Existence of Stein Kernels under a Spectral Gap, and
Discrepancy Bounds

arXiv:1703.07707v2 [math.PR] 8 Mar 2018

Thomas A. Courtade∗ , Max Fathi† and Ashwin Pananjady∗
∗

UC Berkeley, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences
CNRS & Université Paul Sabatier, Institut de Mathématiques de Toulouse

†

March 9, 2018

Abstract
We establish existence of Stein kernels for probability measures on Rd
satisfying a Poincaré inequality, and obtain bounds on the Stein discrepancy
of such measures. Applications to quantitative central limit theorems are
discussed, including a new CLT in Wasserstein distance W2 with optimal
rate and dependence on the dimension. As a byproduct, we obtain a stable
version of an estimate of the Poincaré constant of probability measures under
a second moment constraint. The results extend more generally to the setting
of converse weighted Poincaré inequalities. The proof is based on simple
arguments of calculus of variations.
Further, we establish two general properties enjoyed by the Stein discrepancy, holding whenever a Stein kernel exists: Stein discrepancy is strictly
decreasing along the CLT, and it controls the skewness of a random vector.

1

Introduction

What is known as Stein’s method is a vast array of concepts and techniques for
proving quantitative convergence of sequences of random variables to some limit.
These ideas originated in the work of Stein [47, 48], and have found many applications in the study of quantitative central limit theorems, Poisson and geometric
approximation, concentration of measure, random matrix theory and free probability. We refer to the survey [45] for an overview of the topic.
In this work, we shall be interested in one particular concept used in this
setting: Stein kernels (also known as Stein factors) and their use in proving quantitative central limit theorems. To this end, let ν be a probability measure on Rd .
A matrix-valued function τν : Rd −→ Md (R) is said to be a Stein kernel for ν
(with respect to the standard Gaussian measure γ on Rd ) if for any smooth test
function ϕ taking values in Rd , we have
Z
Z
x · ϕdν = hτν , ∇ϕiHS dν
(1)
1

2
where h·, ·iHS stands for the usual Hilbert-Schmidt scalar product on Md (R). For
applications, Rit generally suffices to consider the restricted class of test functions
ϕ satisfying (|ϕ|2 + k∇ϕk2HS )dν < ∞, in which case both integrals in (1) are
well-defined as soon as τν ∈ L2 (ν), provided ν has finite second moments. We
shall adopt this convention throughout.
In parts of the literature, the notion of Stein kernel is replaced by the relation
Z
Z
x · ∇ϕdν = hτν , Hess ϕiHS dν
(2)
for all smooth real-valued functions ϕ. This notion is slightly weaker compared to
(1) since it only requires test functions that are gradients, but for some applications
it still suffices. Our results will hold for either definition, but we shall adopt the
stronger notion (1) throughout since the improvement comes for free.
The motivation behind the definition is that, since the Gaussian measure is
the only probability distribution satisfying the integration by parts formula
Z
Z
x · ϕdγ = div(ϕ)dγ,
(3)
one can take the identity matrix, denoted by Id, as a Stein kernel if and only if
the measure ν is equal to γ. In this way, the Stein kernel can be seen as a measure
of how far ν is from being a standard Gaussian measure in terms of how much it
violates the integration by parts formula (3). Those kernels appear implicitly in
many works on Stein’s method, and have recently been the topic of more direct
investigations [4, 40, 41, 42, 33].
The question of when a Stein kernel exists for a particular measure ν is a
nontrivial one, and only a few results are known along this direction. In dimension
one, it suffices to have mean zero and a density with connected support to ensure
existence. Indeed, if ν has a density p that does not vanish on the (possibly
infinite) interval (a, b), then the Stein kernel τν is unique up to sets of measure
zero, and is given by
Z ∞
1
yp(y)dy.
(4)
τν (x) :=
p(x) x

In general, however, Stein kernels are not necessarily unique when they exist. A
more detailed study of the one-dimensional case and its generalizations to nonGaussian reference measures can be found in [34].
In higher dimension, existence of Stein kernels has been previously studied
using the tools of Malliavin calculus [39]. In particular, if a random variable
can be realized as the image of a Gaussian random variable by a C ∞ function
with derivatives of at most polynomial growth, then a Stein kernel exists. Another explicit formula for one-dimensional random variables that arise as smooth
functions of some Gaussian vector was also obtained in [22]. However, given a
probability distribution, it may be difficult to find such a smooth function. For
example, Brenier’s theorem in optimal transport [20] tells us that under fairly
general assumptions there exists a map sending a Gaussian random variable onto

3
the distribution considered, but in general it is not smooth enough to apply the
arguments of [39].
Our main results are roughly divided into two categories: sufficient conditions
for existence of Stein kernels in arbitrary dimension, and general bounds on the
so-called Stein discrepancy which hold whenever a Stein kernel exists. Specifically,
we first show that if ν satisfies a Poincaré inequality, or more generally a converse
weighted Poincaré inequality, then a Stein kernel exists. This affirmatively answers a question raised in [42]. In doing so, we obtain bounds on the associated
Stein discrepancy for measures satisfying a Poincaré inequality. These estimates
are dimension-free and depend only on the second moment and the Poincaré constant. We further establish two properties enjoyed by Stein discrepancy that hold
in general, whenever a Stein kernel exists. First, like entropy and Fisher information, Stein discrepancy is monotone along the CLT. Second, Stein discrepancy is
bounded from below by the skewness of a random vector.
These results lead to optimal rates of convergence in the multidimensional
central limit theorem in Wasserstein distance W2 , as well as entropic CLTs, with
suboptimal rate. Our main estimate can also be reformulated as a quantitative
improvement of the fact that among all isotropic measures, the standard Gaussian
measure has the best Poincaré constant.

