arxiv: v1 [math.pr] 10 Jan 2019

Transcription

1 Gaussian lower bounds for the density via Malliavin calculus Nguyen Tien Dung arxiv: v1 [math.pr] 1 Jan 219 January 1, 219 Abstract The problem of obtaining a lower bound for the density is always a challenge to solve. In this paper, based on a known formula, we use a simple idea to get a new representation for the density of Malliavin differentiable random variables. This new representation is particularly useful for finding lower bounds for the density. Keywords: Malliavin calculus, Density formula, Gaussian estimates. 21 Mathematics Subject Classification: 6G15, 6H7. 1 Introduction In this paper, we use the techniques of Malliavin calculus to investigate the density of Malliavin differentiable random variables. In particular, we are going to focus on the problem of finding a Gaussian lower bound for the density. This problem was first discussed by Kusuoka & Stroock [4], and up to date, it is still a subject that need studying. To begin this paper, let us recall some elements of Malliavin calculus (for more details see [7]. Suppose that H is a real separable Hilbert space with scalar product denoted by.,. H. We denote by W = {W(h : h H} an isonormal Gaussian process defined in a complete probability space (Ω,,P, is the σ-field generated by W. Let S be the set of all smooth cylindrical random variables of the form = f(w(h 1,...,W(h n, (1.1 where n N,f C b (Rn the set of bounded and infinitely differentiable functions with bounded partial derivatives, h 1,...,h n H. If has the form (1.1, we define its Malliavin derivative with respect to W as the element of L 2 (Ω,H given by D = n k=1 f x k (W(h 1,...,W(h n h k. More generally, we can define the kth order derivative D k by iterating the derivative operator k times. or any integer k 1 and any p 1, we denote by D k,p the closure of S with respect to the norm k p k,p := E p + E D i p H. i Department of Mathematics, VNU Hanoi University of Science, 334 Nguyen Trai, Thanh Xuan, Hanoi, Vietnam. dung@hus.edu.vn Department of Mathematics, PT University, Hoa Lac High Tech Park, Hanoi, Vietnam. dung nguyentien1@yahoo.com, dungnt@fpt.edu.vn i=1 1

2 An important operator in the Malliavin calculus theory is the divergence operator δ, it is the adjoint of the derivative operator D characterized by E D,u H = E[δ(u] for any S and u L 2 (Ω,H. The domain of δ is the set of all functions u L 2 (Ω,H such that E D,u H C(u L2 (Ω, where C(u is some positive constant depending on u. Let D 1,2 and u Domδ such that u L 2 (Ω,H. Then u Domδ and we have the following relation provided the right-hand side is square integrable. δ(u = δ(u D,u H, (1.2 It is known that any random variable in L 2 (Ω,,P can be expanded into an orthogonal sum of its Wiener chaos: = J n, n= where J = E( and J n denotes the projection onto the nth Wiener chaos. rom this chaos expansion one may define the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator L by L = nj n and its pseudoinverse by L 1 = 1 n J n. Note that, for any L 2 (Ω, we have L 1 DomL and LL 1 = n=1 L 1 L = E[]. Moreover, the operators D,δ and L have following relation: DomL if and only if D 1,2 and D Domδ, and in this case n= δd = L. (1.3 Inthelasttwodecades, thereareseveralpapersdevotedtothe studyofdensitiesbymeansofmalliavin calculus. Among others, we mention the works[5, 8] and the references therein for sufficient conditions for a random variable to has a density bounded from below. Another fruitful contribution is Nourdin & Viens s density formula, Theorem 3.1 in [6] can be restated as follows. Proposition 1.1. Let D 1,2 be such that E[] =. We define the random variable G := D, DL 1 H (1.4 and the function g (x := E[G = x]. Then, the law of has a density ρ with respect to the Lebesgue measure if and only if g ( > a.s. In this case suppρ is a closed interval of R containing and we have, for almost all x suppρ : ρ (x = E 2g (x exp ( z g (z dz. (1.5 The formula (1.5 has been effectively applied to various stochastic equations (see e.g. [3] and the references therein. However, its use requires both lower and upper bounds of G. In fact, if σmin 2 G σmax 2 a.s. then the density of satisfies, x R. E 2σmax 2 exp σmin 2 ρ (x E 2σmin 2 exp σmax 2 The aim of the present paper is to answer the following question: Whether or not we can get a Gaussian lower bound for the density if we only have G σmin 2 (similarly, a Gaussian upper bound if < G σmax. 2 The rest of this article is organized as follows. In Section 2, based on a density formula provided in [7], we use a simple idea to obtain a new presentation for densities. As a consequence, under suitable assumptions, we are able to give an affirmative answer to the above question. In Section 3, we provide some examples to illustrate the applicability of our abstract results. 2

