Skip to main content
13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 3, 2023 at 20:59 comment added Nawaf Bou-Rabee Obviously not: it is only Gaussian in the additive Ornstein-Uhlenbeck case.
Jul 3, 2023 at 19:24 comment added 0xbadf00d @NawafBou-Rabee Thank you for the reference; I will take a look. My idea was: If $\mu^h$ has an invariant measure, shouldn't it be a Gaussian distribution as well? In that case, it would suffice to determine mean and variance. I've asked for that and explained it further here: math.stackexchange.com/q/4728844/47771. Maybe you can take a look.
Jul 3, 2023 at 15:35 comment added Nawaf Bou-Rabee @0xbadf00d in general, there is no explicit formula for $\mu^h$; see, e.g., arxiv.org/abs/2108.00682 for a well-written and authoritative account of the state-of-the-art
Jul 1, 2023 at 14:08 comment added 0xbadf00d Old question, I know, but instead of the relation between $\mu$ and $\mu^h$, I am more interested in a formula for $\mu^h$. We can give such a formula for $\mu$ by considering the adjoint of the generator of the diffusion applied to the density of $\mu$. But I don‘t know how to deal with $\mu^h$.
Mar 9, 2015 at 15:33 comment added Sam Livingstone Thanks, this is just what I was looking for. Very much appreciate it!
Mar 9, 2015 at 15:32 vote accept Sam Livingstone
Mar 8, 2015 at 19:19 history edited Nawaf Bou-Rabee CC BY-SA 3.0
added 8 characters in body
Mar 8, 2015 at 17:21 history edited Nawaf Bou-Rabee CC BY-SA 3.0
edited body
Mar 8, 2015 at 14:55 history edited Nawaf Bou-Rabee CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 62 characters in body
Mar 8, 2015 at 14:41 review Late answers
Mar 8, 2015 at 15:40
Mar 8, 2015 at 14:38 history edited Nawaf Bou-Rabee CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 3 characters in body
Mar 8, 2015 at 14:26 review First posts
Mar 8, 2015 at 14:41
Mar 8, 2015 at 14:25 history answered Nawaf Bou-Rabee CC BY-SA 3.0