2

On existence of Stein kernels

Let ν be a probability measure on Rd . Henceforth, we make the following assumption:
Assumption. The measure ν is absolutely continuous
with respect to the Lebesgue
R
measure, and has finite second moment, i.e. |x|2 dν < ∞.

We shall work in the Sobolev space Wν1,2 of vector valued functions, which we
define as as the closure of the set of all smooth vector-valued
functions f : Rd −→
R
d
2
2
R in L (ν), with respect to the usual Sobolev norm (|f | + k∇f k2HS )dν. We
also define its T
restriction
to the set of (vector-valued) functions with average zero
 R
1,2
f : f dν = 0 .
Wν,0
:= Wν1,2
Definition 2.1. A function τν : Rd −→ Md (R) is a Stein kernel for ν if for any
ϕ ∈ Wν1,2 equation (1) holds. The Stein discrepancy is defined as
Z
2
S(ν|γ) := inf kτν − Idk2HS dν,

where the infimum is taken over all Stein kernels of ν, and takes value +∞ if no
Stein kernel exists.

One of the main applications of Stein kernels is that bounds on the Stein
discrepancy can be used to obtain rates of convergence in the central limit theorem,
as discussed in Section 4.
We now introduce the functional inequalities we shall use as criteria for existence of Stein kernels.

4
Definition 2.2. A probability measure ν is said to satisfy a Poincaré inequality
with constant Cp if for any locally lipschitz function f ∈ L2 (ν) we have
Z
Varν (f ) ≤ Cp |∇f |2 dν.
A measure satisfying a Poincaré inequality is also said to have spectral gap.
The terminology comes from the fact that Cp−1 is a lower bound on the smallest
dν
.
positive eigenvalue of the operator −∆ + ∇H · ∇ in L2 (ν), where H = − log dx
There is a vast literature on Poincaré inequalities, with many examples and
abstract results giving sufficient conditions for one to hold. In particular, the class
of measures satisfying a Poincaré inequality is stable under bounded perturbations
and tensor products, and it contains the set of all log-concave probability measures.
A more general sufficient condition for a measure with density e−V to have spectral
gap is
∃a ∈ (0, 1), R ≥ 0, c > 0 such that a|∇V (x)|2 − ∆V (x) ≥ c ∀|x| ≥ R,
which was obtained in [6]. We refer to [5] for more background on Poincaré
inequalities.
We shall also consider a more general type of functional inequalities:
Definition 2.3. A probability measure ν is said to satisfy a converse weighted
Poincaré inequality with weight ω : R −→ R∗+ if for any locally lipschitz f ∈ L2 (ν)
we have
Z
Z
2
inf
(f − c) ωdν ≤ |∇f |2 dν.
c∈R

This definition originates from [15], and was further studied in [21]. Such
inequalities are related to measure concentration for heavy-tailed distributions.
We could incorporate a constant in front of the Dirichlet form in the definition,
but we have chosen to absorb it into the weight to reduce notations, so that a
Poincaré inequality with constant CP corresponds to a converse weighted Poincaré
inequality with constant weight CP−1 .

2.1

Finite Poincaré constant ensures existence of a Stein kernel

Our main result of this section is that a (converse weighted) Poincaré inequality ensures existence of a Stein kernel, and moreover that the Poincaré constant
controls the Stein discrepancy. Stated more precisely,
Theorem 2.4. Assume that ν is centered (i.e. has mean zero) and
R satisfies a
converse weighted Poincaré inequality with weight ω, and such that |x|2 ω −1 dν <
1,2
∞. Then there exists a unique function g ∈ Wν,0
such that τν = ∇g is a Stein
kernel for ν. Moreover,
Z
Z
kτν k2HS dν ≤ |x|2 ω −1 dν.
(5)

5
In particular, if ν is centered and satisfies a Poincaré inequality with constant
Cp , the above result applies and
Z
Z
(6)
kτν k2HS dν ≤ Cp |x|2 dν

so that the Stein discrepancy satisfies
2

S(ν|γ) ≤ (Cp − 2)

Z

|x|2 dν + d

The centering assumption on ν is necessary for the theorem to hold. Indeed,
a necessary condition for existence of a Stein kernel is that ν is centered, seen by
taking ϕ = 1 in the defining equation (1).
In most situations, we shall be using the above bounds for measures satisfying a
Poincaré inequality and with second moment normalized with respect to dimension
(e.g., as is the case for isotropic measures):
d
Corollary 2.5. Let ν be a centered probability measure
R 2 on R satisfying a Poincaré
inequality with constant Cp , normalized so that |x| dν = d. Then

S(ν|γ)2 ≤ d(Cp − 1).

A few remarks are in order:
• The standard Gaussian measure γ has Poincaré constant Cp = 1, so the
above estimates dictate S(γ|γ) = 0, as desired.
• Stein discrepancy is additive on product measures (i.e., S(ν ⊗k |γ ⊗k )2 =
kS(ν|γ)2 ), whereas the Poincaré constant is independent of dimension (i.e.,
Cp (ν ⊗k ) = Cp (ν)). Thus, our estimates are dimension-free in nature.
• A converse weighted Poincaré inequality is by no means necessary for existence of a Stein kernel. In dimension one, the formula (4) works in more
general situations. We will see another multi-dimensional example further
on.
Proof of Theorem 2.4. The
R result follows from an application of the Lax-Milgram
theorem [32]. Indeed, h∇f, ∇hiHS dν is a continuous bi-linear functional on
R
1,2
1,2
Wν,0
× Wν,0
, and dominates the weighted Sobolev norm ω|f |2 + |∇f |2 dν for
non-constant functions by the assumption
that ν satisfies a converse weighted
R
1,2
Poincaré inequality. Finally, f −→ f · xdν on Wν,0
is a continuous linear form
d
since for any ~c = (c1 , .., cd ) ∈ R we have
Z
Z
x · f dν = x · (f − ~c)dν
≤
≤

Z

Z

ω

−1

2

|x| dν

ω

−1

2

|x| dν

1/2 

inf
~c

1/2 Z

Z

ω
2

X

|∇f | dν

2

|fi − ci | dν

1/2

.

