Is this a well-known probabilistic model? - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net 2013-05-22T09:10:14Z http://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/14021 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdf http://mathoverflow.net/questions/14021/is-this-a-well-known-probabilistic-model Is this a well-known probabilistic model? gowers 2010-02-03T18:47:56Z 2010-02-03T20:22:34Z <p>While I was thinking about the Erd&#337;s discrepancy problem, the following random walk model arose rather naturally. You fix a positive integer k, and you take a random step of 1 or -1 at each stage, except if that stage is a multiple of k, in which case you get to choose. Your object is to keep the walk as close to the origin as you can.</p> <p>An obvious strategy is a greedy one: each time you have the choice, if the walk is currently positive you choose -1 and if it's currently negative you choose +1. (Clearly it makes no difference to the outcome what you do if it is zero.) This is like giving your random walk a drift term of size 1/k, but the drift is always directed towards the origin.</p> <p>A slightly different question would be if you are presented with the entire walk up to kN-1 and you then choose the signs at k, 2k, 3k, ... , Nk, attempting to minimize the maximum distance it ever goes from the origin.</p> <p>It is not hard to see that it must go at least logarithmically far, since by the time you get to M you will probably have had a run of log M 1s in the random walk, which you can do almost nothing about. I have thought about the problem in a non-rigorous way and it feels to me as though it shouldn't be too hard to prove that by the time you get to M you won't have gone further than $(\log M)^2$ or $(\log M)^3$ or something like that. (The rough argument is that if you look at a run of $k^2$ steps, it won't tend to drift more than about k, and you'll have k steps that you can choose so as to cancel out the drift. That is what usually happens, and the exceptions ought to be exponentially rare, so to speak.)</p> <p>My main question is this: are these, or something like them, well-known questions? (Or do answers to them follow almost instantly from known results?)</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/14021/is-this-a-well-known-probabilistic-model/14025#14025 Answer by Douglas Zare for Is this a well-known probabilistic model? Douglas Zare 2010-02-03T19:07:34Z 2010-02-03T20:22:34Z <p>If you apply the greedy algorithm, that is very close to asking for the maximum drawdown of a random walk with positive drift. </p> <p>The distribution of maximum drawdowns of a Brownian motion with constant drift have been studied, and some answers are on page 2 <a href="http://etd.caltech.edu/etd/available/etd-05272004-115820/unrestricted/thesis.pdf" rel="nofollow">here</a>. The expected maximum drawdown with positive drift grows asymptotically like $c \log M$. I'm not sure how the tails look.</p> <p>I asked how badly the Brownian approximation behaves for discrete walks <a href="http://mathoverflow.net/questions/11221/brownian-approximation-of-downswings-of-walks-with-positive-drift" rel="nofollow">here</a>. It can be far off for some skewed distributions, but it should be off by a small constant factor for these nearly symmetric steps.</p> <p>The globally optimal adjustments can't reduce the maximum excursion by more than a factor of 2 compared with the greedy algorithm, since on the largest (without loss of generality) positive excursion to $d$, the greedy algorithm was all -1s. Then any change made would still mean the walk increases by at least $d$, so at best a global optimization could move the start to $-d/2$ which would make the maximum at least $d/2$ in both directions. </p>