3 2 Representation and lower bounds for the density This section contains our abstract results, we first provide a representation formula for densities. u D,u H Proposition 2.1. Let D 1,2 and u : Ω H, and suppose that D,u H a.s. and belongs to the domain of δ. Then the law of has a continuous density given by ( ρ (x = ρ (aexp w(zdz, x suppρ, (2.1 where a is a point in the interior of suppρ and [ ( ] u w(z := E δ = z. D,u H a Proof. According to Exercise in [7], the law of has a continuous density given by [ ( ] u ρ (x = E 1 {>x} δ, x suppρ. (2.2 D,u H Note that the proof of (2.2 is similar to that of Proposition in [7]. Since D 1,2, this implies that suppρ is a closed interval of R (see Proposition in [7]: suppρ = [α,β] with α < β. It follows from (2.2 that [ [ ( ]] u ρ (x = E 1 {>x} E δ D,u H = E [ 1 {>x} w ( ] = β x w (yρ (ydy. Let a be a point in the interior of suppρ. Solving the above equation with initial condition ρ (a gives us (2.1. This completes the proof. A general representation like the above conveys no meaning unless provided at least a way to use it. The following corollary provides such a way. Corollary 2.1. Let D 2,4 be such that E[] = and G be the random variable defined by (1.4. Assume that G a.s. and the random variables G and 1 DG G 2, DL 1 H belong to L 2 (Ω. Then the law of has a continuous density given by ( ( ρ (x = ρ (exp h (zdz exp w (zdz, x suppρ, (2.3 where the functions w and h are defined by [ ] [ w (z := E 1 = z, h (z := E G G 2 DG, DL 1 H = z ]. Proof. Since E[] =, this implies that α < < β and hence, we can take a = in Theorem 2.1. On the other hand, we choose u = DL 1. By the relation (1.3 we have δ(u = δ(dl 1 = LL 1 = E E[] =. 3

4 The conditions on and G allow us to use the relation (1.2 and we obtain ( ( u u δ = δ D,u H D, DL 1 ( H u = δ G = δ(u + 1 G G 2 DG,u H = + 1 G G 2 DG, DL 1 H. Hence, we obtain w( = w ( + h (. Inserting this relation into (2.1 gives us (2.3. This completes the proof. We now are ready to provide Gaussian lower bounds for the density. Theorem 2.1. Let D 2,4 be such that E[] =. Suppose that G σmin 2 a.s. for some deterministic constant σ min. The density of exists and satisfies ( ρ (x ρ (exp h (zdz exp, x R. (2.4 2σ 2 min 2σ 2 min Moreover, if for some real number m 1, h ( m 1 a.s. then ρ (x ρ (exp m 1 x, x. (2.5 If for some real number m 2, h ( m 2 a.s. then ρ (x ρ (exp 2σ 2 min If for some real number M >, h ( M a.s. then ρ (x ρ (exp 2σ 2 min m 2 x, x. (2.6 M x, x R. (2.7 Proof. We first recall that the fact G σmin 2 implies suppρ = R, see Corollary 3.3 in [6]. To prove (2.4 we write = Therefore, when x, we have Similarly, when x, we also have w (zdz w (zdz = [ + E [ + E z σ 2 min 2G = z 2σ 2 min ] dz = z ]dz dz = x2 2σmin 2. [ E = z ]dz x2 2G 2σmin 2. Thus (2.4 is verified for all x R. The proof of (2.5, (2.6 and (2.7 is straightforward, so we omit it. 4