1/2

6
1,2
Hence there exists a unique g ∈ Wν,0
such that
Z
Z
h∇g, ∇f iHS dν = x · f dν

(7)

1,2
for any f ∈ Wν,0
, and in particular ∇g is a Stein kernel.
R
R
In addition, g minimizes the functional J(f ) := 12 k∇f k2HS dν − x · f dν.
Indeed,
Z
Z
1
2
J(f ) =
k∇f kHS dν − x · f dν
2
Z
Z
1
2
=
k∇f kHS dν − h∇g, ∇f iHS dν
2
Z
1
k∇gk2HS dν = J(g)
≥−
2

where we have just applied (7) to integrate by parts to go from the first to the
second line, and applied the Cauchy-Schwarz inequalityR for the final lower bound,
while applying again (7) with f = g yields J(g) = − 12 k∇gk2HS dν. The CauchySchwarz inequality and the converse weighted Poincaré inequality for ν then give,
after a simple computation,
Z
1/2 Z
1/2
Z
Z
1
1
2
2
2
2 −1
k∇gkHS dν = J(g) ≥
|∇g| dν −
ω|g| dν
|x| ω dν
−
2
2
(8)
Z
1
ω −1 |x|2 dν,
(9)
≥−
2
establishing (5).

Remark 2.1. Even when ν does not satisfy a (converse weighted)
Poincaré
inR
R
1,2
equality, if g ∈ Wν,0
minimizes the functional J : f 7→ 12 k∇f k2HS − x · f dν,
then ∇g is a Stein Kernel for ν. To see this, consider a perturbation in the
1,2
direction h ∈ Wν,0
, which gives:
0 ≤ J(g + εh) − J(g)
Z

Z
Z
ε2
|∇h|2 dν.
=ε
h∇g, ∇hidν − x · hdν +
2
R
R
Letting ε ↓ 0 shows that h∇g, ∇hidν ≥ x · hdν. Replacing h by −h gives the
reverse inequality.
Hence, a sufficient condition for existence of a Stein kernel is that the functional
J has a minimum. Stated another way, there exists a finite constant c > 0 such
that
Z
2
Z
1,2
≤ c k∇f k2HS dν ∀f ∈ Wν,0
,
(10)
x · f dν

and moreover, equality is attained for some nonzero function g. This should be
compared against the definition of the Poincaré inequality.

7
Converse weighted Poincaré inequalities have been established for a large class
of heavy-tailed probability distributions via Lyapunov function techniques in [21].
Here are some examples from [15, 21]:
Corollary 2.6. Stein kernels exist for the following probability distributions on
Rd :
(i) Generalized Cauchy distributions νβ (dx) := Z −1 (1+|x|2 )−β for β > max((d+
4)/2, d);
p
(ii) ProbabilityR measures of the form ν(dx) = Z −1 e−V (x) with V convex and
p > 0, as soon as |x|2+2(1−p) dν < ∞. In particular, subexponential distributions
p
with density proportional to e−|x| with p ∈ (0, 1).
Note that these examples typically do not satisfy a classical Poincaré inequality.
Of course, there exist probability measures that satisfy the (10) condition
without satisfying a (converse weighted) Poincaré inequality. For example, if we
consider two disjoint closed annuli C1 and C2 that are centered around the origin,
then the uniform probability measure on C1 ∪ C2 does not satisfy a converse
weighted Poincaré inequality, yet it does satisfy (10).
We conclude this section by noting that, as pointed out in [33], for log-concave
probability measures (which always satisfy a Poincaré inequality [6]) there is a
reverse version of our inequality:
Proposition 2.7. Let ν be a centered log-concave measure. Then for some numerical constant C,
Cp ≤ C(1 + S(ν|γ)2 ).
This statement, combined with our main result, tells us that for log-concave
measures, controlling the Stein discrepancy and controlling the Poincaré constant
are equivalent. At first glance, the above estimate does not capture the dimensionfree nature of the Poincaré constant. This may be a necessary downside of such
bounds, since if we consider a measure of the form ν = γd−1 ⊗ ν̃ it behaves in the
correct way, as the Poincaré constant is at least as bad as that of the projection
along the worst direction.
As mentioned in [33], Proposition 2.7 is obtained by combining the moment
bound of Theorem 2.8 in [33] and Milman’s results on obtaining estimates on
Poincaré constants of log-concave measures by the worst variance of 1-lipschitz
functions [38].

2.2

Extension to non-Gaussian reference measures

Theorem 2.4 also generalizes to Stein kernels with non-Gaussian reference measures. Such an extension is natural in the framework of the generator approach
to Stein’s method, where an integration by parts formula for a given measure is
obtained by finding a Markov generator that leaves the considered measure invariant. This approach was pioneered in [9, 28]. Stein’s method for the approximation

8
of non-Gaussian reference measures has had some successful applications in the
study of convergence of Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithms [27] and for generalizations of the fourth moment theorem [3]. The Gaussian functional inequalities
of [33] were also extended to a class of non-Gaussian measures, using arguments
from Bakry-Émery calculus.
We can extend Theorem 2.4 to the situation where the Gaussian measure is
replaced by a general reference measure µ = e−V dx, where V : Rd → R is a
smooth function. In this situation, a Stein kernel of a measure ν with respect to
µ is defined by the relation
Z
Z
∇V · ϕdν = hτν , ∇ϕiHS dν ∀ϕ ∈ Wν1,2 .
(11)
Applying the same arguments as for the Gaussian case, we obtain
Theorem 2.8. Let µ = e−V dx, where V : Rd → R is Rsmooth. Assume that
νR satisfies a Poincaré inequality with constant Cp , that ∇V dν = 0 and that
|∇V |2 dν < ∞. Then there exists a Stein kernel for ν, relative to µ, of the form
τν = ∇g for some g ∈ Wν1,2 . Moreover, we have the bound
Z
Z
kτν k2HS dν ≤ Cp |∇V |2 dν.
(12)
R
Note that for polynomial potentials V , the finiteness of |∇V |2 dν automatically follows from the Poincaré inequality. As in the previous section, this result
can easily be generalized to cover measures satisfying a converse weighted Poincaré
inequality.

3
3.1

General bounds on the Stein discrepancy
Stein discrepancy controls skewness

Above, it was shown that in presence of a suitable Poincaré inequality, the Stein
discrepancy is controlled from above by second moments. Here, we establish a
complementary lower bound on the Stein discrepancy in terms of skewness:
Theorem 3.1. Let X = (X1 , X2 , . . . , Xd ) have law ν. If ν is isotropic with finite
fourth moment, then
d
1X
2
|E[Xi3 ]|2 .
S(ν|γ) ≥
9
i=1

Proof. First, we shall reduce the problem to the one-dimensional case. Let τ be
a Stein factor for ν. Then τ i (x) := E[τii (X)|Xi = x] is a Stein kernel for Xi .

9
Moreover, we have
Z
2
S(ν|γ) =
≥

X

1≤i,j≤d

Z X
d
i=1

|τi,j − δi,j |2 dν

|τi,i − 1|2 dν ≥

d
X
i=1

E[|τ i (Xi ) − 1|2 ] ≥

d
X
i=1

S(νi |γi )2 ,

where νi is the law of Xi and γi is the ith marginal of γ. Hence it is enough to
prove the theorem when d = 1.
Now let X be a real-valued random variable with mean zero and unit variance,
n
P
Xi , where the Xi ’s are
and let νn be the law of the standardized sum √1n
i=1

independent copies of X. Then

S(ν|γ)2 ≥ nS(νn |γ)2

(13)

for any n ≥ 1 (see for example Section 2.5 in [33] and Theorem 3.2 in the next
section). Moreover, it was established in [33] that the Stein discrepancy is always
larger than the Wasserstein distance W2 to the standard Gaussian measure. Hence
S(νn |γ)2 ≥ W2 (νn , γ)2 for all n ≥ 1. Finally, Rio established in [44] that under
√
our assumptions, nW2 (νn , γ) −→ 13 |E[X 3 ]|, which concludes the proof.

3.2

Strict Monotonicity of the Stein Discrepancy in the CLT

Monotonicity of information measures along the CLT have a long history, going
back to Shannon’s conjecture on the monotonicity of the
P entropy, which was eventually resolved in [2]. More specifically, if Sn = √1n ni=1 Xi , where X1 , . . . , Xn
are i.i.d. isotropic random vectors, then both the entropy and Fisher information
of Sn with respect to the standard Gaussian measure are non-increasing in n. Following Artstein, Ball, Barthe and Naor’s proof of this fact, several generalizations
and alternative proofs have been discovered [50, 46, 35, 36, 37, 23].
Since Stein discrepancy relates to both Fisher information and entropy in
various ways [33], it is natural to conjecture that it also is non-increasing along the
CLT. It turns out that this is indeed the case and, in fact, it is strictly decreasing.
The following generalizes (13) along these lines:
Theorem 3.2. Let P
ν be an isotropic probability measure on Rd , and let νn denote
1
the law of Sn = √n ni=1 Xi , where X1 , . . . , Xn are i.i.d. with law ν. Then
S(νn |γ)2 ≤

m
S(νm |γ)2
n

1 ≤ m ≤ n.

Proof. For m ≥ 1, let τm denote a Stein kernel associated with Sm . We may
assume that such a τm exists, since if it does not, the claim is vacuous. We shall
first show that for all n ≥ m, the function
τn (sn ) = E[τm (Sm )|Sn = sn ]

(14)

10
p
is a valid Stein kernel for Sn . Indeed, for sn = m
n sm + s̃, any smooth function ϕ
evaluated on sn may also be considered as a smooth function of sm for each fixed
s̃. In particular, the chain rule directly yields
r
m
∇sm ϕ(sn ) =
∇s ϕ(sn ).
n n
p
Therefore, starting with linearity of expectation and defining S̃ := Sn − m
n Sm ,
we may write
r
n
EhSn , ϕ(Sn )i =
EhSm , ϕ(Sn )i
m
r
n
=
E[E[hSm , ϕ(Sn )i|S̃]]
m
r
n
E[E[hτm (Sm ), ∇sm ϕ(Sn )iHS |S̃]]
=
m
= E[hτm (Sm ), ∇sn ϕ(Sn )iHS ]
= EhE[τm (Sm )|Sn ], ∇ϕ(Sn )iHS ,

establishing (14) is a valid Stein kernel.
Following [23], if a function ϑ : Rd → R satisfies Eϑ(Sm ) = 0, then
m
1 ≤ m ≤ n.
(15)
E[|E[ϑ(Sm )|Sn ]|2 ] ≤ E[|ϑ(Sm )|2 ]
n
This inequality is due to Dembo, Kagan and Shepp [26]; see also Kamath and
Nair [31]. Now, E[τm (Sm )] = Id, so a direct application of (15) to the coordinates
of τm − Id yields
m
Ekτn (Sn ) − Id k2HS = E[kE[τm (Sm ) − Id |Sn ]k2HS ] ≤ Ekτm (Sm ) − Id k2HS .
n
Taking the infimum over all valid Stein kernels τm , τn finishes the proof.
Remark 3.1. The same result holds if (2) is adopted as the definition of a Stein
kernel.

