (1), the sup and integral may be interchanged: 
 
 where the last step used property (2). 
 From "first principles"
 To demonstrate that the monotone convergence theorem is not "hidden", the proof below does not use any properties of Lebesgue integral except those established here and the fact that the functions 
 and 
 are measurable. 
Denote by 
 the set of simple 
-measurable functions 
 such that  
 on 
. 
  Monotonicity— 
 - If 
 everywhere on 
 then 
 
 - If 
 and 
 then 
 
 - If f is nonnegative and 
, where 
 is a non-decreasing chain of 
-measurable sets, then 
 
   Proof 1. Since 
 we have 
 
 By definition of Lebesgue integral and the properties of supremum, 
 
 2. Let 
 be the indicator function of the set 
 It can be deduced from the definition of Lebesgue integral that 
 
 if we notice that, for every 
 
 outside of 
 Combined with the previous property, the inequality 
 implies 
 
 3. First note that the claim holds if f is the indicator function of a set, by monotonicity of measures.  By linearity, this also immediately implies the claim for simple functions. 
Since any simple function supported on Sn is simple and supported on X, we must have  
 
.
 For the reverse, suppose g ∈ SF(f) with 
  By the above,  
 
   Now we turn to the main theorem 
  Proof Recall the closed intervals generate the Borel σ-algebra.  Thus it suffices to show, for every 
, that 
.  Now observe that 
 ![{\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}g_{n}^{-1}([t,+\infty ])&=\left\{x\in X\mid g_{n}(x)\geq t\right\}\\[3pt]&=\left\{x\in X\;\left|\;\inf _{k\,\geq \,n}f_{k}(x)\geq t\right.\right\}\\[3pt]&=\bigcap _{k\,\geq \,n}\left\{x\in X\mid f_{k}(x)\geq t\right\}\\[3pt]&=\bigcap _{k\,\geq \,n}f_{k}^{-1}([t,+\infty ])\end{aligned}}}](./_assets_/9c4629e8eef562fad7dbba39d6bff54ca975e36f.svg)
 Every set on the right-hand side is from 
, which is closed under countable intersections.  Thus the left-hand side is also a member of 
. 
Similarly, it is enough to verify that 
, for every 
.  Since the sequence 
 pointwise non-decreases, 
 
.
    Step 2—Given a simple function 
 and a real number 
, define 
 
 Then 
, 
, and 
. 
   Proof Step 2a. To prove the first claim, write s as a weighted sum of indicator functions of disjoint sets: 
 
.
 Then 
 
.
 Since the pre-image 
 of the Borel set 
 under the measurable function 
 is measurable, and 
-algebras are closed under finite intersection and unions, the first claim follows. 
Step 2b. To prove the second claim, note that, for each 
 and every 
, 
 
Step 2c. To prove the third claim, suppose for contradiction there exists 
 
 Then 
, for every 
. Taking the limit as 
, 
 
 This contradicts our initial assumption that 
. 
    Step 3—From step 2 and monotonicity, 
 
    Step 4—For every 
, 
 
.
   Proof Indeed, using the definition of 
, the non-negativity of 
, and the monotonicity of Lebesgue integral, we have 
 
.
 In accordance with Step 4, as 
 the inequality becomes 
 
.
 Taking the limit as 
 yields 
 
,
 as required. 
    Step 5—To complete the proof, we apply the definition of Lebesgue integral to the inequality established in Step 4 and take into account that 
: 
 
   The proof is complete. 
 Examples for strict inequality
 Equip the space 
 with the Borel σ-algebra and the Lebesgue measure. 
  
  ![{\displaystyle f_{n}(x)={\begin{cases}{\frac {1}{n}}&{\text{for }}x\in [0,n],\\0&{\text{otherwise.}}\end{cases}}}](./_assets_/bf508e0cccac351160fdf49494d4f3711f15edfe.svg)
 These sequences 
 converge on 
 pointwise (respectively uniformly) to the zero function (with zero integral), but every 
 has integral one. 
 The role of non-negativity
 A suitable assumption concerning the negative parts of the sequence f1, f2, . . . of functions is necessary for Fatou's lemma, as the following example shows. Let S denote the half line [0,∞) with the Borel σ-algebra and the Lebesgue measure. For every natural number n define 
 ![{\displaystyle f_{n}(x)={\begin{cases}-{\frac {1}{n}}&{\text{for }}x\in [n,2n],\\0&{\text{otherwise.}}\end{cases}}}](./_assets_/032ca178360ef3bcbb8ef9ee885942640791cad1.svg)
 This sequence converges uniformly on S to the zero function and the limit, 0, is reached in a finite number of steps: for every x ≥ 0, if n > x, then fn(x) = 0.  However, every function fn has integral −1.  Contrary to Fatou's lemma, this value is strictly less than the integral of the limit (0). 
As discussed in § Extensions and variations of Fatou's lemma below, the problem is that there is no uniform integrable bound on the sequence from below, while 0 is the uniform bound from above. 
 Reverse Fatou lemma
 Let f1, f2, . . . be a sequence of extended real-valued measurable functions defined on a measure space (S,Σ,μ). If there exists a non-negative integrable function g on S such that fn ≤ g for all n, then 
 
 Note: Here g integrable means that g is measurable and that 
. 
 Sketch of proof
 We apply linearity of Lebesgue integral and Fatou's lemma to the sequence 
  Since 
 this sequence is defined 
-almost everywhere and non-negative. 
 Extensions and variations of Fatou's lemma
 Integrable lower bound
 Let 
 be a sequence of extended real-valued measurable functions defined on a measure space 
. If there exists an integrable function 
 on 
 such that 
 for all 
, then 
 
 Proof
 Apply Fatou's lemma to the non-negative sequence given by 
. 
 Pointwise convergence
 If in the previous setting the sequence 
  converges pointwise to a function 
 
-almost everywhere on 
, then 
 
 Proof
 Note that 
 has to agree with the limit inferior of the functions 
 almost everywhere, and that the values of the integrand on a set of  measure zero have no influence on the value of the integral. 
 Convergence in measure
 The last assertion also holds, if the sequence 
 converges in measure to a function 
. 
 Proof
 There exists a subsequence such that 
 
 Since this subsequence also converges in measure to 
, there exists a further subsequence, which converges pointwise to 
 almost everywhere, hence the previous variation of Fatou's lemma is applicable to this subsubsequence. 
 Fatou's Lemma with Converging Measures
 Measures with setwise convergence 
In all of the above statements of Fatou's Lemma, the integration was carried out with respect to a single fixed measure 
. Suppose that 
 is a sequence of measures on the measurable space 
 such that (see Convergence of measures) 
 
.
 Then, with 
 non-negative integrable functions and 
 being their pointwise limit inferior, we have 
 
   | Proof  | 
  We will prove something a bit stronger here. Namely, we will allow   to converge  -almost everywhere on a subset   of  . We seek to show that    Let     .  Then μ(E-K)=0 and       Thus, replacing   by   we may assume that   converge to   pointwise on  . Next, note that for any simple function   we have      Hence, by the definition of the Lebesgue Integral, it is enough to show that if   is any non-negative simple function less than or equal to  , then       Let a be the minimum non-negative value of φ. Define      We first consider the case when  .  We must have that   is infinite since        where M is the (necessarily finite) maximum value of that   attains.  Next, we define      We have that      But   is a nested increasing sequence of functions and hence, by the continuity from below  ,    .  Thus,     .  At the same time,       proving the claim in this case.  The remaining case is when  . We must have that   is finite. Denote, as above, by   the maximum value of   and fix   Define      Then An is a nested increasing sequence of sets whose union contains  . Thus,   is a decreasing sequence of sets with empty intersection. Since   has finite measure (this is why we needed to consider the two separate cases),      Thus, there exists n such that       Therefore, since      there exists N such that       Hence, for        At the same time,       Hence,       Combining these inequalities gives that      Hence, sending   to 0 and taking the liminf in  , we get that      completing the proof.    | 
 Asymptotically uniform integrable functions 
The following results use the notion asymptotically uniform integrable (a.u.i). A sequence 
 of measurable 
-valued functions is a.u.i with respect to a sequence of measures 
 if 
 
Weakly converging measures 
A sequence of measures 
 on a metric space 
 converges weakly to a finite measure 
 on M if, for each bounded continuous function 
 on 
, 
 
  Measures with convergence in total variation 
A sequence of finite measures 
 on a measurable space 
 converges in total variation to a measure 
 on 
 if 
 
