Skip to main content

Foundations

Cramér-Wold Theorem

A multivariate distribution is uniquely determined by all of its one-dimensional projections. This reduces multivariate convergence in distribution to checking univariate projections, and is the standard tool for proving multivariate CLT.

AdvancedTier 2StableSupporting~30 min

Learning position

Place this page in a reading path.

foundations | layer 1 | tier 2. This page has 2 direct prerequisites and 2 published dependents.

What next

Asymptotic Statistics: M-Estimators, Delta Method, LAN

This is the first curated or graph-derived continuation from the current page.

Evidence badge

Claim status

This page has no public Lean mapping yet. Use the evidence page to inspect how claim status labels work.

Show the backing system

Why This Matters

The central limit theorem in one dimension says n(Xˉn−μ)→dN(0,σ2)\sqrt{n}(\bar{X}_n - \mu) \xrightarrow{d} \mathcal{N}(0, \sigma^2). But in statistics and ML, you almost always work with vectors: the MLE θ^∈Rd\hat{\theta} \in \mathbb{R}^d, the gradient ∇L∈Rd\nabla \mathcal{L} \in \mathbb{R}^d, the sample covariance matrix entries. The multivariate CLT says n(Xˉn−μ)→dN(0,Σ)\sqrt{n}(\bar{X}_n - \mu) \xrightarrow{d} \mathcal{N}(0, \Sigma), but proving convergence in distribution for random vectors is harder than for scalars.

The Cramér-Wold theorem solves this: to prove a random vector converges in distribution, it suffices to prove that every one-dimensional projection converges. This reduces a dd-dimensional problem to infinitely many one-dimensional problems, each of which can be handled by the scalar CLT.

The Theorem

Theorem

Cramér-Wold Theorem

Statement

Let Xn,XX_n, X be random vectors in Rd\mathbb{R}^d. Then:

Xn→dXif and only ift⊤Xn→dt⊤Xfor all t∈RdX_n \xrightarrow{d} X \quad \text{if and only if} \quad t^\top X_n \xrightarrow{d} t^\top X \quad \text{for all } t \in \mathbb{R}^d

A multivariate distribution is uniquely determined by the collection of all its one-dimensional marginals (projections onto arbitrary directions).

Intuition

If two distributions agree on every 1D shadow (projection), they must be the same distribution. Conversely, if two sequences of distributions get close in every 1D shadow, they get close in the full dd-dimensional space. The projection t⊤Xt^\top X is a scalar random variable, so you can use all the scalar tools (characteristic functions, univariate CLT, moment conditions) to check convergence direction by direction.

Proof Sketch

The characteristic function of t⊤Xt^\top X is φt⊤X(s)=E[eist⊤X]=φX(st)\varphi_{t^\top X}(s) = \mathbb{E}[e^{i s t^\top X}] = \varphi_X(st), the characteristic function of XX evaluated at stst.

If t⊤Xn→dt⊤Xt^\top X_n \xrightarrow{d} t^\top X for all tt, then by Levy's continuity theorem, φt⊤Xn(1)→φt⊤X(1)\varphi_{t^\top X_n}(1) \to \varphi_{t^\top X}(1) for each tt. But φt⊤Xn(1)=φXn(t)\varphi_{t^\top X_n}(1) = \varphi_{X_n}(t), so φXn(t)→φX(t)\varphi_{X_n}(t) \to \varphi_X(t) for all t∈Rdt \in \mathbb{R}^d. By the multivariate Levy continuity theorem, Xn→dXX_n \xrightarrow{d} X.

Why It Matters

The standard proof of the multivariate CLT uses Cramér-Wold: to show n(Xˉn−μ)→dN(0,Σ)\sqrt{n}(\bar{X}_n - \mu) \xrightarrow{d} \mathcal{N}(0, \Sigma), fix any t∈Rdt \in \mathbb{R}^d and note that t⊤n(Xˉn−μ)=n(t⊤Xˉn−t⊤μ)t^\top \sqrt{n}(\bar{X}_n - \mu) = \sqrt{n}(t^\top \bar{X}_n - t^\top \mu) is a sample mean of scalars t⊤Xit^\top X_i with variance t⊤Σtt^\top \Sigma t. The scalar CLT gives t⊤n(Xˉn−μ)→dN(0,t⊤Σt)t^\top \sqrt{n}(\bar{X}_n - \mu) \xrightarrow{d} \mathcal{N}(0, t^\top \Sigma t). Since this holds for all tt, Cramér-Wold gives the full multivariate result.

This same technique proves asymptotic normality of multivariate MLE, multivariate delta method results, and joint convergence of multiple statistics.

Failure Mode

You must check ALL directions tt, not just the coordinate directions. Checking only t=e1,…,edt = e_1, \ldots, e_d (the standard basis) establishes convergence of each coordinate marginally, but marginal convergence does not imply joint convergence. The full collection of projections captures the dependence structure that marginals miss.