4
4.1

Applications
Quantitative central limit theorems

We shall now discuss some applications of the bounds to quantitative central limit
theorems in Wasserstein distance W2 , which is defined as
Z
W2 (µ, ν)2 := inf |x − y|2 dπ(x, y),
π

where the infimum is taken over all couplings π of the probability measures µ and
ν. We refer the reader to the textbook [51] for more information about Wasserstein
distances and optimal transport.

11
Theorem 4.1. Let X1 , ..Xn be independent centered, isotropic random variables.
Assume that the law of Xi satisfies a Poincaré inequality with constant Ci , and
n
P
Xi . Then
let νn be the law of √1n
i=1

n
d X
W2 (νn , γ) ≤ 2
(Ci − 1).
n
2

i=1

In particular, if the Xi are i.i.d., and their law ν is centered, isotropic and satisfies
a Poincaré inequality with constant Cp , then
d(Cp − 1)
.
n
√
We remark that the rate W2 (νn , γ) = O(1/ n) in the CLT for i.i.d. random
variables is known to be optimal in general. Moreover, the dependence on the
dimension is sharp, since it cannot be improved for product measures. To our
knowledge, this seems to be the first result with sharp dependence on both the
dimension and on n for W2 and with assumptions satisfied by a large class of
probability measures. A similar result can be obtained with converse weighted
Poincaré inequalities, with the same sharp rate but a less explicit prefactor.
In the i.i.d. case, there are several similar results already present in the literature. In dimension one, a more general result has been obtained by Rio in [43, 44],
where a finite fourth moment suffices. He also obtained convergence in stronger
transport distances when the random variable has a finite exponential moment,
which is a weaker assumption than our use of a Poincaré inequality. The proofs
rely on an explicit representation of transport maps involving the repartition function of ν, which is unavailable in higher dimensions. Subsequently, Bobkov [11]
combined optimal rates in the entropic CLT [14] with Talagrand’s inequality to
√
conclude O(1/ n) convergence of W2 (νn , γ) in dimension one, but left open the
problem in higher dimensions.
In the multidimensional setting, Zhai [53] has recently
established that for
√
W2 (νn , γ)2 ≤

n)
√
random variables in dimension d, we have W2 (νn , γ) ≤ 5 dβ(1+log
, under the
n
boundedness assumption |X| ≤ β almost surely. His assumptions are not directly
comparable with ours, since bounded random variables do not necessarily satisfy a Poincaré inequality, while there are many examples of unbounded random
variables that do satisfy one. However, it is true that every bounded random
variable regularized via convolution with a Gaussian measure of arbitrarily small
variance does satisfy a Poincaré inequality [10], which suggests that Zhai’s result
may potentially be improved to have optimal dependence on both dimension and
n. Unfortunately, the bounds on the Poincaré constant obtained in [10] are exponential in β, so it is not clear whether Zhai’s result may be recovered from our
own via this route. In situations where both estimates apply, the bound in the
present work will typically be smaller. For example, for high-dimensional product
measures, the Poincaré constant is independent of the dimension, while β would

12
√
be of order of d. Moreover, we eliminate the extra log n factor. It may be relevant to point out that both our assumptions and those of [53] fit in the framework
of random variables with a finite exponential moment.
Also in higher dimensions, Bonis showed in [16] that, under the moment constraint EkXk2+m < ∞ for m ∈ [0, 2], we have the asymptotic rate W2 (νn , γ) =
O(n−1/2+(2−m)/4 ). However, in the case m = 2, the prefactor (which does not
appear explicitly in Bonis’ work) seems to have a suboptimal dependence on the
dimension d [17].
In dimension 1, and for log-concave measures in higher dimension, the works
[7, 8, 30] can be used to obtain a sharp rate of convergence in relative entropy
when a Poincaré inequality holds, which implies convergence in W2 . These results
however would rely on a bound on the relative entropy of ν, which in general
would give a worse prefactor in the bound.
Proof of Theorem 4.1. The proof hinges on the fact that
#
"
n
n
1 X
1 X
τi (Xi ) | √
Xi = x
τ̄n (x) := E
n
n
i=1

is a Stein kernel for the law of

√1
n

n
P

i=1

Xi , where τi is a Stein kernel for the law

i=1

of Xi . In the i.i.d. case, we already proved this fact in the proof of Theorem 3.2,
and the proof in the non-identicaly distributed case is exactly the same. As a
consequence, using the fact that conditional expectation is an L2 -projection,
Z
2
2
W2 (νn , γ) ≤ S(νn ) ≤ |τ̄n − Id |2 dνn
Z
n
1 X
≤ 2
hτi (xi ) − Id, τj (xj ) − Ididνi (xi )dνj (xj )
n
i,j=1
n Z
1 X
= 2
|τi (xi ) − Id |2 dνi (xi )
n
i=1

n
d X
(Ci − 1)
≤ 2
n
i=1

where the last bound is obtained by applying Theorem 2.4. This concludes the
proof.
It is also possible to extend the method to weakly dependent random variables,
using a standard splitting trick:
Theorem 4.2. Let (Xi ) be a sequence of centered isotropic random variables, and
assume that there exists a k such that as soon as |i − j| > k then Xi and Xj are
independent. Assume moreover that E[Xi ·Xj ] = 0 for all distinct i, j, and that the

13
law of each random variable satisfies a Poincaré inequality with uniform constant
Cp . Then
d(Cp − 1) + 2d(k − 1)
W2 (νn , γ)2 ≤
⌊n/k⌋
n
P
Xi .
where νn is the law of Sn := √1n
i=1

As an example, this theorem applies to Xi :=

k−1
Q

fj (Yi+j ) with the Yi i.i.d.

j=0

random variables satisfying some Poincaré inequality and the fj bounded lipschitz
functions with mean zero and unit variance.
Proof. We can define the partial sums
m−1
1 X
j
Sm
:= √
Xi(k+1)+j
m
i=0

j
for j = 1, .., k. Then each Sm
is a sum of independent random variables, so we
can apply Theorem 4.1 to obtain convergence in W2 distance to the Gaussian, i.e.

