4
$\begingroup$

I toss a fair coin $n$ times. Some notation:

$S_i=$ difference between #heads and #number of tails after the first $i$ tosses, $1\leq i\leq n$.

$M_n=\max(S_1,S_2,\dots,S_n)$,

$m_n=\min(S_1,S_2,\dots,S_n)$.

$M=\max(M_n,|m_n|)$.

Now, suppose that I know that exactly half the times heads came up. That is, $S_n=0$.

I want to say something about $M$. What I want to know, is, if it's true that $P(M<c\sqrt{n}\mid S_n=0)=\Omega_c(1)$, for every constant $c>0$?

That is, do i I have some positive probability, not depending on $n$, that the difference between the heads and the tails in absolute value at no stage exceeded, say, $\frac{1}{1000}\sqrt{n}$?

I know it's true if I look just at one-sided difference, that is, not in absolute value. pages 18-19 here, for example.

http://www2.math.uu.se/~sea/kurser/stokprocmn1/slumpvandring_eng.pdf But

But not my case.

I asked on MathStackExchange also, but got no answer.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ I think by the properties of the binomial distribution, this is true even without conditioning on $S_n = 0$. Right? Your question is the same as upper-bounding the tail probability that $|\text{#heads} - n/2| \geq c\sqrt{n}/2$, and a Chernoff bound gives that this probability is $\leq 2e^{-\Theta(c)}$. OK, this bound is only for $M_n$, not $M$, but I think a bound should say that it translates. $\endgroup$
    – usul
    Sep 19, 2015 at 12:37
  • $\begingroup$ ...I was thinking of Etemadi's inequality: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etemadi%27s_inequality $\endgroup$
    – usul
    Sep 19, 2015 at 12:48
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think this inequality helps, since I'm asking about $\alpha$ which is some small constant times the standard deviation. $\endgroup$
    – karpasi
    Sep 19, 2015 at 13:21
  • $\begingroup$ Hmm, in the inequality, try taking each $X_k = H_k - \frac{1}{2}$, where $H_k = 1$ if the $k$th coin is heads and $H_k = 0$ if tails. Then the $S_k = \text{#heads} - k/2$, and the bound can help you. $\endgroup$
    – usul
    Sep 19, 2015 at 13:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Here's the m.se post: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1411447/… $\endgroup$ Sep 20, 2015 at 0:18

3 Answers 3

6
$\begingroup$

Note that $P(M>C\sqrt n)$ is decaying exponentially in $C^2$. Now fix large $T$ and condition upon the values at the times $n/T,2n/T,\dots (T-1)n/T$ being less than $\frac c2\sqrt n$ in absolute value. That event has some small positive probability $p_T$ (essentially you just pinch the Brownian bridge at a few points). On the other hand, for each short span of length $n/T$, $\frac c2\sqrt n=(\sqrt T\frac c2)\sqrt{n/T}$, so you now play the exponential "large deviation" probability about $e^{-c^2T/8}$ for each span versus the linear number $T$ of spans in the union bound, which is a clear win.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

As I indicated in my comment, $$ P(M\ge r|S_n=0) \le \frac{2P(S_n=2r)}{P(S_n=0)} , \quad\quad\quad\quad (1) $$ from the material linked to in the OP (and this estimate is close to exact).

Now if take $r=c\sqrt{n}$ and use Stirling's formula, then $P(S_{2n}=0)\sim n^{-1/2}$ and $$ P(S_{2n}=2cn^{1/2}) = \frac{(2n)!}{(n+cn^{1/2})! (n-cn^{1/2})!} 2^{-2n} \sim \sqrt{\frac{2n}{n^2-c^2n}} \left( \frac{n^2}{n^2-c^2n} \right)^n \left( \frac{n-cn^{1/2}}{n+cn^{1/2}}\right)^{cn^{1/2}} . $$ The last factor converges to $e^{-2c^2}$. Similarly, the second factor converges to $e^{c^2}$. We find that both numerator and denominator from (1) are $\sim n^{-1/2}$, but the constant has $e^{-c^2}$ in it, so $(1)$ will be $\le p <1$ if we take $c$ large enough. This answers the question as originally posed.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ My question is if this is true for every constant $c>0$. Sorry if it wasn't clear, I edited now and slightly changed the wording. I knew that it's true for $c$ large enough, just by what you wrote (that is, using the union bound). My question was about the cases where the union bound isn't good enough, that is, when $\frac{P(S_n=2cn^{1/2})}{P(S_n=0)}>1/2$ $\endgroup$
    – karpasi
    Sep 19, 2015 at 23:43
0
$\begingroup$

Define $S_t$ for every $t\geq 0$ by linear interpolation. Then by Donsker's (conditioned) invariance principle (see e.g. Proposition 4.3 in http://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0509522.pdf for a more general fact with a proof based on absolute continuity), under the conditional probability distribution $\mathbb{P}\left(\ \cdot \ | \ S_n=0\right)$, $$\left(\frac{S_{nt}}{\sqrt{n}}; 0 \leq t \leq 1 \right)$$ converges in distribution (for the uniform topology on the space of real-valued continuous functions on $[0,1]$) to the Brownian bridge $(W^{br}_t; 0 \leq t \leq 1)$.

As a consequence, $$\mathbb{P}\left( M < c \sqrt{n} \ | \ S_n=0 \right) \quad \mathop{\longrightarrow}_{n \rightarrow \infty} \quad \mathbb{P}(\sup |W^{br}|<c) \quad = \quad \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} (-1)^n e^{-2n^2c^2}.$$

More generally, $$\mathbb{P}\left( -a \sqrt{n} \leq m_n, M_n \leq b \sqrt{n} \ | \ S_n=0 \right) \quad \mathop{\longrightarrow}_{n \rightarrow \infty}\quad \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-2n^2(a+b)^2} - \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-2(b+n(a+b))^2}.$$

$\endgroup$

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.