  Theorem[2]—Let 
 be a measurable space, 
 be a sequence of measures on 
 converging in total variation to a measure 
, and 
 be a sequence of measurable 
-valued functions on 
, and 
 be a measurable 
-valued function. Assume that 
 and 
 Then 
 
 if and only if the following two statements hold: 
 - (i) for each 
,  
 as 
, and, therefore, there exists a subsequence 
 such that 
 for 
-a.e. 
;  - (ii) 
 is a.u.i. with respect to 
. 
   Fatou's lemma for conditional expectations
 In probability theory, by a change of notation, the above versions of Fatou's lemma are applicable to sequences of random variables X1, X2, . . . defined on a probability space 
; the integrals turn into expectations. In addition, there is also a version for conditional expectations. 
 Standard version
 Let X1, X2, . . . be a sequence of non-negative random variables on a probability space 
 and let 
 be a sub-σ-algebra. Then 
 
   almost surely.
 Note: Conditional expectation for non-negative random variables is always well defined, finite expectation is not needed. 
 Proof
 Besides a change of notation, the proof is very similar to the one for the standard version of Fatou's lemma above, however the monotone convergence theorem for conditional expectations has to be applied. 
Let X denote the limit inferior of the Xn. For every natural number k define pointwise the random variable 
 
 Then the sequence Y1,  Y2, . . . is increasing and converges pointwise to X. For k ≤ n, we have Yk ≤ Xn, so that 
 
   almost surely
 by the monotonicity of conditional expectation, hence 
 
   almost surely,
 because the countable union of the exceptional sets of probability zero is again a null set. Using the definition of X, its representation as pointwise limit of the Yk, the monotone convergence theorem for conditional expectations, the last inequality, and the definition of the limit inferior, it follows that almost surely 
 ![{\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\mathbb {E} {\Bigl [}\liminf _{n\to \infty }X_{n}\,{\Big |}\,{\mathcal {G}}{\Bigr ]}&=\mathbb {E} [X|{\mathcal {G}}]=\mathbb {E} {\Bigl [}\lim _{k\to \infty }Y_{k}\,{\Big |}\,{\mathcal {G}}{\Bigr ]}=\lim _{k\to \infty }\mathbb {E} [Y_{k}|{\mathcal {G}}]\\&\leq \lim _{k\to \infty }\inf _{n\geq k}\mathbb {E} [X_{n}|{\mathcal {G}}]=\liminf _{n\to \infty }\,\mathbb {E} [X_{n}|{\mathcal {G}}].\end{aligned}}}](./_assets_/13169cd09a4372a20eb250f3d617c3623bfacabc.svg)
  Let X1, X2, . . . be a sequence of random variables on a probability space 
 and let 
 be a sub-σ-algebra. If the negative parts 
 
 are uniformly integrable with respect to the conditional expectation, in the sense that, for ε > 0 there exists a c > 0 such that 
 
,
 then 
 
   almost surely.
 Note: On the set where 
 
 satisfies 
 ![{\displaystyle \mathbb {E} [\max\{X,0\}\,|\,{\mathcal {G}}]=\infty ,}](./_assets_/11b354af5729d85d5b7f584bac0edc000ed0f6e6.svg)
 the left-hand side of the inequality is considered to be plus infinity. The conditional expectation of the limit inferior might not be well defined on this set, because the conditional expectation of the negative part might also be plus infinity. 
 Proof
 Let ε > 0. Due to uniform integrability with respect to the conditional expectation, there exists a c > 0 such that 
 ![{\displaystyle \mathbb {E} {\bigl [}X_{n}^{-}1_{\{X_{n}^{-}>c\}}\,|\,{\mathcal {G}}{\bigr ]}<\varepsilon \qquad {\text{for all }}n\in \mathbb {N} ,\,{\text{almost surely}}.}](./_assets_/8ca3bf9b4f2b18c99ab5fb278b2fa046d649f839.svg)
 Since 
 
 where x+ := max{x,0} denotes the positive part of a real x, monotonicity of conditional expectation (or the above convention) and the standard version of Fatou's lemma for conditional expectations imply 
 
   almost surely.
 Since 
 
 we have 
 
   almost surely,
 hence 
 
   almost surely.
 This implies the assertion. 
 References
  - Carothers, N. L. (2000). Real Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 321–22. ISBN 0-521-49756-6.
  - Royden, H. L. (1988). Real Analysis (3rd ed.). London: Collier Macmillan. ISBN 0-02-404151-3.
  - Weir, Alan J. (1973). "The Convergence Theorems". Lebesgue Integration and Measure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 93–118. ISBN 0-521-08728-7.
 
  | 
|---|
| Basic concepts |  | 
|---|
| Sets |  | 
|---|
| Types of measures |  | 
|---|
| Particular measures |  | 
|---|
| Maps |  | 
|---|
| Main results |  | 
|---|
| Other results |  | 
|---|
| Applications & related |  | 
|---|