W2 (νj,m , γ)2 ≤

(Cp − 1)d
m

j
where νj,m is the law of Sm
. Since Skm =

W2 (νkm

, γ)2

≤

1
k

P

W2 (νj,m

W2 (νkm+j , γ)2 ≤

, γ)2

≤

(Cp −1)d
.
m

√1
k

k
P

j
Sm
, it is easy to check that

j=1

Moreover for any j ∈ {1, .., k − 1},

(Cp − 1)d 2d(k − 1)
km
2dj
W2 (νkm , γ)2 +
≤
+
,
km + j
km + j
m
km

where we split the sum and used the fact that the Wasserstein distance is bounded
by the second moment to control the contribution of Xmk+1 , .., Xmk+j .

4.2

Entropy bounds

R
dν
denote the entropy of ν relative to γ and Iγ (ν) :=
Let Hγ (ν) := dν log dγ
R
|∇ log f |2 dγ denote the relative Fisher information. The HSI inequality of [33]
states that


S(ν)2
Iγ (ν)
Hγ (ν) ≤
log 1 +
.
2
S(ν)2

As a consequence, we also have the following rate of convergence in the entropic
CLT:

Proposition 4.3. Assume that ν satisfies a Poincaré inequality with constant Cp ,
and satisfies the Fisher information bound Iγ (ν) ≤ αd. Then we have


d(Cp − 1)
αn
log 1 +
Hγ (νn ) ≤
2n
(Cp − 1)

14
Convergence to the Gaussian measure in entropy is strictly stronger than convergence in W2 , due to Talagrand’s inequality [49]. The choice of scaling in the
dimension for the upper bound on the Fisher information reflects the fact that for
product measures, it is of order d. In dimension one, the actual rate of convergence
in the entropic CLT is asymptotically 1/n under a fourth moment condition [13],
and non-asymptotically 1/n if the entropy of a single random variable is bounded
[14] (with a prefactor that is exponential in the entropy). When the Poincaré
inequality holds a non-asymptotic rate was obtained in [8, 1], and extended to
multi-dimensional random vectors having log-concave density in [7]. Related results in dimension one were obtained in [30].

4.3

Fisher information bounds

In this section, we shall combine our main estimate with results of [42] to obtain
bounds on the Fisher information of a sum of independent random variables,
to which we add a small Gaussian noise. To thisR end, recall that the Fisher
dν
.
information of ν relative to γ is defined as Iγ (ν) := |∇ log f |2 dγ, where f = dγ
After applying Theorem V.3 in [42], we get
Proposition 4.4. Let (Xi ) be a collection of independent centered isotropic ran√ P
n
√
Xi ,
dom variables in Rd with Poincaré constants Ci . Let Wn := 1 − tZ + √nt
i=1

where Z is a standard Gaussian random variable independent of the Xi . If νnt denotes the law of Wn , then
Iγ (νnt )

n
X
t2
(Ci − 1)d.
≤ 2
n (1 − t)
i=1

In particular, if the Xi satisfy a Poincaré inequality with same constant Cp , then
Iγ (νnt ) ≤

t2 (Cp − 1)d
.
n(1 − t)

Due to Cramer’s law [24], weak convergence of νnt to γ is equivalent to convern
P
Xi . Unfortunately, Cramer’s law is unstable in general [12], so
gence of √1n
i=1

we cannot directly deduce quantitative closeness of X to a Gaussian if X + Z is
close to Gaussian for a general random variable X (although the counterexamples
of [12] do not seem to satisfy a Poincaré inequality, so it may be that under such
an extra assumption Cramer’s law would be stable).
Rates of convergence in Fisher information of order O(n−1 ) in dimension one
when the information of a single variable is finite and under a Poincaré inequality
have been obtained in [30]. In higher dimension, a quantitative bound on the
difference between Fisher informations of ν1 and ν2 was obtained in [29], but does
not readily lead to a quantitative central limit theorem.

15
Remark 4.1. Instead of using the results of [42], it is possible to derive upper
bounds on Iγ (νnt ) by W2 (νn , γ)2 using the gradient flow structure of the OrnsteinUhlenbeck flow, as done for example in Theorem 24.16 of [52], and apply our
bounds on the rate of convergence in W2 distance to conclude.

4.4

Stability of the Poincaré constant under a second moment
constraint

Combined with the previously mentioned fact that Stein discrepancy controls W2
distance to γ, Corollary 2.5 implies the following estimate:
4.5. Let ν be a centered probability measure on Rd , normalized so that
RTheorem
|x|2 dν = d. Then its Poincaré constant Cp satisfies
Cp ≥ 1 +

