arxiv: v1 [math.pr] 8 May 2017

Transcription

1 SEMI-MARKOV MODELS AND MOTION IN HETEROGENEOUS MEDIA arxiv: v1 [math.pr] 8 May 217 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 Abstract. In this paper we stuy continuous time ranom walks (CTRWs) such that the holing time in each state has a istribution epening on the state itself. For such processes, we provie integro-ifferential (backwar an forwar) equations of Volterra type, exhibiting a position epenent convolution kernel. Particular attention is evote to the case where the holing times have a power-law ecaying ensity, whose exponent epens on the state itself, which leas to variable orer fractional equations. A suitable limit yiels a variable orer fractional heat equation, which moels anomalous iffusions in heterogeneous meia. Contents 1. Introuction 1 2. Semi-Markov moels for motion in homogeneous meia 4 3. Semi-Markov moels for motion in heterogeneous meia The time-change by a epenent time process Variable orer backwar equations 1 4. The forwar equations of semi-markov processes in heterogeneous meia Convergence to the variable orer fractional iffusion Arbitrary holing times an integro-ifferential Volterra equations Integro-ifferential Volterra equations with position epenent kernel 19 References Introuction We here consier continuous time ranom walks (CTRWs) on countable state spaces. It is assume that every time the walker jumps, the future trajectory becomes inepenent of its past, namely the next position an the next jump time epen only on the current position; furthermore, in a generic time instant, the future behavior is assume to be also epening on the time alreay spent in the current position. Such a process is sai to be semi-markovian. If the waiting times between jumps follow an exponential istribution, then, ue to the lack of memory property, the ranom walk is a Markov process. Date: May 9, Mathematics Subject Classification. 6K15, 6K4, 6G22. Key wors an phrases. Semi-Markov processes, anomalous iffusion, continuous time ranom walks, Volterra equations, fractional erivatives, suborinators. 1

2 2 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 It is well known that suitable (Markovian) ranom walks are goo approximations of the Brownian motion. In the last ecaes it has been notice that the CTRWs whose waiting times have istribution with a power-law ecay, playe a central role in statistical physics because they are goo approximations of anomalous iffusion processes, where the mean square isplacement grows as x 2 t α, α (, 1), an therefore slower than a stanar Brownian motion (for a complete overview on this matter consult [34] an references therein). In these moels each site exercises a trapping effect which, in some sense, elayes the time with respect to a corresponing Markov process. It turns out that these facts can be frame in a nice probabilistic setting: to construct a large class of CTRWs, it is sufficient to replace the eterministic time t of a Markov process by an inepenent inverse stable suborinator (on this point see, for example, the instructive iscussion in [29]). It is well known (see for example [18, page 365] an [33]) that the transition probabilities of the correponing CTRW follows both the fractional backwar an forwar equations. Such equations are obtaine from Kolmogorov backwar an forwar equations by replacing the time erivative with the fractional one, which introuces a memory effect by a convolution integral with a slowly ecaying power-law kernel. A suitable scaling then leas to anomalous iffusion processes, whose p..f. solves the Fokker-Planck equation (see, e.g., [34]) 2 p(x, y, t) = kd1 α t p(x, y, t). (1.1) t x2 It has been empirically confirme (see [34]) that these moels are particularly effective in a number of applications, e.g., for moeling iffusion in percolative an porous systems, charge carrier transport in amorphous semiconuctors, nuclear magnetic resonance, motion on fractal geometries, ynamics of a bea in a polymeric network, protein conformational ynamics an many others. We finally stress that many aspects of the theory hol as they are if the istribution of the holing times is arbitrary an not necessarily with a power law ecay provie that it satisfies some mil assumptions (see, for example, the iscussion in [29, Section 4]). In this case the ranom time process is given by the inverse of a generic suborinator an the corresponing backwar equations have the form of a Volterra integro-ifferential equation t t p(x, y, s) k(t s) s k(t)p(x, y, ) = z g x,z p(z, y, t), (1.2) where g x,y := (G) x,y an G is the Markovian generator (see [9; 33; 44; 45] for the general theory an [11; 12] for some particular cases). The fractional case is more familiar in statistical physics because it is wiely use in applications. Up to now, we have only consiere the simplest forms of fractional kinetic equations, where the fractional inex α is constant. On the other han, it is clear that further theoretical investigations are require for the escription of more complicate (an more realistic) ranom processes, where the particle moves in an inhomogeneous environment; as we will iscuss in the paper it turns out that this leas to equations of multi-fractional type. Equations with time-fractional erivative whose orer epens on space have been stuie in [38], where the authors consiere a CTRW, say X(t), t, such that the function f(x, t) = E{u(X(t)) X() = x},

3 3 for a suitable test function u, solves the fractional backwar equation D α(x) t f(x, t) = Gf(x, t) (1.3) where D α(x) t enotes the α-fractional erivative in the sense of Caputo-Dzerbayshan, i.e., for α (, 1), D α t u(t) := 1 Γ(1 α) t t u(s) (t s) α s t α u() Γ(1 α), (1.4) for any function u such that the above integral is ifferentiable. In such a moel, the trapping effect is not exercise with the same intensity at all sites. Inee, when the particle reaches the state x, it is trappe for a time interval with ensity ψ(t) t 1 α(x) before jumping to another point. Thus the time elay is stronger when the particle is locate at points with small values of α. This leas to the funamental fact regaring the time-change relation X(t) = M(L(t)): the time process L an the Markov process M are not inepenent. Such a construction is far from trivial, since L is the right continuous inverse of a non-ecreasing aitive process also calle time-inhomogeneous suborinator (for basic information consult [41] an [37]). In the case of a countable state space S, we here present the erivation of the backwar equation D α(x) t p(x, y, t) = z We further introuce the forwar equation t p(x, y, t) = z g x,z p(z, y, t). (1.5) g z,y R D 1 α(z) t p(x, z, t) (1.6) where R D 1 α(x) t enotes the fractional erivative in the sense of Riemann-Liouville, i.e., for β (, 1), R D β 1 t u(t) := Γ(1 β) t t u(s) (t s) β s (1.7) for any function u such that the above operator is well efine. Further we explain why eq. (1.6) is a true forwar equation in the classical sense of Kolmogorov. Therefore, this paper also creates a further brige between the theory of semi- Markov processes an moels of motion in heterogeneous meia (a ifferent theory concerning motions at finite velocity is iscusse in [19]): on the one han, there is the theory of semi-markov processes, on the other han, there are recent works concerning the fractional iffusion equation with multifractional inex: t p(x, y, t) = 1 2 ( ) 2 x 2 k(x)d 1 α(x) t p(x, y, t). (1.8) Such equation has been erive in [8], but the relate theory is still at an early stage, especially with regar to physical an phenomenological aspects. However, the use of a multi-fractional inex α(x) is more realistic in the escription of physical phenomena. Inee, it takes into account the possibility of heterogeneous meia, or, more simply, it consiers homogeneous meia where some impurities are scattere. Finally, in the same spirit as (1.2) we show that previous moels can be generalize by letting the (ranom) trapping effects having an arbitrary ensity, subject