Application: Multivariate CLT Proof

The multivariate CLT follows immediately from the scalar CLT plus Cramér-Wold:

  1. Let X1,…,Xn∈RdX_1, \ldots, X_n \in \mathbb{R}^d be i.i.d. with mean μ\mu and covariance Σ\Sigma.
  2. Fix any t∈Rdt \in \mathbb{R}^d. Define Yi=t⊤XiY_i = t^\top X_i. Then YiY_i are i.i.d. scalars with mean t⊤μt^\top \mu and variance t⊤Σtt^\top \Sigma t.
  3. By the scalar CLT: n(t⊤Xˉn−t⊤μ)→dN(0,t⊤Σt)\sqrt{n}(t^\top \bar{X}_n - t^\top \mu) \xrightarrow{d} \mathcal{N}(0, t^\top \Sigma t).
  4. But N(0,t⊤Σt)\mathcal{N}(0, t^\top \Sigma t) is the distribution of t⊤Zt^\top Z where Z∼N(0,Σ)Z \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \Sigma).
  5. Since step 3 holds for all tt, Cramér-Wold gives n(Xˉn−μ)→dN(0,Σ)\sqrt{n}(\bar{X}_n - \mu) \xrightarrow{d} \mathcal{N}(0, \Sigma).

This proof is three lines once you have the scalar CLT and Cramér-Wold. Without Cramér-Wold, you would need to work directly with multivariate characteristic functions, which is messier.

Common Confusions

Watch Out

Marginal convergence is not the same as joint convergence

If (Xn,Yn)→d(X,Y)(X_n, Y_n) \xrightarrow{d} (X, Y), then Xn→dXX_n \xrightarrow{d} X and Yn→dYY_n \xrightarrow{d} Y (marginals converge). But the converse is false: marginal convergence does not imply joint convergence. Cramér-Wold fixes this by checking ALL linear combinations, not just the individual coordinates. The projection t⊤(Xn,Yn)=t1Xn+t2Ynt^\top (X_n, Y_n) = t_1 X_n + t_2 Y_n captures the dependence between XnX_n and YnY_n.

Watch Out

Cramér-Wold does require all directions, but the proof handles them uniformly

The theorem requires convergence of t⊤Xnt^\top X_n for every t∈Rdt \in \mathbb{R}^d. In a symbolic proof you fix an arbitrary but unspecified tt, derive t⊤Xn→dt⊤Xt^\top X_n \xrightarrow{d} t^\top X using parameters that depend symbolically on tt (e.g., the variance t⊤Σtt^\top \Sigma t in the multivariate CLT proof), and then conclude — because the argument did not use any specific value of tt — that the convergence holds for every tt. This is what people informally mean by "checking a generic tt": one symbolic argument that works for all directions.

What this is not: it is not "check a randomly chosen direction", it is not "check almost every direction", and it is not "check a finite set of directions". Cramér-Wold genuinely requires every tt, and counterexamples exist where checking only the coordinate directions, or only a finite or measure-zero set of directions, is insufficient.

Exercises

ExerciseCore

Problem

Use the Cramér-Wold theorem to show that if Xn→dN(0,Id)X_n \xrightarrow{d} \mathcal{N}(0, I_d) and A∈Rk×dA \in \mathbb{R}^{k \times d} is a fixed matrix, then AXn→dN(0,AA⊤)AX_n \xrightarrow{d} \mathcal{N}(0, AA^\top).

ExerciseAdvanced

Problem

Give an example of random vectors (Xn,Yn)(X_n, Y_n) in R2\mathbb{R}^2 such that Xn→dXX_n \xrightarrow{d} X and Yn→dYY_n \xrightarrow{d} Y but (Xn,Yn)(X_n, Y_n) does not converge in distribution to (X,Y)(X, Y).

References

Canonical:

  • Billingsley, Convergence of Probability Measures (2nd ed., 1999), Section 29
  • van der Vaart, Asymptotic Statistics (1998), Theorem 2.4 (Cramér-Wold device)
  • Durrett, Probability: Theory and Examples (5th ed., 2019), Theorem 3.9.5

Historical:

  • Cramér & Wold, "Some Theorems on Distribution Functions" (1936)

Last reviewed: April 26, 2026

Cite this page

Sneiderman, Robby. "Cramér-Wold Theorem." TheoremPath, reviewed 2026-04-26. https://theorempath.com/topics/cramer-wold-theorem

Canonical URL
https://theorempath.com/topics/cramer-wold-theorem
Author
Robby Sneiderman, TheoremPath
Last reviewed
2026-04-26
What this is
A reference page on TheoremPath. Written and maintained by the named author. Not peer reviewed and not refereed by any venue. Each claim below carries its own verification status.
Terms
All rights reserved. Non-commercial quotation with attribution permitted.

Citing one claim

One statement on this page is separately addressable. Each carries an identifier of the form claim:<topic>::<statement> printed beside it, and resolves to that identifier's anchor on this URL. Quote the statement, its assumptions, and its failure modes together.

Recorded verification on this page: 1 informal_only.

  • This page is a secondary source. Where a claim cites literature, the result is due to that source and not to this site.
  • 1 of 1 claims on this page name no source. Their attribution to the literature is not recorded here, whatever their verification status says.
  • 1 of 1 carry neither a source nor a proof check. Their provenance is the author's reading of the literature; check them against a primary source before relying on them.
  • Statements are given in LaTeX exactly as authored. The rendered page passes the same LaTeX through KaTeX, so text scraped from the HTML repeats expressions and drops radicals; quote from statementTex.

/claims.json lists 1,178 of the 1,231 statements this site records, with the anchor and the recorded verification of each. What earns a place in it: a theorem, lemma, corollary, or proposition block on a published topic page. Definitions are not listed, and neither are the 27 statements on comparison pages. A missing entry means the rule above did not select the statement, not that this site is silent on the result.

Canonical graph

Required before and derived from this topic

These links come from prerequisite edges in the curriculum graph. Editorial suggestions are shown here only when the target page also cites this page as a prerequisite.

Required prerequisites

2