W2 (ν, γ)2
.
d

This estimate is a quantitative reinforcement of the fact that among all probability measures with the same second moment, the Gaussian has the best Poincaré
constant. More generally, it is aR reinforcement of the fact that, given a sequence
of centered measures (νn ) with |x|2 dνn = d, if their Poincaré constants converge
to 1, then νn weakly converges to the standard Gaussian [18]. Once again, we
note that this estimate depends optimally in the dimension.
In a different direction, De Philippis and Figalli [25] recently showed a similar
quantitative stability result among a different class of measures: for densities that
are of the form e−V γ with V convex, the Gaussian has the worst Poincaré constant,
and we have a deficit of the form 1 − Cp ≤ ǫ =⇒ W1 (ν, γ) ≤ C(d, α)| log ǫ|−1/4+α
for any α > 0, for ǫ small enough. Our results are not directly comparable,
since they concern completely different classes of measures. We just note that
the dependence in ǫ in the result of [25] is not expected to be sharp. Indeed, in
dimension one they show that W1 (ν, γ) ≤ Cǫ. In spirit, this question is also similar
to the stability problem for the Szegö-Weinberger inequality, that was solved in
[19].
Finally, we observe that Theorem 2.4 leads to the more general analogous
result for measures satisfying a converse weighted Poincaré inequality. Although it
is easily seen that such inequalities are stable under log-bounded transformations
of the measure [21], the following appears to be the first quantitative stability
result along these lines:
4.6. Let ν be a centered probability measure on Rd , normalized so that
RTheorem
2
|x| dν = d. If ν satisfies a converse weighted Poincaré inequality with weight
function ω, then
Z
W2 (ν, γ)2
1
.
|x|2 ω −1 dν ≥ 1 +
d
d
By Hölder’s inequality, the following corollary is immediate:

16
4.7. Let ν be a centered probability measure on Rd , normalized so that
RCorollary
|x|2 dν = d. If ν satisfies a converse weighted Poincaré inequality with weight
function ω, then for Hölder conjugate exponents 1 ≤ p, q ≤ ∞,
k d1 |x|2 kLp (ν) kω −1 kLq (ν) ≥ 1 +

W2 (ν, γ)2
.
d

Of course, Theorem 4.5 coincides with the special case where p = 1 and q = ∞.
Acknowledgments This work benefited from support from the France-Berkeley
fund and the Labex CIMI. M. F. was partly supported by NSF FRG grant
DMS-1361122 and Project EFI (ANR-17-CE40-0030) of the French National Research Agency (ANR). T.C. and A.P. were supported in part by NSF Grants
CCF-1528132 and CCF-0939370 (Center for Science of Information). We thank
Thomas Bonis, Thomas Gallouët, Michel Ledoux and Ivan Nourdin for their advice and comments, and the anonymous referee for remarks that helped improve
this manuscript.

References
[1] S. Artstein, K. Ball, F. Barthe and A. Naor, On the Rate of Convergence
in the Entropic Central Limit Theorem, Probab. Theory Relat. Fields 129,
381-390 (2004).
[2] S. Artstein, K. Ball, F. Barthe and A. Naor, Solution of Shannon’s Problem
on the Monotonicity of Entropy, Journal of the AMS 17, 975-982 (2004).
[3] E.Azmoodeh, S.Campese and G.Poly, Fourth moment theorems for Markov
diffusion generators. Journal of Functional Analysis, Volume 266, Issue 4
(2013).
[4] H. Airault, P. Malliavin, and F. Viens. Stokes formula on the Wiener space
and n-dimensional Nourdin-Peccati analysis. Journal of Functional Analysis,
258(5):1763–1783, (2010).
[5] D. Bakry, I. Gentil and M. Ledoux, Analysis and geometry of Markov diffusion operators. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften 348, (2014).
[6] D. Bakry, F. Barthe, P. Cattiaux and A. Guillin, A simple proof of the
Poincaré inequality in a large class of probability measures including logconcave cases. Elec. Comm. Prob. Vol. 13 60–66, (2008).
[7] K. Ball and V. H. Nguyen, Entropy jumps for isotropic log-concave random
vectors and spectral gap, Studia Mathematica, vol. 213, no. 1, pp. 81–96,
(2012).
[8] K. Ball, F. Barthe, and A. Naor, Entropy jumps in the presence of a spectral
gap, Duke Mathematical Journal, vol. 119, no. 1, pp. 41–63, (2003).

17
[9] A. D. Barbour, Stein’s method for diffusion approximations. Probab. Theory
Relat. Fields 84 (3), 297–322 (1990).
[10] J.B. Bardet, N. Gozlan, F. Malrieu and P.A. Zitt, Functional inequalities
for Gaussian convolutions of compactly supported measures: explicit bounds
and dimension dependence. Bernoulli, Vol. 24, No. 1, 333-353 (2018).
[11] Sergey G. Bobkov. Entropic approach to E. Rio’s central limit theorem for
W2 transport distance. Statistics and Probability Letters, 83(7):1644–1648,
(2013).
[12] Bobkov, S. G., Chistyakov, G. P., Gotze, F. Entropic instability of Cramer’s
characterization of the normal law. Selected Works of Willem van Zwet, pp.
231-242, Sel. Works Probab. Stat., Springer, New York, (2012).
[13] S. G. Bobkov, G. P. Chistyakov and F. Götze, Rate of convergence and
Edgeworth-type expansion in the entropic central limit theorem. Ann. Probab.
41 no. 4, pp. 2479-2512 (2013).
[14] S. G. Bobkov, G. P. Chistyakov and F. Götze, Berry-Esseen bounds in the
entropic central limit theorem. Probab. Theory Related Fields 159, pp. 435–
478 (2014).
[15] S. Bobkov and M. Ledoux, Weighted Poincar-type inequalities for Cauchy
and other convex measures Ann. Probability 37, 403-427 (2009).
[16] T. Bonis, Rates in the Central Limit Theorem and diffusion approximation
via Steins Method. Arxiv preprint (2016).
[17] T. Bonis, personal communication.
[18] A.A. Borovkov and S.A. Utev. On an inequality and a related characterisation
of the normal distribution. Theory of Probability and Its Applications, 28:219–
228, (1984).
[19] L. Brasco and A. Pratelli, Sharp stability of some spectral inequalities, Geometric and Functional Analysis, Vol. 22, Issue 1, pp 107–135 (2012).
[20] Y. Brenier, Polar factorization and monotone rearrangement of vector-valued
functions. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 44, no.4, pp. 375-417 (1991).
[21] P. Cattiaux , N. Gozlan , A. Guillin, C. Roberto. Functional inequalities
for heavy tails distributions and application to isoperimetry. Electronic J.
Probab. 15 : 346–385, (2010).
[22] S. Chatterjee, Fluctuations of eigenvalues and second order Poincaré inequalities. Probab. Theory Related Fields, 143, 1-40, (2009).