5 Remark 2.1. Similarly, if < G σmax 2 a.s. we also have an upper bound for the density that reads ( ρ (x ρ (exp h (zdz exp, x suppρ. 2σ 2 max However, because of appearance of G in the denominators, it will be non-trivial to check the square integrable property of G and 1 DG G 2, DL 1 H and the boundedness of h. That is why we only provide lower bounds as in Theorem 2.1. To evaluate an upper bound, a popular method is to use the formula (2.2 with u = D. The reader can consult Proposition in [7] for such a evaluation. Remark 2.2. If the randomvariable G satisfies σmin 2 G σmax 2 a.s. the formula (2.3 will provide us lower and upper bounds for the density. However, in this case, we should use the formula (1.5 to get Gaussian estimates for the density because Proposition 1.1 only requires D 1,2. We end up this section by providing a variant of density formula (2.3 which can be of interest for the readers who are not used to working with the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator. Let (W t t [,T] be a standard Brownian motion defined on a complete probability space (Ω,,,P, where = ( t t [,T] is a natural filtration generated by W. Now Malliavin derivative operator is with respect to W and H = L 2 [,T]. We consider the stochastic process u s := E[D s s ]. Then, by the Clark-Ocone formula we have δ(u = E[D s s ]dw s = E[]. Hence, with the exact proof of Corollary 2.1, we obtain the following. Theorem 2.2. Let D 2,4 be such that E[] =. Define the random variable Φ := D s E[D s s ]ds. Assume that Φ a.s. and the random variables Φ and 1 T Φ 2 D sφ E[D s s ]ds belong to L 2 (Ω. Then the law of has a continuous density given by ρ (x = ρ (exp ( h (zdz ( exp w (zdz, x suppρ, (2.8 where the functions w and h are defined by [ ] w (z := E = z, h (z := E Φ [ 1 Φ 2 D s Φ E[D s s ]ds = z ]. Remark 2.3. The conclusion of Theorem 2.1 still holds true if we replace G by Φ and h by h. Remark 2.4. The following problem will be interesting to investigate: ind other choices for u in Proposition Examples In this section, we provide some examples to illustrate the applicability of our abstract results. 3.1 Additive functional of Gaussian processes Let (X t t [,T] be a centered Gaussian process with continuous paths. It is known from Section in [6] that the Gaussian space generated by X can be identified with an isonormal Gaussian process of 5

6 the type X = {X(h : h H}, where the real and separable Hilbert space H is defined as follows: (i denote by E the set of all R-valued step functions on [,T], (ii define H as the Hilbert space obtained by closing E with respect to the scalar product 1[,s], 1 [,t] H = E(X sx t. In particular, with such a notation, we identify X t with X(1 [,t]. We now consider the functional Y T := f(x s ds E[f(X s ]ds. (3.1 The density of Y T has been discussed by Nourdin and Viens, see Proposition 3.1 in [6]. In order to be able to obtain Gaussian estimates, they require the condition c f (x C for all x R and for some C,c >. Our Theorem 2.1 allows us to address the case, where f (x is not bounded above, and we obtain the following. Theorem 3.1. Assume that E[X s X v ] for all s,v [,T], and f : R R is a twice differentiable function satisfying f (x c for all x R. Then, the density of the random variable Y T exists and satisfies (i If f (x for all x R, then ρ YT (x ρ YT (exp 2c 2 σt 2, x. (3.2 (ii If f (x for all x R, then ρ YT (x ρ YT (exp 2c 2 σt 2, x, (3.3 where σ 2 T := E[X sx v ]dsdv. Proof. We only consider the case f (x c for all x R because the case f (x c can be treated similarly. The Malliavin derivative of Y T with respect to X is given by D r Y T = Thanks to Proposition 3.7 in [6] we have and D r L 1 Y T = G YT = e u f (X s 1 [,s] (rds, r [,T]. e u E [f (e u X s + 1 e 2u X s ]1 [,s] (rdsdu, r [,T]. f (X s E [f (e u X v + 1 e 2u X v ]E[X sx v ]dsdvdu, where X stands for an independent copy of X and E is the expectation with respect to X. Hence, it holds that G YT = c 2 e u c 2 E[X s X v ]dsdvdu E[X s X v ]dsdv = c 2 σ 2 T a.s. 6

