0
$\begingroup$

$(X_k)_{k \in \mathbb{N}}$ is a sub-martingale, $R_1,R_2$ two stopping times such that $R_1 \leq R_2$.

The optional stopping theorem which I know is the following (from probability theory, independence, interchangeability, martingales: theorem 5 page 248, other reference Shiryaev probability 2: theorem 1 page 119):

Theorem $1$ : letting $X_{R_1}(w)=X_{R_1(w)}(w)1_{\{R_1<\infty\}}(w),$ if $X_{R_1},X_{R_2} \in L^1,$ $\liminf_k\int_{\{R_2>k\}}|X_k|dP=0$ then $E[X_{R_2}|\mathcal{F}_{R_1}] \geq X_{R_1}.$

Consider the following theorem from Shreve-Karatzas book:

1

In the proof of theorem 3.22, he refers to theorem $9.3.5$ from a course in probability theory:

2 3

He refers to exercise $11$, which can be proved easily using theorem $1,$ as a counterexample to theorem $9.3.5$ (not true for all cases):

4

What's the difference between theorem $1$ and theorem $9.3.5$ ? In theorem $3.22,$ is it necessary to define $X_{\infty}$ as the almost sure limit ? What are the weakest conditions to obtain $E[X_{R_2}|\mathcal{F}_{R_1}] \geq X_{R_1}$ ?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Could you please include full references to the books/papers you are quoting from? $\endgroup$ Jun 7, 2021 at 15:08
  • $\begingroup$ References added $\endgroup$
    – Kurt.W.X
    Jun 7, 2021 at 20:34
  • $\begingroup$ @Kurt.W.X, Does still interesting in this question right now? $\endgroup$
    – JGWang
    Mar 10, 2022 at 8:00
  • $\begingroup$ Sure, it would be great. $\endgroup$
    – Kurt.W.X
    Mar 11, 2022 at 5:37

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

I am charmed to see people are still using Chung's book. By the the index that Chung uses, $N_{\infty}$ , he means that the supermartingale is a supermartingale up to and in including $\infty$. If you were to say this about martingales you would mean that there was a limit, $X_{\infty}$, and the $E(X_{\infty}|F_n ) = X_n$, closeable may be the term. This is strong, the martingale is uniformly integrable, and the conditions of your first theorem are guaranteed.$$$$ A counterexample to keep in mind is recurrent random walk, where you might take $\beta = inf \lbrace n>5: S_n = 0 \rbrace $, in which case $S_5, S_{\beta}$ is clearly not a martingale

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $X=\{X_n,\mathscr{F}_n; n\in N_+ \}$ is a sub-martingale, $R_1,R_2$ are two stopping times such that $R_1\le R_2$. Denote \begin{equation*} \mathsf{E}[X_{R_2}|\mathscr{F}_{R_1}]\ge X_{R_1}. \tag{1} \end{equation*}

  1. What's the difference between theorem 1 and theorem 9.3.5:

Both theorem 1 and theorm 9.3.5 give the conditions of (1) holds, but theorem 1 is for the a fixed $R_2$, theorem 9.3.5 give the sufficient conditions of (1) holds for arbitrary stopping time $R_2(\ge)R_1$.

  1. Is it necessary to define $X_\infty$ as the almost sure limit?

To get the conclusion of therem 9.3.5, usually, suppose that the (sub/super-)martingale $X$ is right closed(cf. C. Dellacherie & P. Meyer, Probabilities and Potential B, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1982, p.5--, V.7--V.10). If $X$ is right closed, then \begin{equation*} \lim_{n\to\infty}X_n=X_\infty, \quad X_\infty(\ge/\le)=\mathsf{E}[Y|\mathscr{F}_\infty] \qquad \text{a.s.} \end{equation*} and $X_\infty$ is the $\mathscr{F}_\infty$-measurable right closing element of $X$ also.

  1. What are the weakest conditions to obtain (1):

For fixed $R_2$, above mentioned Theorem 1 is the weakest conditions to obtain (1). For arbitrary $R_2$, ``$X$ is right closed'' is the weakest conditions to obtain (1).

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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