4
$\begingroup$

Let $f,h,g$ be continuous functions and $B$ a real Brownian motion. We suppose that a.s. $$\forall u \in \mathbb{R}_+,f(B_u)=f(B_0)+\int_0^ug(B_r)dB_r+\frac{1}{2}\int_0^uh(B_r)dr.$$

Prove that $f$ is a $C^2$-function, $f'=g$ and $f''=h.$

It seems this is a converse of Itô's formula.

Do you know how to prove it? What is the equivalent of this and the proof when we consider $q$-dimensional Brownian motion?

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ OP, do you have a source for this claim? I believe its true and am trying to prove it, but I am curious as to whether this is a conjecture or already known. $\endgroup$
    – Nate River
    Commented Dec 6, 2022 at 4:40
  • $\begingroup$ One can cook up a function $f$ such that $\Delta f$ is well-defined and continuous, but $f$ is not $C^2$. Setting $g = \nabla f$ and $h = \Delta f$, we find that the displayed equation in the question is satisfied, but $f$ is not $C^2$. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 6, 2022 at 10:57
  • $\begingroup$ @MateuszKwaśnicki This is for the multidimensional case yes? $\endgroup$
    – Nate River
    Commented Dec 6, 2022 at 11:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @NateRiver: Ah, yes — I did not realise the main question is 1-D, sorry. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 6, 2022 at 11:06
  • $\begingroup$ Ah it’s okay, you saved me a lot of effort and grief - I was about to attempt to work on the multidimensional case! $\endgroup$
    – Nate River
    Commented Dec 6, 2022 at 11:07

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

Here is a complete answer. We show $f$ is $C^2$, and then the full result will follow from user479223’s derivation. The following idea follows the suggestion of John Dawkins on the MSE post, and was also independently suggested to me in private communication by user479223.

Let $K$ be a second anti derivative of $h$, i.e. $K’’ = h$. By Itô’s lemma applied to $K$, and the formula in the problem statement applied to $f$, we have that $f(B_t) - K(B_t)$ is a continuous local martingale.

Since if a continuous function of a Markov martingale is a martingale, the function has to be affine linear, we then have that $f - K$ is a affine linear function, that is, of the form $ax + b$, from which it follows that $f$ is $C^2$, and $f’’ = K’’ = h$ as desired.

An alternate derivation:

What follows is not strictly necessary, however as the ideas may be relevant for the multidimensional case or in the less smooth case, I chose to write it up. In the following we show “by hand” that $f$ is $C^1$ with $f’ = g$. This may allow us to deduce a converse of Itô’s lemma for less smooth functions.

We show that $f$ is right differentiable, the left differentiability follows the exact same proof by symmetry.

Note that since almost surely, the equality in the problem statement holds for all $t$, we have also

$$f(B_\tau)=f(B_0)+\int_0^\tau g(B_s) \, dB_s +\frac{1}{2}\int_0^\tau h(B_s) \, ds$$

for all stopping times $\tau$.

Now fix arbitrary $x$, and let $\psi = \inf \ \{ t \in \mathbb R \, \vert \, B_t = x\}$. Then $W_t := B_{\psi + t} - B_{\psi}$ is a standard Brownian motion independent of $\mathcal F_\tau$, and we have,

$$f(W_\tau)=f(W_0)+\int_0^\tau g(W_s) \, dW_s +\frac{1}{2}\int_0^\tau h(W_s) \, ds.$$

almost surely for all stopping times $\tau$.

Now for all $h > 0$, set $\tau_h := \inf \, \{t \in \mathbb R \, \vert \, W_t = h \}.$

We then have that

\begin{multline*} \frac{f(x + h) - f(x)}{h} \\ = \frac{f(W_{\tau_h} + x) - f(x)}{h} \\ = \frac{\int_0^{\tau_h} g(W_s + x)\,dW_s}{h} +\frac{1}{2h}\int_0^{\tau_h}h(W_s + x) \, ds. \end{multline*}

For the first term, we have

\begin{multline*} \frac{\int_0^{\tau_h} g(W_s + x)\,dW_s}{h} \\ = \frac{\int_0^{\tau_h} g(x) \,dW_s}{h} + o(1) \\ = \frac{g(x)W_{\tau_h}}{h} + o(1) \\ = \frac{g(x) h}{h} + o(1) \\ = g(x) + o(1) \to g(x). \end{multline*}

as $h \to 0^+$, where the $o(1)$ notation denotes a term that goes to $0$ in probability as $h \to 0$.

While for the second term, we compute \begin{multline*} \frac{1}{2h}\int_0^{\tau_h}h(W_s + x) \, ds \\ = \frac{1}{2h} \int_0^{\tau_h} h(x) \, ds + o(1) \\ = \frac{h(x)}{2} \cdot \frac{\tau_h}{h} + o(1) \to 0 \end{multline*} in probability as $h \to 0^+$, where the limit in probability of $\frac{\tau_h}{h}$ can be computed directly to be $0$ from the explicit density of $\tau_h$.

We conclude

$$\lim_{h \to 0+} \frac{f(x + h) - f(x)}{h} = g(x)$$

and since $x$ was arbitrary, $f' = g$ as desired, and $f$ is $C^1$.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Here is a partial answer.

If $f\in C^2$ then we have by Itô's lemma on $f$ that for all $u$ a.s. that

$$\int_0^u f'(B_r) dB_r+\frac12\int_0^u f''(B_r) dr=\int_0^u g(B_r) dB_r+\frac12\int_0^u h(B_r) dr.$$

Rearranging yields that for all $u$

$$\int_0^u(f'(B_r)-g(B_r))dB_r=\frac12\int_0^u (h(B_r)-f''(B_r))dr.$$

Taking the quadratic variation on each side yields that for all $u$

$$\int_0^u E(f'(B_r)-g(B_r))^2dr=0,$$

given that $f'$ and $g$ are continuous this implies that $f'(B_r)=g(B_r)$ a.s. Thus we know that for all $u$

$$\int_0^u (h(B_r)-f''(B_r))dr=0,$$

implying that $h(B_r)=f''(B_r)$ a.s.

I suspect that we can prove $f\in C^2$ but I am not sure. I am unable to come up with a counterexample. Thanks for the problem.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ @ThomasKojar How would you do this? You don't have any information on $f(t)$ you just have information on $f(B_t)$. $\endgroup$
    – user479223
    Commented Dec 5, 2022 at 21:32
  • $\begingroup$ Check (I asked on MO since I didn't expect to have an answer): math.stackexchange.com/questions/4590803/… $\endgroup$
    – mathex
    Commented Dec 5, 2022 at 21:32
  • $\begingroup$ @ThomasKojar I believe it might be possible. But I was unable to do so. $\endgroup$
    – user479223
    Commented Dec 5, 2022 at 21:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .