10
$\begingroup$

Is there either a closed form (in terms of the moments of $X_1$, say) or good bounds on $$ \mathbb{E} \sup_{k \leq n} \frac{1}{k} \sum_{i=1}^k X_i, $$ where $X_i$ are iid and arbitrarily nice? (In my specific application, $X_i$ are given by $(B_i - p)^2$, where $B_i$ are iid Bernoulli variables with mean $p$.) I am particularly interested in the correct functional dependence on $n$; e.g., is there a constant bound that holds for all $n$?

$\endgroup$
5
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Not an answer, but a comment (I can't comment yet). If your random variable is upper bounded like in your application : $X_i \leq a$ a.s., then trivially: $$\mathbb{E}[\sup_{1 \leq k \leq n}{ \frac{1}{k} \sum_{i=1}^{k}{X_k}}] \leq a$$ and since it's non-decreasing and bounded you know it's convergent. So I guess the question is more about the value of the limit and how fast it converges to this limit than about constant bounds (unless you want to know what happens for unbounded R.V) ? $\endgroup$
    – Adrien
    Commented Nov 7, 2013 at 20:29
  • $\begingroup$ That's a very good point you raise about the thing being trivially bounded -- thanks! $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 7, 2013 at 22:53
  • $\begingroup$ That specific application is equivalent to the case where each $X_i$ is Bernoulli. The supremum over all $k$ is almost surely rational, and there should be expressions which are not too bad for the probability that the last time the average is at least $p/q$ is at $k=aq$. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 8, 2013 at 4:27
  • $\begingroup$ I am an amateur (some random idea), though I would like to think $X_i$ as dyadic expansions of numbers on $[0,1]$ and use may be some results from number theory? or see something similar here mathoverflow.net/questions/146397/… $\endgroup$
    – user24367
    Commented Nov 8, 2013 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ If we consider only $+-1$ w.p. $\frac{1}{2}$ and remove the first (some finite) nuumber of steps, then we are basically looking for the maximum slope.....which occurs when the walk is $+1$ consecutively before hitting a $-1$. It should be easy to find probabilities of these paths in this case (to get finite $n$ results)....for asymptotic results I guess Donsker'e theorem would be good enough. $\endgroup$
    – user24367
    Commented Nov 8, 2013 at 11:31

3 Answers 3

7
$\begingroup$

You're asking about maximal inequalities. These are known in more generality for measure-preserving transformations. As has already been pointed out, in your special case, you can expect to get a constant bound. The averages very quickly approach the limit, so you're looking at the average of the max of the first few terms together with the limiting value.

In general, for measure-preserving transformations, if the $X_k$ are just $L^1$ (even in the iid case), the expectation of the supremum can diverge logarithmically. If the $X_k$ have some higher moments: $L^p$ for any $p>1$, then you get the bound $\|M((X_k))\|_p \le C_p \|X_1\|_p$, where $C_p$ is some constant with a $p-1$ in the denominator.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Could you give a reference for a result of this form? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 9, 2013 at 15:56
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Try Ergodic Theorems by Ulrich Krengel. It must be there somewhere... $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 9, 2013 at 18:52
10
$\begingroup$

I'll extend my comment about the trivial bounded case to the more interesting unbounded case. Let $Y_n = \sup_{1 \leq k \leq n}{\frac{1}{k} \sum_{i=1}^{k}{X_i} }$.

Let's only assume that $X$ has finite variance $\sigma^2$. Using a peeling argument and Kolmogorov's inequality:

For a given $n$, let $M$ the smallest integer such that $n \leq 2^M$. We have $Y_n \leq Y_{2^M}$, so: \begin{align*} \mathbb{P}(Y_n \geq \varepsilon) & \leq \mathbb{P}(Y_{2^M} \geq \varepsilon) \\ & \leq \sum_{m=0}^{M-1}{\mathbb{P}\left( \sup_{2^m \leq k \leq 2^{m+1}}{\frac{1}{k} \sum_{i=1}^{k}{X_i} } \geq \varepsilon \right)} \\ & \leq \sum_{m=0}^{M-1}{\mathbb{P}\left( \sup_{2^m \leq k \leq 2^{m+1}}{ \sum_{i=1}^{k}{X_i} } \geq 2^m \varepsilon \right)} \\ %& \leq \sum_{m=0}^{M-1}{\mathbb{P}\left( \sup_{1 \leq k \leq 2^{m+1}}{ \sum_{i=1}^{k}{X_i} } \geq 2^m \varepsilon \right)} \\ & \leq \sum_{m=0}^{M-1}{\frac{2^{m}}{(2^m)^2} \frac{\sigma^2}{\varepsilon^2}} \\ & \leq \frac{\sigma^2}{\varepsilon^2} \sum_{m=0}^{M-1}{\frac{1}{2^m}} \\ & \leq 2 \frac{\sigma^2}{\varepsilon^2} \\ \end{align*} Going back to the expected value: \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}\left[ Y_n \right] & = \mathbb{E}\left[ Y_n {1}_{\left\lbrace Y_n \leq 0 \right\rbrace} \right] + \mathbb{E}\left[ Y_n {1}_{\left\lbrace Y_n > 0 \right\rbrace} \right] \\ & \leq \mathbb{E}\left[ Y_n {1}_{\left\lbrace Y_n > 0 \right\rbrace} \right] \\ \end{align*} $Y_n {1}_{Y_n > 0}$ is a non-negative random variable, so writing $F_{n}$ its c.d.f, we have: \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}\left[ Y_n {1}_{Y_n > 0} \right] & = \int_{0}^{+\infty}{(1-F_{n}(t)) dt} \\ & = \int_{0}^{+\infty}{\mathbb{P}(Y_n {1}_{\left\lbrace Y_n > 0 \right\rbrace}>t) dt} \\ & = \int_{0}^{+\infty}{\mathbb{P}(Y_n >t) dt} \\ & = \int_{0}^{a}{\mathbb{P}(Y_n > t) dt} + \int_{a}^{+\infty}{\mathbb{P}(Y_n > t) dt} \\ & \leq \int_{0}^{a}{1 dt} + \int_{a}^{+\infty}{ \frac{2 \sigma^2}{t^2} dt} \\ & \leq a + 4 \frac{\sigma^2}{a} \end{align*} for any positive $a$. Taking $a = \sqrt{2} \sigma$ to minimize the bound: $$\mathbb{E}\left[ Y_n \right] \leq 2 \sqrt{2} \sigma$$ If I didn't do too many calculation errors, the result is unexpectedly nice!

So while I was only trying to prove that $\mathbb{E}\left[ Y_n \right]$ is still bounded when $X$ isn't, without any hope of obtaining anything explicit, it turns out we can actually obtain a very nice bound! Therefore, we should be able to do even better in the bounded case. I guess that in this case one doesn't absolutely need a peeling argument, and using an union bound and Hoeffding's inequality is enough, but still one should obtain better results by using again a peeling argument (with different intervals ?) and Azuma-Hoeffding's inequality instead of Kolmogorov's one.

$\endgroup$
8
$\begingroup$

Here is an "arbirarily nice" example with closed form results.

Let $X_1,X_2,\ldots$ be i.i.d. real random variables with partial sums $S_k:=\sum_{i=1}^kX_i$ and let $M_n:=\sup_{k\leq n} \frac{S_k}{k}$, $R_n:=\inf_{k\leq n} \frac{S_k}{k}= - \sup_{k\leq n} \frac{-S_k}{k}$, and let $M_\infty,R_\infty$ be the all-time supremum/infimum (possibly $\infty/-\infty$).

(1) The distribution of $M_n$ resp. $R_n$ can be obtained as follows.

For $a\in \mathbb{R}$ let $$T_a:=\inf\{k\geq 1\;:\;S_k-ka>0\} \mbox{ and } U_a:=\inf\{k\geq 1\;:\;S_k-ka\leq 0\}$$
be first strictly ascendending resp. weakly descending ladder epochs of the random walk generated by the steps $X_i-a$, then clearly $$\{M_n > a\}=\{ T_a \leq n\}\;\mbox{ and }\; \{R_n > a\}=\{ U_a > n\}\;\;, $$ The fluctuation theory of random walks (see e.g. chapter XII in Feller II (1971)) gives for the generating functions $g_a(z):= \mathbb{E}(z^{T_a}),\, h_a(z):=\mathbb{E}(z^{U_a}) $ that $$\log\left(\frac{1}{1-g_a(z)}\right)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{z^n}{n} \mathbb{P}(S_n>na)\;\;\mbox{ (Sparre Andersen's theorem, Thm 1 in XII.7)}$$
$$\mbox{ and } (1-g_a(z))(1-h_a(z))=1-z\;\;\mbox{ (duality, Thm 4 in XII.7).}$$ Thus $\mathbb{P}(M_n>a)$ resp. $\mathbb{P}(R_n>a)$ can (in principle) be computed when only the probabilities $\mathbb{P}(S_k>ka), k=1,\ldots,n$ are known.

(2) Now let the $X_i$ be $\exp(1)$-distributed. Then clearly $M_n, R_n\geq 0$ so only $a\geq 0$ need to be considered. Here it is known that for $a\geq 0$ $$\mathbb{P}(T_a=n) = \frac{n^{n-1}}{n!} a^{n-1}e^{-an} \;\;\;\mbox{ for } n\geq 1, \mbox{ resp. that }$$ $$g_a(z)=z\,e^{-a+T(zae^{-a})} \;\;\;\;(*)$$ where $T(z):=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{n^{n-1}}{n!} z^n$ denotes the "tree function". $(*)$ can e.g. be proved using Sparre Andersen's thm. and Lagrange inversion (the series defining $T$ converges for $|z|\leq e^{-1}$ and represents the inverse of $z\mapsto z e^{-z}$ there). Thus $$\mathbb{P}( M_n>a) = \sum_{k=1}^n \frac{k^{k-1}}{k!} a^{k-1}e^{-ak}\;\;\mbox{ and }$$ $$\mathbb{E} (M_n) = \int_0^\infty \mathbb{P} (M_n>a)\,da=\sum_{k=1}^n \frac{1}{k^2}$$

Let $[z^n] F(z)$ denote the $n$-th cofficient of a (formal) power series $F(z)$. We have \begin{align*} \mathbb{P}(R_n >a) &=1-\mathbb{P}(U_a\leq n)\\ &=[z^n]\frac{1-h_a(z)}{1-z}\\ &=[z^n]\frac{1}{1-g_a(z)}\end{align*} where in the last step the duality relation was used.

Expanding $\frac{1}{1-g_a(z)}$ into a geometric series and using Lagrange inversion on the individual terms now gives $$\mathbb{P}( R_n>a) = \left(\sum_{k=0}^n \frac{(n-k)}{n}\frac{(na)^k}{k!}\right)e^{-na}\;.\;\mbox{ Thus }$$ $$\mathbb{E} (R_n) = \int_0^\infty \mathbb{P} (R_n>a)\,da=\frac{1}{n^2}\sum_{k=0}^n (n-k)=\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2n}$$

(3) Passing to the limit gives that $\mathbb{P}(M_\infty >a)=e^{-a+T(ae^{-a})}$ (note that $\mathbb{P}(M_\infty > a)=1 \mbox{ for } a\in[0,1]$), and $$\mathbb{E} (M_\infty) = \int_0^\infty e^{-a+T(ae^{-a})}\,da=\zeta(2)=\frac{\pi^2}{6}$$ and that $R_\infty $ is uniformly distributed on $[0,1]$:

we have that $$\mathbb{P}( R_n >a) =\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{Poiss}(na)\leq n) -a\,\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{Poiss}(na)\leq n-1)$$ By the strong law of large numbers for sums of i.i.d. $\mathrm{Poiss}(a)$-variables, both $\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{Poiss}(na)\leq n)$ and $\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{Poiss}(na)\leq n-1)$ tend to $0$ if $a>1$ and to $1$ if $0<a<1$. Further $\mathbb{P}( R_n >1)=\mathbb{P}(\mathrm{Poiss}(n)=n)$ tends to zero (e.g. by Stirling's formula). Thus for $a>0$ $$ \mathbb{P}(R_\infty>a)= 1-\min(a,1)\;\;,$$ that is, $R_\infty$ is uniformly distributed on $(0,1)$.

Further $$\mathbb{E} (R_\infty) = \frac{1}{2}$$

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Do you have a reference for $\mathbb{P}(T_a=n) = \frac{n^{n-1}}{n!} a^{n-1}e^{-an} $ in the exponential case? $\endgroup$
    – Viktor B
    Commented Dec 19, 2020 at 13:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In queueing theory this distribution is called the Borel distribution with arrival rate $a$. It is known that it decribes the the number of customers in a busy period of an $M/D/1$ -queue with arrival rate $a$ and deterministic service time 1 - this is essentially equivalent to the statement about $T_a$. I' ll have to look for a moe direct reference. $\endgroup$
    – esg
    Commented Dec 19, 2020 at 14:41

You must log in to answer this question.

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