of the analytical tool rather than the essence of the problem led him to dem<strong>and</strong> the existenceof finite moments of any order for the r<strong>and</strong>om variables under his consideration.Liapunov offered a formulation of this limit theorem free from the restriction justmentioned. His methods, <strong>and</strong> the generality of his result created such a great impression, thateven to our day the proposition in his wording is often called the main, or the central limittheorem of probability theory 7 .From among the other directions of research followed by the Petersburg school the socalledMarkov chains should be especially cited. This peculiar term screens one of the mostgeneral <strong>and</strong> fruitful patterns of natural processes. One of the main concepts for the entiremodern natural science is the notion of phase space of the possible states of a studied system.A change of an isolated system is supposed to be deterministic <strong>and</strong> free from the so-calledaftereffect if, during time interval , the system certainly transfers from state to state =F(; ) where F is some definite single-valued function of the initial state <strong>and</strong> the interval oftime. For r<strong>and</strong>om processes without aftereffect, given <strong>and</strong> , we only have, instead of thefunction F(; ), a definite probability distribution depending on <strong>and</strong> for the state toreplace the state after units of time.Markov considered the simplest case of such processes in which the phase space onlyconsisted of a finite number of states 1 , 2 , …, n . In addition, he restricted his attention toconsidering processes, as we say, with discrete time, i.e., only observed after = 1, 2, 3, …Under these conditions, the studied probability distributions are given by transitionprobabilities p ij( ) for the time interval from state i to state j with the recurring formulasp ij( +1) =kp ik( ) p kj(1)allowing the calculation of p ik( ) for any = 1, 2, 3, … given the matrix (p ij ) of the transitionprobabilities p ij = p ij (1) for an elementary unit time interval.This simple pattern nevertheless allows to study all the main general properties ofprocesses without aftereffect. In particular, Markov ascertained the first rigorously provedergodic theorem: if all p ij are positive, then p ij ( ) p j as where p j do not depend on i.I have not in the least exhausted even the main achievements of the Petersburg school. Ihave mainly dwelt on its essentially new ideas, <strong>and</strong> sometimes explicated them in asomewhat modernized form so as to show more clearly their influence on the furtherdevelopment of the theory of probability, <strong>and</strong> their importance for mathematical naturalscience. It would have been more difficult to offer, in a popular article, a notion of thetechnical skill, elegance <strong>and</strong> wit of the school’s exceptionally eminent analytical methods.Only with considerable delay, in the 1920s or even the 1930s, the importance of the worksof Chebyshev, Markov <strong>and</strong> Liapunov was quite appreciated in Western Europe. Nowadaysthey are everywhere perceived as the point of departure for the entire further development ofthe theory of probability. In particular, the main Liapunov limit theorem 8 <strong>and</strong> the theory ofMarkov chains were exactly what was most of all needed for a reliable substantiation of thedeveloping statistical physics. That the West had slowly adopted the ideas of the Petersburgschool may perhaps be indeed partly explained by the fact that the school was very remotefrom statistical physics, so that Markov only illustrated the application of his theory of trialsconnected into a chain (the application of Markov chains) by considering the distribution ofvowels <strong>and</strong> consonants in the text of {Pushkin’s} ! (Eugene Onegin) 9 .Hopefully, my last remark will not lead to an impression that the works of the Petersburgschool lacked an animated feeling of connection with the requirements of mathematicalnatural science. A keen sense of reality in formulating mathematical problems was especiallycharacteristic of Chebyshev. Issuing from comparatively special elementary, <strong>and</strong> sometimesrather old-fashioned applied problems, he elicited from them with exceptional insight such
general mathematical concepts that potentially embraced an immeasurably wider circle oftechnical <strong>and</strong> natural-scientific problems.6. The fourth period of the development of probability theory begins in Russia with theworks of Sergei Natanovich Bernstein. With regard to their scope, only the writings of theGerman mathematician now living in the USA, Richard Mises, can be compared with them.They both posed the problems of1) A rigorous logical substantiation of the theory of probability.2) The completion of research into limit theorems of the type of Laplace <strong>and</strong> Liapunovpropositions leading to the normal law of distribution.3) The use of modern methods of investigation possessing full logical <strong>and</strong> mathematicalvalue for covering, to the greatest possible extent, the new domains of application ofprobability theory.In this last direction, the activity of Mises, who headed a well organized Institute ofApplied Mathematics {in pre-Nazi Germany}, was perhaps even wider than Bernstein’sresearch. The latter, however, offered many specimens of using stochastic methods in mostvarious problems of physics, biology <strong>and</strong> statistics. And in the second, purely mathematicaldirection, Bernstein accomplished his investigations on a considerably higher methodological<strong>and</strong> technical level. He extended the conditions for applying the main limit theorem forindependent r<strong>and</strong>om variables to such a degree of generality that proved to be essentiallyfinal. To him also belong the unsurpassed in generality conditions for applying the main limittheorem to dependent variables as well as the first rigorously proved bivariate limit theorem10 .Finally, with respect to the logical substantiation of the theory of probability, Bernstein isthe author of its first systematically developed axiomatics based on the concept of aqualitative comparison of events according to their higher or lower probabilities. Thenumerical representation itself of probability appears here as a derivative concept. TheAmerican mathematician Koopman has comparatively recently rigorously formalized adevelopment of such a notion.The work of the Moscow school of probability theory began in 1924 (Khinchin,Kolmogorov, Slutsky, with Glivenko, Smirnov, Gnedenko <strong>and</strong> others joining them later).Essential investigations belonging to the range of ideas of this school were also due toPetrovsky, who, with regard to his style, nevertheless remained a pure analyst. In its mainpart (Slutsky began his research independently), the Moscow school was founded by N.N.Luzin’s pupils (Khinchin <strong>and</strong> Kolmogorov) who issued from transferring the methods of themetric theory of functions of a real variable to a new field. Exactly these methods havedetermined their success in the first two directions of the work done in Moscow:1) The determination of the necessary <strong>and</strong> sufficient conditions for the applicability of thelaw of large numbers to sums of independent terms; the discovery of extremely generalconditions for the applicability of the so-called strong law of large numbers to the same sums11 ; the necessary <strong>and</strong> sufficient conditions for the convergence of a series of independentterms; Khinchin’s so-called law of the iterated logarithm.2) The creation of an axiomatics of the theory of probability, very simple with regard to itsformal structure <strong>and</strong> embracing its entire applications, both classical <strong>and</strong> most modern ones.3) As stated above, limit theorems of the Liapunov type dem<strong>and</strong> more special analytictools. In this direction, the Moscow school applied the method of characteristic functions (t) = Ee it .Here, as a result of Khinchin’s <strong>and</strong> Gnedenko’s investigations, it was completely ascertainedto which laws of distribution can the sums of independent terms tend if the size of each term,
- Page 4 and 5: [3] I bear in mind the well-known p
- Page 6 and 7: successes of physical statistics. B
- Page 8 and 9: classes of independent facts whose
- Page 10 and 11: distribution is a corollary of the
- Page 12 and 13: examine in the first place the curv
- Page 14 and 15: 12. According to Bortkiewicz’ ter
- Page 16 and 17: generality, the similarities taking
- Page 18 and 19: one on another, as well as the corr
- Page 20 and 21: is inapplicable because the right s
- Page 22 and 23: Instead, Slutsky introduced new not
- Page 24 and 25: abandoned in August 1936, but it is
- Page 26 and 27: last decades, mathematicians more o
- Page 28 and 29: charged with making the leading ple
- Page 30 and 31: motion and a number of others) are
- Page 32 and 33: phenomena. It is self-evident that
- Page 34 and 35: Such new demands were formulated in
- Page 36 and 37: The addition of independent random
- Page 38 and 39: automatic lathes, etc. Here, the ma
- Page 40 and 41: 11. Kolmogorov, A.N. Grundbegriffe
- Page 42 and 43: period 1 and remained, until the ap
- Page 46 and 47: with probability approaching unity,
- Page 48 and 49: logic. The ensuing vagueness in his
- Page 50 and 51: 2. Gnedenko, B.V. (1949), On Lobach
- Page 52 and 53: will be sufficient, although not ne
- Page 54 and 55: nlimk = 1P(| k (n) - m k (n) | > H
- Page 56 and 57: favorite classical issue as the gam
- Page 58 and 59: and some quite definite (not depend
- Page 60 and 61: influenced by a construction that a
- Page 62 and 63: P ij (1) = p ij (1) , P ij (t) =kP
- Page 64 and 65: 4.2d. Bebutov [1; 2] as well as Kry
- Page 66 and 67: are yet no limit theorems correspon
- Page 68 and 69: described, from the viewpoint that
- Page 70 and 71: conditional variance and determined
- Page 72 and 73: Romanovsky [45] and Kolmogorov [46]
- Page 74 and 75: Let S be the general population wit
- Page 76 and 77: Part 1. Russian/Soviet AuthorsAmbar
- Page 78 and 79: 2. On necessary and sufficient cond
- Page 80 and 81: Gnedenko, B.V., Groshev, A.V. 1. On
- Page 82 and 83: 52. ( (Mathematical Principl
- Page 84 and 85: Kozuliaev, P.A. 1. Sur la répartit
- Page 86 and 87: Obukhov, A.M. 1. Normal correlation
- Page 88 and 89: 30. Généralisations d’un théor
- Page 90 and 91: 22. Alcune applicazioni dei coeffic
- Page 92 and 93: 10. A.N. Kolmogorov. The Theory of
- Page 94 and 95:
Kuznetsov, Stratonovich & Tikhonov
- Page 96 and 97:
In the homogeneous case H s t = H t
- Page 98 and 99:
to such a generalization. He only s
- Page 100 and 101:
In the particular case of a charact
- Page 102 and 103:
as it is usual for the modern theor
- Page 104 and 105:
1. {The second reference to Pugache
- Page 106 and 107:
Smirnov, Romanovsky and others made
- Page 108 and 109:
determined the precise asymptotic c
- Page 110 and 111:
for finite values of N, M and R 2 .
- Page 112 and 113:
Mikhalevich’s findings by far exc
- Page 114 and 115:
Uch. Zap. = Uchenye ZapiskiUkr = Uk
- Page 116 and 117:
Khinchin, A.Ya. 43. Math. Ann. 101,
- Page 118 and 119:
7. DAN 115, 1957, 49 - 52.Pinsker,
- Page 120 and 121:
Anderson, T.W., Darling, D.A. (1952
- Page 122 and 123:
Statistical problems in radio engin
- Page 124 and 125:
observations for its power with reg
- Page 126 and 127:
securing against mistakes (A.N. Kry
- Page 128 and 129:
of the others, then its distributio
- Page 130 and 131:
In Kiev, in the 1930s, N.M. Krylov