6
$\begingroup$

Let $W$ be a standard one-dimensional Brownian motion. Let $T$ be a stopping time with $\mathbb{E}\sqrt{T}<+\infty$. Then $$\mathbb{E}W_T=0\quad \mathbb{E}W^2_T=\mathbb{E}T$$ I can prove these identies under the condition $\mathbb{E}T<+\infty$. But what about this one?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ The (now deleted) example of Bjorn shows that at most one of those is true for the hitting time of $1$, in which case $EW_T=EW_T^2=1$, i.e., neither $0$, nor $\infty$ ;-) $\endgroup$
    – fedja
    Dec 28, 2014 at 18:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @fedja: But if $T$ is the hitting time of 1, then $E \sqrt{T} = \infty$, doesn't it? So that example is excluded by the hypothesis. $\endgroup$ Dec 28, 2014 at 19:43
  • $\begingroup$ @Nate Elderedge Ah, indeed. OK, let me try to answer properly then :-) $\endgroup$
    – fedja
    Dec 28, 2014 at 21:57
  • $\begingroup$ @user57639 OK, see if it works now. Either I am missing some obvious approach, or it can make one of the trickiest problems about the Brownian motion on the probability exam. Where did you get this question from? $\endgroup$
    – fedja
    Dec 29, 2014 at 5:21
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ The conclusion that $\mathbb{E}W_T=0$ under the $\mathbb{E}\sqrt{T}<\infty$ assumption is Theorem 2.50 of Brownian Motion by Morters and Peres. $\endgroup$
    – HMPanzo
    Dec 29, 2014 at 5:46

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

OK, since I slipped again (there is no way I will believe nowadays that after 40 one's abilities do not decline sharply, though when I was younger I was more optimistic about the lifetime of a mathematician), let's try to figure it out.

We are going to use the standard trick of considering the truncated stopping times $T_\tau=\min(\tau,T)$. Everything is fine for them, so the whole problem is passing to the limit.

The only good idea I have about the Brownian motion is to construct some sub- and super-martingales and play with them a bit. The key, of course, is to control $E\Phi(W(T_\tau))$ where $\Phi(x)$ is some function growing a bit faster than $|x|$, so we can pass to the limit in any expression growing linearly in $W(T_\tau)$.

Notice that if $E\sqrt T<+\infty$, then so is $E\Psi(T)$ with some regular concave $\Psi(x)$ vanishing at $0$ and growing a bit faster than $\sqrt x$. Now the key point is that $\Psi(t+W(t)^2)-2\Psi(t)$ is a super-martingale (concavity of $\Psi$ plus the fact that the first derivative $\Psi'$ is decreasing). Thus, for our "decent" stopping time $T_\tau$, we have $$ E\Psi(W(T_\tau)^2)\le E\Psi(T_\tau+W(T_\tau)^2)\le 2E\Psi(T_\tau)\le 2E\Psi(T)\,, $$ which is exactly what we were looking for.

The first statement is now immediate. For the second one we need to work a bit more. Assume that $E[W(T)^2]<+\infty$. Consider a convex function $\Phi(x)$ defined as $x^2$ on $[-2A,2A]$ and extended linearly so that it is $C^1$ beyond that interval. Also, define $\Psi(x)=x$ on $[0,A^2]$ and make it concave, smooth, and constant on $[2A^2,+\infty]$. Then $2\Phi(W(t))-\Psi(T+W(t)^2)$ is a sub-martingale, so $$ E\Psi(T_\tau)\le E\Psi(T+W(T_\tau)^2)\le 2E\Phi(W(T_\tau))\,. $$ Now we can pass to the limit as $\tau\to+\infty$ to get $E\Psi(T)\le 2E\Phi(W(T))\le 2E[W(T)^2]$. Finally, letting $A\to\infty$, we get (by Fatou, say) $ET<+\infty$, after which you know everything yourself.

I hope there is no stupid error this time :-)

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Is it possible to provide an example of a function $\Psi$ verifying the conditions in your proof when $E[\sqrt{T}]<+\infty$ ? $\endgroup$
    – john
    Mar 29, 2022 at 2:41
3
$\begingroup$

Well, I provide a proof using Burkholder-Davis-Gundy(BDG) inequality.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_variation#Martingales)

Let $M=\left\{M_t=W_{t\wedge T};0\le t<+\infty\right\}$, then $M$ is a martingale with $\langle M\rangle_t=t\wedge T$, so by BDG inequality, we have there exists a constant $K>0$ such that $$\mathbb{E}M_T^*\le K\mathbb{E}\sqrt{T}<+\infty$$ where $M_t^*=\sup_{0\le s\le t}|M_s|$.

Since for all $t\ge0$ $$|M_t|\le\sup_{0\le s\le t}|M_s|=\sup_{0\le s\le t}|W_{s\wedge T}|\le\sup_{0\le s\le T}|W_{s\wedge T}|=\sup_{0\le s\le T}|M_s|=M_T^*$$ Hence $M$ is uniformly integrable, $\mathbb{E}W_T=\mathbb{E}M_T=0$.

Hence $\left\{M_t;0\le t\le+\infty\right\}$ is a martingale with last element $M_T=W_T$, $\left\{M_t^2;0\le t\le+\infty\right\}$ is a submartingale.

If $\mathbb{E}T<+\infty$, then we already know that $\mathbb{E}W_T^2=\mathbb{E}T$.

If $\mathbb{E}W_T^2<+\infty$, then for all $t>0$, since $M_t = \mathbb{E}[W_T \mid \mathcal{F}_t]$, the conditional Jensen inequality yields $$\mathbb{E}M_t^2\le \mathbb{E}W_T^2<+\infty$$ hence $M$ is $L^2$ bounded, hence $L^2$ convergent.

By the monotone convergence theorem, we have $$\mathbb{E}T=\mathbb{E}\lim_{t\to+\infty}(t\wedge T)=\lim_{t\to+\infty}\mathbb{E}(t\wedge T)=\lim_{t\to+\infty}\mathbb{E}W_{t\wedge T}^2=\lim_{t\to+\infty}\mathbb{E}M_{t}^2=\mathbb{E}M_T^2<+\infty,$$ so again $\mathbb{E}W_T^2=\mathbb{E}T$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.