4 4 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 to some mil assumptions. These moels then yiel integro-ifferential equations of Volterra type, with a position epenent kernel of convolution, i.e., t p(x, y, t) = z g z,y t t p(x, z, s) k(t s, z) s. (1.9) The plan of the paper is the following. In sections 2, 3, 4 an 5, we consier the case of power-law holing times, which is the most familiar case in statistical physics. In particular, in section 2 we review (in our notations) some known facts on CTRWs in a homogeneous environment, where the fractional inex α is assume to be constant in space. Section 3 an 4 regar CTRWs in heterogeneous environment, where the fractional inex is assume to be space-epenent. Section 5 eals with the erivation of the multifractional iffusion equation. In section 6 many results are extene to the case where the holing times follow more general istributions. 2. Semi-Markov moels for motion in homogeneous meia Before moving to heterogenous meia we collect some results from the literature concerning classical moels which will be use in the subsequent parts. As we state in the introuction, the most popular moel in statistical physics is relate with holing times in each site having a ensity ψ(t) Ct α 1, C >, α (, 1), with a power law ecay. So, for example ψ(t) = (/t)e α ( λt α ) (compare with [42, eq. (26)]), an this is relate to fractional processes. Hence we focus the attention on this case to present the results concerning this theory. First, in orer to introuce the notation that we will use hereafter, we recall some basic facts regaring the classical theory of steppe Markov processes. Let us consier a continuous time Markov process M with iscrete state space S n 1 M(t) = X n V n t < V n+1 where V = V n = E k (2.1) where X n is a homogeneous iscrete-time Markov chain on S with transition probabilities h i,j = P (X n+1 = j X n = i), n N i, j S, (2.2) an the sojourn times are such that Let k= P (E n > t X n = i) = e λit n N, t. (2.3) p i,j (t) = P (M(t) = j M() = i) (2.4) be the transition probabilities. The Markovian generator of M is the matrix with elements g i,j = λ i (h i,j δ i,j ) (2.5) where δ i,j enotes the Kronecker symbol. Then the infinitesimal transition probabilities have the form p i,j (t) = { g i,j t = λ i h i,j t, i j, 1 + g i,i t = 1 λ i t + λ i h i,i t, i = j. (2.6)

5 5 It is enough for our moels to consier the case in which, a.s., ζ := sup V n = E n =, (2.7) n n so that the processes here are non explosive an hence we shall not consier what happens to a process after explosion. Uner all these assumptions the functions p i,j (t), with i, j S solve the Kolmogorov backwar equations (e.g. [36, Sec. 2.8]) t p i,j(t) = g i,k p k,j (t), k p i,j () = δ i,j, (2.8) as well as the Kolmogorov forwar equations t p i,j(t) = p i,k (t)g k,j, k p i,j () = δ i,j, (2.9) which can be written in compact matrix notation as P (t) = GP (t) = P (t)g, t P () = I. (2.1) We now consier a CTRW constructe in the same way of M, except for the istribution of the waiting times, which are no longer exponentially istribute. These processes are sai to be semi-markov processes in the sense of Gihman an Skoroho [2, Chapter 3]. Hence let X(t) be n 1 X(t) = X n, T n t < T n+1, where T = T n = J k, (2.11) where X n is a homogeneous iscrete time Markov chain on S with transition probabilities h i,j = P (X n+1 = j X n = i), n N, i, j S, (2.12) an the sojourn times are such that k= P (J n > t X n = i) = F i (t), n N, t, (2.13) where F i (t) = 1 F i (t) is an arbirtrary c..f. We will evote particular attention to the case for λ i >, where P (J n > t X n = i) = E α ( λ i t α ), n N, t, (2.14) E α (x) := k= x k Γ(1 + αk) is the Mittag-Leffler function. In this case (e.g. [42, eq. (26)]) t α E α ( λt α ) C λ Γ(1 α), C λ >, (2.15) an the corresponing equations are fractional. The charactering property of semi- Markov processes is the following: by efining γ(s) = s sup {w s : X(w) X(s)}, the sojourn time of X in the current position, the couple (X(t), γ(t)) is a (strict) Markov process [2, Chapter 3, Section 3, Lemma 2]. This is to say that, when conitioning on the trajectory up to time s, future events epen not only on the

6 6 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 current position X(s), as it is for Markov processes, but also on the quantity γ(s). Let p i,j (t) := P (X(t) = j X() = i, γ() = ) = P (X(t + τ) = j X(τ) = i, γ(τ) = ) (2.16) be the transition probabilities (the secon equality follows by time-homogeneity). We know from [19, page 2] that the transition probabilities solve the renewal equation t p i,j (t) = P {J i > t}δ i,j + h i,l p l,j (t s)f i (s) (2.17) where here f i (t) enotes a smooth ensity of F i (t). Note that (2.17), which provies a system of integral equations for the transition probabilities (2.16), comes from a very classical conitioning argument: fixing the time of the first jump J an using the Markov property of the semi-markov process at the jump times yiels (see [19, page 19] for some etails) P (X(t) = j X() = i, γ() = ) = P (X(t) = j, J > t X() = i, γ() = ) l + P (X(t) = j, J t X() = i, γ() = ). (2.18) A similar approach on semi-markov processes, with an interesting iscussion on exactly solvable moels, can be foun in [16]. The process (2.11) is known to have a eep connection to fractional calculus. Inee, the following result hols. Proposition 2.1. The transition functions p i,j (t), i, j S, efine in (2.16) solve the following system of backwar equations D α t p i,j (t) = k as well as the system of forwar equations g i,k p k,j (t), p i,j () = δ i,j, (2.19) D α t p i,j (t) = k p i,k (t)g k,j, p i,j () = δ i,j. (2.2) Proof. By the convolution Theorem we can compute the Laplace transform in (2.19) an we obtain s α p i,j (s) sα s p i,j() = k g i,k p k,j (s). (2.21) Instea, by applying the Laplace tranform to (2.17) we have s α p i,j (s) = s(λ i + s α ) δ i,j + l λ i h i,l p l,j (s) λ i + s α. (2.22) By setting g i,j = λ i (h i,j δ i,j ), it is easy to show that (2.22) reuces to (2.21) an using the uniqueness theorem for Laplace tranforms eq. (2.19) is prove. Now if we apply again the Laplace transform to (2.2) we get that s α p i,j (s) sα s p i,j() = k g k,j p i,k (s), (2.23)

7 7 an thus the solution of (2.19) an (2.2) coincie. Inee they can be obtaine by solving either the system (2.21) or (2.23) in the variables p i,j (s), which, in compact operator form, reas P (s) = s α 1 (s α I G) 1 (2.24) where I is the ientity matrix, an this conclues the proof. Remark 2.2. We observe that (2.19) erives irectly by the renewal equation, which has a clear backwar meaning. Instea the reason why we call eq. (2.2) forwar equation is that it is formally obtaine by introucing the fractional Caputo erivative in the Kolmogorov forwar equation (2.9); the fact that it has a clear probabilistic interpretation has never been prove. A clear probabilistic meaning to (2.2) will be erive later in Section 4 from the general form of the forwar equation of semi-markov processes we will present. Concerning forwar equations of semi-markov processes, see also the iscussion in [13]. It is well known that (2.11) can be equivalently constructe by replacing the time t in (2.1) with the right continuous inverse of an inepenent α-stable suborinator. For the sake of clarity we here report a sketche proof of this fact, which essentially follows [29, Theorem 2.2]. Let H an L respectively enote the α-stable suborinator an its inverse, i.e., L(t) := inf {s : H(s) > t}. (2.25) In orer to prove that (2.11) is the same process as M(L(t)) it is sufficient to prove that M(L(t)) has the same Mittag-Leffler intertimes of (2.11). This is clear since to construct a semi-markov process in the sense of Gihman an Skorooho, as in Section 2, it is sufficient to have an embee chain X n an a sequence of inepenent r.v. s representing the holing times. Here M(t) an (2.11) have the same embee chain an thus it remains only to show that they have the same waiting times. Since we have which is equivalent to (by [29, Lemma 2.1]) M(t) = X n V n t < V n+1 (2.26) M(L(t)) = X n V n L(t) < V n+1 (2.27) M(L(t)) = X n H(V n ) t < H(V n+1 ). (2.28) Further, by [1, Lemma 2.3.2] we have that H(V n ) = H(V n ), a.s., we can rewrite (2.28) as M(L(t)) = X n H(V n ) t < H(V n+1 ). (2.29) Thus the jump times τ n of M(L(t)) are such that τ n = H(Vn ) an since H has stationary increments, the holing times of M(L(t)) become, for any n τ n+1 τ n = H(V n+1 ) H(V n ) = H(E n ), (2.3) where we use that V n+1 V n are exponential r.v. s E n. By a stanar conitioning argument we have, uner P ( X n = x), Ee ηh(en) = λ x λ x + η α. (2.31)

8 8 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 Now since [3, eq. (3.4)] we have, e ηt E α ( λ x t α )t = η α 1 1 λ x + η α (2.32) e ηt t E α( λ x t α )t = an this shows that the holing times have the same istribution. λ x λ x + η α (2.33) Example 2.3 (The fractional Poisson process). One of the most popular CTRW with heavy taile waiting times is the so-calle Fractional Poisson process, corresponing to the case where λ i = λ, h i,i+1 = 1 an X() = a.s. It has been stuie by a number of authors (see for example [3; 22; 24; 29; 4]). Its transition probabilities (2.16) solve the system of fractional Kolmogorov forwar equations D α t p i,j (t) = λp i,j (t) + λp i,j 1 (t) j i p i,j () = δ i,j (2.34) as well as the system of Kolmogorov fractional backwar equations D α t p i,j (t) = λp i,j (t) + λp i+1,j (t) j i p i,j () = δ i,j (2.35) an it is easy to check irectly that their common explicit solution in Laplace space is p i,j (s) = λj i s α 1 (λ + s α. (2.36) ) j i+1 However, the equation often reporte in the literature (e.g. [4]) is D α t p k (t) = λp k (t) + λp k 1 (t) k (2.37) p k () = δ k, which is the forwar equation corresponing to the special case i =. In [29], the authors prove that the fractional Poisson process can be constructe as a stanar Poisson process with the time variable replace by an inverse stable suborinator. 3. Semi-Markov moels for motion in heterogeneous meia We now show how the tools use for moeling homogeneous meia can be aapte to inclue heterogeneity, in the sense that the trapping effect exercise in ifferent sites epens on the current position. To be consistent with the literature introuce in Section 2 we first focus on the case in which the holing time at the position x has a ensity ψ(t) t α(x) 1. How this can be generalize to ifferent ecaying patterns will be showe later. Hence we consier now a CTRW efine exactly as in (2.11), except for the istribution of the waiting times, which here present a state epenent fractional orer: n 1 X(t) = X n, T n t < T n+1, where T = T n = P (J n > t X n = i) = F i (t) = E αi ( λ i t αi ) α i (, 1). (3.1) k= J k