18
[23] T. A. Courtade, Monotonicity of Entropy and Fisher Information: A quick
proof via maximal correlation. Communications on Information and Systems,
vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 111–115, (2016).
[24] Cramér, H. Ueber eine Eigenschaft der Normalen Verteilungsfunktion. Math.
Zeitschrift, 41, 405–414 (1936).
[25] G. De Philippis and A. Figalli, Rigidity and stability of Caffarelli’s logconcave perturbation theorem. Nonlinear Anal. 154, 59–70. (2017).
[26] A. Dembo, A. Kagan, and L. A. Shepp, Remarks on the maximum correlation
coefficient, Bernoulli, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 343–350, (2001).
[27] P. Diaconis, Steins method for Markov chains: first examples. Lecture Notes–
Monograph Series Volume 46, 26-41, (2004).
[28] F. Götze, On the rate of convergence in the multivariate CLT. Ann. Probab
19, 724–739, (1991).
[29] O. Johnson, Information theory and the central limit theorem. Vol. 8. London:
Imperial College Press, (2004).
[30] O. Johnson and A. Barron, Fisher information inequalities and the central
limit theorem, Probab. Theory Relat. Fields 129, no. 3, 391–409 (2004).
[31] S. Kamath and C. Nair, “The strong data processing constant for sums of iid
random variables,” Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Symposium
on Information Theory, Hong Kong, (2015).
[32] Lax, P. D.; Milgram, A. N., “Parabolic equations”, Contributions to the
theory of partial differential equations, Annals of Mathematics Studies, 33,
Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, pp. 167–190 (1954).
[33] Ledoux, M., Nourdin, I., Peccati, G. Stein’s method, logarithmic Sobolev and
transport inequalities Geom. Funct. Anal. 25, 256–306 (2015).
[34] Ley, C., Reinert, G., and Swan, Y. Approximate computation of expectations:
a canonical Stein operator. to appear in Probability Surveys (2017).
[35] M. Madiman and A. R. Barron, The monotonicity of information in the
central limit theorem and entropy power inequalities, Proceedings of the 2006
IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, Seattle, Washington,
(2006).
[36] M. Madiman and A. R. Barron, Generalized entropy power inequalities and
monotonicity properties of information, IEEE Transactions on Information
Theory, vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 2317–2329, (2007).

19
[37] M. Madiman and F. Ghassemi, “The entropy power of a sum is fractionally
superadditive,” Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Symposium on
Information Theory, Seoul, Korea, (2009).
[38] E. Milman, On the role of convexity in isoperimetry, spectral gap and concentration. Invent. Math. 177, 1–43 (2009).
[39] I. Nourdin, G. Peccati, Normal approximations with Malliavin calculus: from
Stein’s method to universality. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge
University Press, (2012).
[40] I. Nourdin, G. Peccati and A. Réveillac. Multivariate normal approximation using Stein’s method and Malliavin calculus. Ann. I.H.P. Proba. Stat.,
46(1):45–58, (2010).
[41] I. Nourdin, G. Peccati and Y. Swan, Entropy and the fourth moment phenomenon. J. Funct. Anal. 266, no. 5, 3170–3207 (2014).
[42] I. Nourdin, G. Peccati and Y. Swan, Integration by parts and representation of information functionals. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International
Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT), Honolulu, HI. Pages 2217–2221
(2014).
[43] E. Rio, Upper bounds for minimal distances in the central limit theorem.
Ann. Inst. H. Poincar Probab. Statist. Vol. 45, 3, 802–817 (2009).
[44] E. Rio, Asymptotic constants for minimal distance in the central limit theorem Electron. Commun. Probab. Vol. 16, no. 9, 96–103 (2011).
[45] N. Ross, Fundamentals of Stein’s method. Probability Surveys Vol. 8, 210–293
(2011).
[46] D. Shlyakhtenko, “Shannon’s monotonicity problem for free and classical entropy,” Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., vol. 104, no. 39, pp. 15254–15258 (2007).
[47] C. Stein, A bound for the error in the normal approximation to the distribution of a sum of dependent random variables. In Proceedings of the Sixth
Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability (Univ. California, Berkeley, Calif., 1970/1971), Vol. II: Probability theory, pages 583–
602, Berkeley, Calif., 1972. Univ. California Press.
[48] C. Stein. Approximate computation of expectations. Institute of Mathematical Statistics Lecture Notes - Monograph Series, 7. Institute of Mathematical
Statistics, Hayward, CA (1986).
[49] M. Talagrand. Transportation cost for Gaussian and other product measures.
Geom. and Funct. Anal. 6, 587–600 (1996).

20
[50] A. M. Tulino and S. Verdú, Monotonic decrease of the non-Gaussianness of
the sum of independent random variables: A simple proof, IEEE Transactions
on Information Theory, vol. 52, no. 9, pp. 4295–4297, (2006).
[51] C. Villani, Topics in optimal transportation. Graduate Studies in Mathematics Vol. 58; (2003).
[52] C. Villani, Optimal Transport, old and new. Grundlehren der mathematischen
Wissenschaften, 338 (2009).
[53] A. Zhai, A multivariate CLT in Wasserstein distance with near optimal convergence rate. To appear inProbab. Theory Relat. Fields (2017).