7 urthermore, we have, for r,θ [,T], D θ D r L 1 Y T = D θ D r Y T = f (X s 1 [,s] (r1 [,s] (θds, e 2u E [f (e u X s + 1 e 2u X s]1 [,s] (r1 [,s] (θdsdu. Thus, if f (x for all x R, then D θ D r Y T and D θ D r L 1 Y T. As a consequence, by its definition, h ( a.s. So (3.2 follows from (2.5. Similarly, if f (x for all x R, then h ( a.s. and (3.3 follows from (2.6. This completes the proof. 3.2 SDEs with fractional noise We consider stochastic differential equations driven by fractional Brownian motion of the form X t = x + b(s,x s ds+ σ(s,x s db H s, t [,T], (3.4 where x R, B H = (B H t [,T] is afractional Brownianmotion (fbm ofhurst parameterh ( 1 2,1 and the stochastic integral is interpreted as a pathwise Riemann-Stieltjes integral, see e.g. [9]. Recall that B H is a centered Gaussian process and it admits the so-called Volterra representation (see e.g. [7] pp B H t = where (W t t [,T] is a standard Brownian motion, and c H = K H (t,sdw s, (3.5 K H (t,s := c H s 1/2 H (u s H 3 2 u H 1/2 du, s t H(2H 1 β(2 2H,H 1/2, where β is the Beta function. s By different approaches, the density estimates for the solutions to the equation (3.4 have been recently obtained in [1, 2]. In both these two papers, the authors require c σ(t,x C for all (t,x [,T] R and for some C,c >. When H = 1 2, BH reduces to a Brownian motion and in this case, Nualart [8, Theorem 2.3] only requires σ(t,x c to get a Gaussian lower bound. Here we are able to obtain such a similar result for the case H > 1 2. or a differentiable function f, we denote f 1 f (t,x := t (t,x, f f 2 (t,x := x (t,x. Lemma 3.1. Suppose that b,σ C 1,1 ([,T] R and there exists a constants c > so that σ(t,x c for all (t,x [,T] R. In addition, we assume that the function ( m(t,x := b 2 bσ 2 σ σ 1 (t,x σ is bounded on [,T] R. Then, the Malliavin derivative of X t with respect to Brownian motion W is given by ( ( D s X t = σ(t,x t (K H 1(v,sexp m(u,x u du dv 1 [,t] (s. s v 7