9 9 Use again [42, eq. (26)] to say that, for a constant C > epening on α i an λ i, we have, as t t E α i ( λ i t αi ) Ct αi 1 (3.2) an thus this is a moel of a motion performe in a meium where the trapping effect has not the same intensity at all sites. Before moving to the equation, it is usefull to show that also in this situation it is possible to interpret the semi-markov process X(t) as the time-change of a Markov process. However this is far from trivial an requires some analysis which is carrie out in the following section The time-change by a epenent time process. In orer to have an interpretation of (3.1) as a time-change process, we nee the notion of multistable suborinator (see for example [35] an [37]). Strictly speaking, a multistable suborinator is a generalization of a stable suborinator, in the sense that the stability inex is a function of time α = α(t) (, 1). The intensity of jumps is escribe by a time-epenent Lévy measure ν(x, t) = α(t)x α(t) 1 x Γ(1 α(t)) x >. (3.3) A multistable suborinator σ(t), t is an aitive process in the sense of [41], i.e., it is right-continuous an has inepenent but non stationary increments. Hence all the finite imensional istributions are completely etermine by the istribution of the increments which can be obtaine from (3.3). Therefore (see [37, Section 2] for etails on this point) Ee η(σ(t) σ(s)) = e t s ηα(τ) τ, s t. (3.4) Multistable suborinators are particular cases of a larger class of processes, known as non-homogeneous suborinators, which were introuce in [37]. Definition 3.1. A multistable suborinator σ(t), t, is sai to be piecewise stable if there exists a sequence α j (, 1) an a sequence t j such that the stability inex can be written as α(t) = α j t j t < t j+1 (3.5) an thus the time-epenent Lévy measure has the form ν(x, t) = α jx αj 1 Γ(1 α j ) x, t j t < t j+1. (3.6) Note that to each α j (, 1) there correspons a stable suborinator H αj (t) with inex α j in such a way that σ is efine as σ(t) = σ(t j ) + H αj (t t j ) t [t j, t j+1 ). (3.7) The following theorem shows that (3.1) is given by a Markov process time-change by the inverse of a piecewice stable suborinator. The major novelty consists in the fact that the original process an the ranom time are not inepenent as in the classical case. This reflects the fact that the intensity of the trapping effect is not space homogeneous, i.e., the time elay epens on the current position.

10 1 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 Theorem 3.2. Let M be a Markov process efine as in (2.1). Moreover, let σ M (t) be a multistable (piecewise stable) suborinator epenent on M whose Lévy measure is given, conitionally on V 1 = v 1, V 2 = v 2, an X 1 = x 1, X 2 = x 2, by ν M (x, t) = α x j x αx j 1 Γ(1 α xj ) x, v j t < v j+1. (3.8) Let L M (t) be the right-continuous process L M (t) := inf { s : σ M (s) > t }. (3.9) Then the time-change process M(L M (t)) is the same process as (3.1). Proof. The proof is on the line of the iscussion at the en Section 2. To prove that (3.1) coincies with M(L M (t)) it is sufficient to prove that M(L M (t)) has the same Mittag-Leffler intertimes of (3.1) since M(t) an X(t) have the same embee chain. Let V n, n 1, be the jump times of M. Since we have M(t) = X n V n t < V n+1 (3.1) M(L M (t)) = X n V n L M (t) < V n+1. (3.11) Now by [37, Theorem 2.2] we know that σ M (t) is strictly increasing an then we can apply [29, Lemma 2.1] to say that (3.1) is equivalent to M(L M (t)) = X n σ M (V n ) t < σ M (V n+1 ). (3.12) Now use [37, Theorem 2.1] to say that, a.s., σ M (t) = σ M (t ) an thus to say that (3.12) is equivalent to M(L M (t)) = X n σ M (V n ) t < σ M (V n+1 ). (3.13) Thus the jump times τ n of M(L M (t)) are such that τ n = σ M (V n ) an, by (3.7), the holing times are such that, uner P ( X n = x), τ n+1 τ n = σ M (V n+1 ) σ M (V n ) = H αx (E n ). (3.14) By a stanar conitioning argument we have Ee ηhαx (En) = This fact together with formula (2.33) conclues the proof. λ x. (3.15) αx λ x + η 3.2. Variable orer backwar equations. We here erive the backwar equation for the semi-markov process (3.1) in this new heterogeneous framework an we show that this equation becomes fractional of orer α(i) where i is the state where the transition is starte. Theorem 3.3. The transition functions of (3.1) p i,j (t), i, j S, solve the following system of backwar equations D αi t p i,j (t) = k g i,k p k,j (t), p i,j () = δ i,j. (3.16)

11 11 Proof. We can perform Laplace transform computation similar to that in the proof of Proposition 2.1. By applying the Laplace transform to (3.16) we obtain s αi p i,j (s) s αi 1 p i,j () = k g i,k p k,j (s). (3.17) Instea, by applying the Laplace tranform to (2.17) we have s αi p i,j (s) = s(λ i + s αi ) δ i,j + l λ i h i,l p l,j (s). (3.18) αi λ i + s By setting g i,j = λ i (h i,j δ i,j ), it is easy to show that (3.18) can be rewritten as (3.17) an by the uniqueness theorem for Laplace tranform the esire result is immeiate. The explicit form of the transition probabilities is easy obtaine in Laplace space. By applying the Laplace transform, the system of fractional equations (3.16) reuces to the system of linear equations (3.17) in the variables p i,j (s). In compact matrix form, (3.17) can be written as Λ P (s) s 1 ΛI = G P (s) (3.19) where ( P (s)) i,j = p(s) i,j, I is the ientity matrix, while Thus the solution in matrix form is written as Λ = iag(s α1, s α2,..., s αn...). (3.2) P (s) = 1 s (Λ G) 1 ΛI. (3.21) 4. The forwar equations of semi-markov processes in heterogeneous meia In the spirit of what happens in the homogeneous case one can be tempte to look for the forwar equation by trying to replace the orinary time-erivative in (2.9) with a variable-orer Caputo erivative D α( ) t, where ( ) enotes the final state j. However, such an attempt is unsuccessful since it can be shown that the solution in the Laplace space oes not coincie with the one of (3.16). We iscuss here an example from the literature in which it is showe that this approach fails. Example 4.1 (The state epenent fractional Poisson process). In the pioneering work [15], the authors stuie a generalization of the fractional Poisson process in which the waiting times are inepenent but not ientically istribute. For a given sequence J n, n, of inepenent r.v. s with istribution P (J k t) = E αk ( λt α k ), α k (, 1), (4.1) they efine the state epenent fractional Poisson process as N (t) = n T n t < T n+1 (4.2) where T n = n 1 k= J k, T =. Further they prove that the state probabilities p k (t) := P (N (t) = k N () = ) are such that p k (s) = e st p k (t)t = λ k s α k 1 k i= (sαi + λ). (4.3)