8 Proof. The proof is the same as that of Lemma 5.3 in [2]. Notice that the boundedness of m ensures that the equation (5.6 in [2] satisfies the global Lipschitz and linear growth conditions and hence, its solution is Malliavin differentiable. Theorem 3.2. Suppose the assumption of Lemma 3.1. In addition, we assume that there exists M > so that m(t,x, m 2(t,xσ(t,x, σ 2(t,x M for all (t,x [,T] R. Then, for each t (,T], the density of X t exists and ρ Xt (x c 1 exp ( (x E[X t] 2 2c 2 t 2H, x R, where c 1,c 2 are positive constants. Proof. We assume σ(t,x c, the case σ(t,x c can be treated similarly. Thus we always have D s X t a.s. or the simplicity, we write D s X t = σ(t,x t ϕ(t,s, where ( ( ϕ(t,s := (K H 1(v,sexp m(u,x u du dv 1 [,t] (s. We have ( ( D r ϕ(t,s = (K H 1 (v,s The boundedness of m yields s s v v ( m (u,x u σ(u,x u ϕ(u,rdu dvexp m(u,x u du dv 1 [,t] (s. v e MT K H (t,s ϕ(t,s e MT K H (t,s, s t T. Since m σ is bounded, this implies that v m (u,x u σ(u,x u ϕ(u,rdu M v emt K H (u,rdu MTe MT K H (t,r, and hence, We have and D r ϕ(t,s MTe MT K H (t,rϕ(t,s, r,s t T. D r D s X t = σ 2 (t,x td r X t ϕ(t,s+σ(t,x t D r ϕ(t,s = σ 2 (t,x tϕ(t,rd s X t +σ(t,x t D r ϕ(t,s D r D s X t Me MT K H (t,rd s X t +σ(t,x t MTe MT K H (t,rϕ(t,s = M(1+Te MT K H (t,rd s X t, r,s t T. ixed t (,T]. We now apply Theorem 2.2 to := X t E[X t ]. We have urthermore, for r t, D r Φ = Φ = = D s X t E[D s X t s ]ds σ(t,x t ϕ(t,se[σ(t,x t ϕ(t,s s ]ds c 2 e 2MT KH 2 (t,sds = c2 e 2MT t 2H a.s. D r D s X t E[D s X t s ]ds+ 8 D s X t E[D r D s X t s ]1 [,s] (rds,

9 which leads us to D r Φ 2M(1+Te MT K H (t,r Consequently, we deduce D r Φ E[D r r ]dr 2M(1+Te MT Recalling the definition of h, we obtain D s X t E[D s X t s ]ds = 2M(1+Te MT K H (t,rφ. Φ K H (t,re[d r r ]dr 2M(1+Te MT Φ e MT ϕ(t,re[d r r ]dr = 2M(1+Te 2MT Φ 2M(1+Te2MT c h ( 2M(1+Te2MT c Φ 2 a.s. So we can conclude that ( x 2 2M(1+Te2MT ρ (x ρ (exp 2c 2 e 2MT t2h c Now it is easy to see that there exist positive constants c 1,c 2 such that ρ (x c 1 exp 2c 2 t 2H, x R. This finishes the proof because ρ Xt (x = ρ (x E[X t ]. D r X t σ(t,x t E[D r r ]dr a.s. x, x R. Remark 3.1. AsimpleexampleverifyingTheorem3.2iswhenb(t,x = σ(t,x = f(x,wheref C 1 (R and f(x c for all x R. References [1] M. Besalú, A. Kohatsu-Higa, S. Tindel, Gaussian-type lower bounds for the density of solutions of SDEs driven by fractional Brownian motions. Ann. Probab. 44 (216, no. 1, [2] N.T. Dung, N. Privault, G. L. Torrisi, Gaussian estimates for the solutions of some onedimensional stochastic equations. Potential Anal (215 43: [3] N.T. Dung, The density of solutions to multifractional stochastic Volterra integro-differential equations. Nonlinear Anal. 13 (216, [4] S. Kusuoka, D. Stroock, Applications of the Malliavin calculus. III. J. ac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA Math. 34 (1987, no. 2, [5] P. Malliavin, E. Nualart, Density minoration of a strongly non-degenerated random variable. J. unct. Anal. 256 (29, no. 12, [6] I. Nourdin,.G. Viens, Density formula and concentration inequalities with Malliavin calculus. Electron. J. Probab. 14 (29, no. 78,

10 [7] D. Nualart, The Malliavin calculus and related topics. Probability and its Applications. Springer- Verlag, Berlin, second edition, 26. [8] E. Nualart, Exponential divergence estimates and heat kernel tail. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 338 (24, no. 1, [9] M. Zähle, Integration with respect to fractal functions and stochastic calculus. I. Probab. Theory Related ields, 111: ,