12 12 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 The authors notice that apparently N (t) is not governe by fractional ifferential equations, since the state probabilities corresponing to (4.3) o not solve the fractional forwar equation with variable orer erivative D α k t p k (t) = λp k (t) + λp k 1 (t). (4.4) Moreover, the construction of N (t) as a time-change process was not clear. An application of our results to this particular situation also shes light to such problems. In particular, from Theorem 3.3 it follows that the transition probabilities, which have explicit Laplace transform p i,j (s) = e st p i,j (t)t = sαj 1 λ j i j k=i (λ + sα k ), (4.5) are really relate with fractional calculus an inee they solve the following system of fractional Kolmogorov backwar equations Dt αi p i,j (t) = λp i,j (t) + λp i+1,j (t) j i (4.6) p i,j () = δ i,j. Moreover, by Theorem 3.2 it follows that to obtain (4.2), a stanar Poisson process must be compose with a epenent multistable suborinator. In what follows we etermine the structure of the forwar equations for semi-markov processes efine as in (3.1). The state-epenent fractional Poisson process is therefore a particular case, so a fractional forwar equation for this process can be really written own an oes not coincie with (4.4). We observe that in this framework the authors of [5] also stuie the time-change of a Poisson process by means of the inverse of a multistable suborinator. However in this case the multistable suborinator is assume inepenent from the Poisson process. Hence the resulting process is a ranom walk with inepenent but non ientically istribute sojourn times, whose probability law is a time-inhomogeneous generalization of the Mittag-Leffler istribution, which is not coinciing with (4.1). Hence, the process in [5] is not a moel for motions in heterogeneous meia, but rather in an environment whose physical conitions change over time. We now erive the system of forwar (or Fokker-Planck) equations governing the process (3.1). Since the ranom walk has place in a heterogeneous meium, an aequate kinetic escription of the process requires variable orer fractional operators. The proof of the following theorem is base on the quantities J + i (t)t = P ((X t+t = i) (X t i)) J i (t)t = P ((X t+t i) (X t = i)) where J + i an J i represent the gain an the loss fluxes for the state i. It is intuitive that to eal with J + i an J i it is convenient to assume that the when the process jumps (so when t = T n for some n) it can t jump in its current position. Hence we will assume in the following theorem that h i,i =. However this is not strictly necessary an by aapting the notations one can generalize an remove the assumption. Remark 4.2. The Markov property is a consequence of the lack of memory property of the exponential istribution, which roughly states that when the Markov process is at i the probability of having a jump in an infinitesimal interval of time t is λ i t, so the rate λ i is constant in time. Of course since the lack of memory is not

13 13 true for other istributions, we must have here that the rate varies with time, i.e., it is λ i u i (t)t. It turns out that in this case the function u i (t) is given by u i (t) = tαi 1 Γ(α i ), α i (, 1). (4.7) This fact will be prove in the general situation in Section 6. We remark that the probability that in an infinitesimal interval there is more than one jump is o(t). This is because by construction we know that X(t) is the same process as M(t ) with t = σ M (t ): since σ M (t ) is, a.s., strictly increasing on any finite interval of time an continuous, we have that within an infinitesimal time interval t also the process X(t) performs at most one jump. Theorem 4.3. Let X be the process in (3.1). Assume that the h i,i =. Then the transition probabilities p l,i (t) = P (X(t) = i X() = l, γ() = ) solve the following system of fractional forwar equations t p l,i(t) = k l, i S g k,i R D 1 α k t p l,k (t). (4.8) Proof. The probability that the process performs more than one jump in an infinitesimal interval is o(t) is iscusse in Remark 4.2. Let J + i (t)t be the probability of reaching the state i uring the time interval [t, t + t), i.e., J + i (t)t = P ((X t+t = i) (X t i)) an let J i (t)t be the probability of leaving the state i uring the time interval [t, t + t), i.e., J i (t)t = P ((X t+t i) (X t = i)). Then we have uner P := P ( X() = l, γ() = ) P ({X t+t = i}) = P ({X t+t = i} {X t = i}) + P ({X t+t = i} {X t i}) = P ({X t = i}) P ({X t+t i} {X t = i}) + P ({X t+t = i} {X t i}) (4.9) which, in our notations, reas or, equivalently, p l,i (t + t) = p l,i (t) J i (t)t + J + i (t)t t p l,i(t) = J + i (t) J i (t), t. (4.1) By the total probability law, the ingoing flux can be compute as J + i (t) = k i J k (t)h k,i where h k,i is the matrix of the embee chain. Then we obtain the following balance equation (expressing the conservation of probability mass) t p l,i(t) = J k (t)h k,i J i (t) k i

14 14 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 which can also be written as t p l,i(t) = k J k (t)(h k,i δ k,i ). (4.11) The main goal is to compute the outgoing flux J i (t). It can be viewe as the sum of two contributions J i (t)t = A1 i (t)t + A 2 i (t)t where A 1 i (t)t is the probability to be initially in the state i an to remain there for a time exactly equal to t an A 2 i (t)t is the probability to reach the state i at time t < t an to remain there for a time t t. Thus J i (t) = f i(t)p l,i () + t f i (t t )J + i (t )t where p l,i () = δ l,i an f i (t) the probability ensity of the holing time in i. We can eliminate J + i (t) since by (4.1) we have J + i (t) = t p l,i(t) + J i (t). We thus obtain J i (t) = f i(t)p l,i () + t f i (t t ) ( t p l,i(t ) + J i (t ) ) t (4.12) which is an integral equation in J i (t). By applying the Laplace transform to (4.12) we obtain which gives J i (s) = f i (s)p l,i () + f i (s) ( s p l,i (s) p l,i () + J i (s)) J i (s) = s f i (s) 1 f i (s) p l,i(s). (4.13) By assuming that the holing times follow a Mittag-Leffler istribution we have by (2.33) that an thus formula (4.13) becomes λ i f i (s) = λ i + s αi J i (s) = λ is 1 αi p l,i (s). By remining the efinition of Riemann-Liouville erivative (1.7), we have an (4.11) reuces to t p l,i(t) = k J i (t) = λ i R D 1 αi t p l,i (t) (4.14) λ k R D 1 α k t p l,k (t)(h k,i δ k,i ) = k R D 1 α k t p l,k (t)g k,i. (4.15) an the proof is complete.

15 15 Remark 4.4. We remark that the reason why such equation is calle forwar is that the operator on the right sie acts on the forwar variable i but leaves unchange the backwar variable l. Inee, the equation is erive by conitioning on the event of the last jump (reaching the final state i) that may have occurre in a narrow interval near t. This last aspect is particularly clear by looking at (4.9). Remark 4.5. If X is a Markov process, then the sojourn times are exponentially istribute, i.e. Then (4.13) reuces to f i (s) = λ i λ i + s. J i (s) = λ i p l,i (s) namely J i (t) = λ ip l,i (t). (4.16) Then the balance equation (4.11) reuces to the forwar Kolmogorov equation t p l,i(t) = k J k (t)(h k,i δ k,i ) = k = k λ k (h k,i δ k,i )p l,k (t) p l,k (t)g k,i. From the physical point of view, the ynamics of the Markovian case an that of the CTRW with Mittag-Leffler waiting times present a wie ifference. Inee, in the Markov case, the outgoing flux J i (t) from the state i at time t is proportional to the concentration of particles at the present time t (see (4.16)). Instea, in the CTRW with power law waiting times, the outgoing flux epens on the particles concentration at past times, accoring to a suitable weight kernel (see (4.14)). Example 4.6 (The state epenent fractional Poisson process (continue)). To conclue the iscussion of Example 4.1 we remark here that the forwar equation for the state-epenent fractional Poisson process can be written own by using Theorem 4.3. We have inee that the probabilities p l,i (t) := P (N (t) = i N () = l) satisfy ( R D 1 αi 1 t p l,i(t) = λ t ) p l,i 1 (t) R Dt 1 αi p l,i (t). (4.17) 5. Convergence to the variable orer fractional iffusion Suppose that the state space S is embee in R. Hence our processes can be viewe as processes on R, whose istribution is supporte on S. So in this section we consier a suitable scale limit of a semi-markov process an we show that the one time istribution converges to the solution of forwar heat equation on R with fractional variable orer t p(x, y, t) = 1 2 ( ) R 2 y 2 D 1 α(y) t p(x, y, t). (5.1)

16 16 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 Such equation has been erive for the first time in [8] exactly in the stuy of anomalous iffusion in heterogeneous meia. Hence our metho provies a semi- Markov framework to this equation. The homogeneous case is represente by the time-fractional iffusion equation Dt α p(x, y, t) = 1 p(x, y, t) (5.2) 2 x2 which is well known in literature an alreay has a probabilistic interpretation (see Remark 5.4 below for some etails). This equation is relate with anomalous iffusion (non-fickian iffusion), see, for example, [21] for a recent application. Let us assume that the process efine in (3.1) is a symmetric CTRW with Mittag-Leffler waiting times an with transition probabilities { 1 h i,j = 2, j = i 1, i + 1,, j i 1, i + 1, an λ i = λ. Since i, j are labels for points on the real line we can safely assume that the istance in R of two near points of S is constant an equal to ɛ, i.e., i j = ɛ for j = i 1, i + 1 where is the eucliean istance in R. Hence looking at the process in R the walker performs jumps of size ɛ. Then efine { R 2 p x,y (t), (x, y) S S, (x, y) p(x, y, t) =, otherwise. The forwar equation (4.8) reuces to t p l,i(t) = 1 [ 2 λ R D 1 αi 1 t By consiering now the auxiliary function we can rewrite (5.3) as 2 p l,i 1 (t) + R D 1 αi+1 t ] p l,i+1 (t) 2 R Dt 1 αi p l,i (t). (5.3) u(x, y, t) = R D 1 α(y) t p(x, y, t) (5.4) t p(x, y, t) = 1 λ (u(x, y ɛ, t) + u(x, y + ɛ, t) 2u(x, y, t)). (5.5) 2 By setting λ = 1/ɛ 2 an letting ɛ, the secon erivative 2 y u(x, y, t) arises. 2 We thus obtain t p(x, y, t) = 1 2 ( ) R 2 y 2 D 1 α(y) t p(x, y, t). (5.6) Note that the same scaling limit of a symmetic CTRW on a -imensional lattice leas to an analogous equation exibiting the Laplace operator in place of the secon orer erivative. Equation (5.1) can be obtaine phenomenologically by combining the continuity equation t p(x, y, t) = q(x, y, t) (5.7) y with an a-hoc fractional Ficks law regaring the flux q(x, y, t): q(x, y, t) = y R D 1 α(y) t p(x, y, t). (5.8)

17 17 The fractional erivative in this expression provies a weighte average of the ensity graient over the prior history, provie that the kernel of the average epens on the position y. In terms of probability theory, the picture is complete by the backwar heat equation with fractional variable orer D α(x) 2 t p(x, y, t) = 1 p(x, y, t). (5.9) 2 x2 Such equation has been erive in [38], where the authors stuie the convergence of the resolvent of semi-markov evolution operators. Heuristically, eq. (5.9) can be obtaine from the backwar equation (3.16) aapte to the case of a symmetric ranom walk with Mittag-Leffler waiting times: D αi t p i,j (t) = 1 2 λ (p i+1,j(t) + p i 1,j (t) 2p i,j (t)). (5.1) Inee, passing to a lattice of size ɛ we have D α(x) t p(x, y, t) = 1 2 λ( p(x + ɛ, y, t) + p(x ɛ, y, t) 2p(x, y, t) ). (5.11) By assuming λ = 1/ɛ 2, the limit ɛ gives the esire result. Remark 5.1. In our erivation of the fractional heat equations, the iffusion coefficient is put equal to 1. However, the equations reporte in the literature (e.g. [14; 8]) usually exhibit a space-epenent iffusion coefficient. To obtain this from a CTRW scheme, it is sufficient to assume a space epenent intensity λ such that, in the limit of small ɛ, it is of orer 1/ɛ 2, that is λ(x) = λ(x)/ɛ 2. Then, it is natural to efine the iffusion coefficient as k(x) = λ(x) (5.12) an to repeat the same scaling limit argument in orer to obtain both the forwar equation t p(x, y, t) = 1 2 ( ) 2 y 2 k(y) R D 1 α(y) t p(x, y, t) (5.13) an the backwar equation D α(x) t p(x, y, t) = 1 2 k(x) p(x, y, t). (5.14) 2 x2 Remark 5.2. The mean square isplacement of a subiffusion in a homogeneous meium grows slower with respect to the Brownian motion, i.e., x 2 (t) t α, where α (, 1). Such a process can be represente as a Brownian motion elaye by an inepenent inverse stable suborinator. For a stuy of its long time asymptotic properties, consult [25]. Concerning subiffusion in heterogeneous meia escribe by our equation, the picture is much more complicate an some unexpecte phenomena arise. For example, in [14], the authors fin that in the long time limit the CTRW process is localize at the lattice point where α(x) has its minimum, a phenomenon calle anomalous aggregation. This suggests that the process oes not enjoy the same ergoic properties reporte in [25] for subiffusion in homogeneous meia.

18 18 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 Remark 5.3. The transition probability p(x, y, t) is the funamental solution to the partial ifferential equation (5.9), an thus it is interesting to consier some well-poseness issues. The most recent result in this irection can be foun in [17] where the authors consier the following Cauchy problem ρ(x)d α(x) t u(x, t) u(x, t) = f(x, t) x Ω, t (, T ) u(x, ) = u (x) (5.15) u(x, t) = x Ω, t (, T ) an prove that, uner suitable assumptions on the source term f an the initial atum u, there exists a unique weak solution u(x, t) in the sense of [17, Thm 2.3]. Remark 5.4. There are several results on CTRWs limit processes which can be applie in this situation by making some further assumptions [26; 28; 31; 32; 43]. We iscuss here an example. Consier the couple process (X n, T n ) an introuce a scale parameter c, so the process is (Xn, c Tn). c By making ( assumptions ) on the weak convergence of probability measures of the process X[u/c] c, T [u/c] c (A(t), D(t)) as c (e.g. as in [43, Theorem 3.6]) one has that X c (t) X (t) := A(E(t )) (5.16) where E(t) is the hitting-time of D. In our situation the processes are non inepenent an hence couple in the language CTRW. Of course when A is a Brownian motion an D(t) is an inepenent α-stable suborinator we are in the equivalent homogeneous situation of this section: the one time istribution of A(E(t)) solves inee eq (5.2) in which α is constant [2]. Here we can conjecture that in orer to obtain a process governe by (5.1) we must assume that A is still a Brownian motion an that D(t) is a multistable suborinator σ(t) obtaine as a limit case of the piecewise stable suborinator of Definition (3.1). So we argue that D(t) must be a multistable suborinator (epenent on A(t)) whose Lévy measure is the limit of the Lévy measure of a piecewise stable suborinator, i.e., conitionally on a Brownian path A(t, ω) ν(s, t)/s = R α(x)s α(x) 1 Γ(1 α(x)) 1 {A(t,ω)=x}x. (5.17) Then one can efine E(t) as the hitting-time of σ(t). This require several further investigations. 6. Arbitrary holing times an integro-ifferential Volterra equations The construction of Theorem 3.2 is base on the notion of multistable suborinator. In [37] the authors introuce the more general class of inhomogeneous suborinators, i.e., non ecreasing processes with inepenent an non stationary increments. By using these, it is possible to efine a new type of CTRWs, which is constructe in the same way as (3.1), except for the istributions of the waiting times, which are no more Mittag-Leffler. Inee, for any i S, consier a Lévy measure ν(x, i) which efines a homogeneous suborinator σ i such that Ee sσi (t) = e tf(s,i)

19 19 where f(s, i) = ( 1 e sw ) ν(w, i) (6.1) is the Laplace exponent of σ i. Let L i (t) = inf { τ : σ i (τ) > t } be the right continuous hitting time of σ i. For any i S we assume ν((, ), i) =, in such a way that σ i is a.s. stricly increasing, L i has a.e. continuous sample paths, an, for any t >, σ i (t) an L i (t) are absolutely continuous ranom variables. We are now reay to efine the following CTRW: where T n = n 1 k= J k, T =, an X(t) = X n T n t < T n+1, (6.2) P (J n > t X n = i) = F i (t) = Ee λili (t). (6.3) The generalization of Theorem (3.2) is immeiate. Let M be a Markov process efine as in (2.1). Moreover, let σ M (t) be an inhomogeneous suborinator epenent on M whose Lévy measure, conitionally on V 1 = v 1, V 2 = v 2, an X 1 = x 1, X 2 = x 2, is given by ν M (x, t) = ν(x, i), v i t < v i+1. (6.4) Let L M (t) be the right continuous inverse of σ M (t). Then the time-change process M(L M (t)) is the same process as (6.2). To prove this, the key point is the fact that e st P (J n > t X n = i) = f(s, i) s 1 λ i + f(s, i), (6.5) namely, conitionally to X n = i, J n has a ensity ψ i with Laplace transform e sτ ψ i (τ)τ = which is coinciing with E(e sσi (E n) X n = i). λ i λ i + f(s, i), (6.6) 6.1. Integro-ifferential Volterra equations with position epenent kernel. To obtain a backwar equation, we resort again to (2.17) an applying Laplace transform to both sies yiels f(s, i) p i,j (s) = s(λ i + f(s, i)) δ i,j + l which can be rearrange as λ i h i,l p l,j (s) λ i + f(s, i), (6.7) f(s, i) p i,j (s) s 1 f(s, i)δ i,j = k g i,k p k,j (s) (6.8) where again g i,j = λ i (h i,j δ i,j ). Inverting Laplace transform in (6.8) however oes not yiel to a time-fractional equation. By using inee [44, Lemma 2.5 an Proposition 2.7] we get the inverse Laplace transform t t p i,j (t ) ν(t t, i) t δ i,j ν(t, i) = k g i,k p k,j (t) (6.9)

20 2 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 where ν(t, i) := ν((t, ), i), provie that the integral function is ifferentiable. It is clear that in the situation of Theorem 3.2 one has ν(t, i) = t α i w αi 1 Γ(1 α i ) w = t αi Γ(1 α i ) (6.1) an the operator on the left-han sie of (6.9) becomes a fractional Caputo erivative. We now also erive a forwar equation. Let N (t) = max{n : T n t} (6.11) be the number of renewals for the process (6.2) up to time t. Of course, conitionally to X 1 = x 1, X 2 = x 2,, we have that N is a birth process (with rates λ x1, λ x2, ) time change by the epenent time process L M. Our attention focuses on the quantity, conitionally on {X(t) = i}, E[N (t + t)] E[N (t)] lim t t (6.12) which we call renewal ensity (in the spirit of [1, page 26]) an specifies the mean number of renewals to be expecte in a narrow interval near t conitionally on the current position. Since we conition on X(t) = i, (6.12) is obviously epening on i an N (t + t) N (t) behaves like N(L i (t + t)) N(L i (t)) where N is a stanar birth process. Thus the limit (6.12) can be compute as m i (t) = t E [N (t)] = t EN(Li (t)) = t λ iel i (t) The function = λ i t P (L i (t) > w)w = λ i t t u i (t) := t P (σ i (w) < t)w. (6.13) P (σ i (w) < t)w (6.14) on the right-han sie of (6.13) is sai to be, in the language of potential theory (e.g. [7]), the potential ensity of the suborinator σ i an is such that (e.g. [6, Section 1.3]) e st u i (t)t = 1 f(s, i) (6.15) provie that the erivative in (6.14) exists a.e. Heuristically u i (t) represents the mean of the total amount of time spent by the suborinator σ i in the state t. To obtain a forwar equation we can follow the same line of section 4 up to formula (4.13). Then, by using (6.6), the outgoing flux has Laplace transform J i (s) = λ s i f(s, i) p l,i(s) an thus the convolution theorem gives J i (t) = t t = λ i t t p l,i (τ) m i (t τ)τ (6.16) p l,i (τ) u i (t τ)τ. (6.17)

21 21 Finally, (4.11) reuces to t p l,i(t) = k g k,i t t p l,k (s) u k (t s)s, (6.18) which is the forwar equation for our process. It is straightforwar to prove that in the fractional case the renewal ensity relatively to the state k reas m k (t) = λ k t α k 1 Γ(α k ) an the operator on the right-han sie of (6.18) reuces to the Riemann Liouville erivative R D 1 α k. With the above iscussion we have prove the following result. Theorem 6.1. Let X(t) be a process like (6.2) with holing times F i (t) given by (6.3). Further assume that m i (t) exists for any i. Then the probabilities p i,j (t) satisfy the backwar equation (6.9) as well as the forwar equation (6.18). References [1] D. Applebaum. Lévy Processes an stochastic calculus. Secon Eition. Cambrige University Press, New York, 29. [2] B. Baeumer an M.M. Meerschaert. Stochastic solutions for fractional Cauchy problems. Fractional Calculus an Applie Analysis 4: 481 5, 21. [3] L. Beghin an E. Orsingher. Fractional Poisson processes an relate planar motions, Electr. J. Prob., 29, 14, [4] L. Beghin an E. Orsingher. Poisson-type processes governe by fractional an higher-orer recursive ifferential equations. Electr. J. Prob., 22: , 21. [5] L. Beghin an C. Ricciuti. Time-inhomogeneous fractional Poisson processes efine by the multistable suborinator, arxiv: [6] J. Bertoin. Suborinators: examples an appications. Lectures on probability theory an statistics (Saint-Flour, 1997), Lectures Notes in Math., 1717, Springer, Berlin, [7] K. Bogan, T. Byczkowski, T. Kulczycki, M. Ryznar, R. Song an Z. Vonraček. Potential Analysis of Stable Processes an its Extensions. P. Graczyk, A. Stos, eitors, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 198, , 29. [8] A.V. Chechkin, R Gorenflo an I. M. Sokolov. Fractional iffusion in inhomogeneous meia, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 38: , 25. [9] Z.-Q. Chen. Time fractional equations an probabilistic representation. Chaos, Solitons an Fractals, in press. [1] D. R. Cox. Renewal theory, John Wiley an Sons, New York, [11] M. D Oviio, E. Orsingher an B. Toalo. Fractional telegraph-type equations an hyperbolic Brownian motion. Statistics an Probability Letters, 89(1): , 214. [12] M. D Oviio, E. Orsingher an B. Toalo. Time-change processes governe by space-time fractional telegraph equations. Stochastic Analysis an Applications, 32(6): , 214. [13] W. Feller. On semi-markov processes. Proceeings of the National Acaemy of Sciences of the Unite States of America, 51(4): , 1964.

22 22 COSTANTINO RICCIUTI 1 AND BRUNO TOALDO 2 [14] S. Fetoov an S. Falconer. Subiffusive master equation with space-epenent anomalous exponent an structural instability, Physical Review E 85, 31132, 212. [15] R. Garra, E. Orsingher an F. Polito. State-epenent fractional point processes. J. Appl. Probab.. 52: 18 36, 215. [16] N. Georgiou. I. Z. Kiss, E. Scalas. Solvable non-markovian ynamic network, Phys. Rev. E 92, 4281, 215. [17] Y. Kian, E. Soccorsi an M. Yamamoto. A uniqueness result for time-fractional iffusion equations with space-epenent variable orer. arxiv: [18] V.N. Kolokoltsov. Markov processes, semigroups an generators. De Gruyter Stuies in Mathematics, 38. Walter e Gruyter, Berlin, 211. [19] V. Korolyuk an A. Swishchuk. Semi-Markov ranom evolutions. Springer- Science + Business Meia, B.V., [2] I.I. Gihman an A.V. Skoroho. The theory of stochastic processes II. Springer-Verlag, [21] M. Hairer, G. Iyer, L. Koralov, A. Novikov, an Z. Pajor-Gyulai. A fractional kinetic process escribing the intermeiate time behaviour of cellular flows. The Annals of Probability, to appear (available at arxiv: ). [22] N. Laskin. Fractional Poisson process. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 8: , 23. [23] R. Le Guével an J. Lévy Véhel, L. Liu. On two multistable extensions of stable Lévy motion an their semi-martingale representations. J. Theoret. Probab., 28(3): , 213. [24] F. Mainari, R. Gorenflo an E. Scalas. A fractional generalization of the Poisson processes. Vietnam J. Math. 32: 53 64, 24. [25] M. Magziarz an R. Schilling. Asymptotic properties of Brownian motion elaye by inverse suborinators. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc, 143: , 215. [26] M. Magziarz an T. Zorawik. Densities of scaling limits of couple continuous time ranom walks. Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal., 19: , 216. [27] F. Mainari, R. Gorenflo an E. Scalas. A fractional generalization of the Poisson processes. Vietnam J. Math., 32: 53 64, 24. [28] M.M. Meerschaert an H.P. Scheffler. Triangular array limits for continuous time ranom walks. Stochastic Processes an their Applications, 118(9): , 28. [29] M.M. Meerschaert, E. Nane an P. Vellaisamy. The fractional Poisson process an the inverse stable suborinator. Elect. J. Prob., 16(59): , 211. [3] M.M. Meerschaert, E. Nane an P. Vellaisamy. Fractional Cauchy problems on boune omains. The Annals of Probability, 37(3): , 29. [31] M.M. Meerschaert an H. Scheffler, Limit theorems for continuous time ranom walks with infinite mean waiting times, J. Appl. Prob., 41(3): , 24. [32] M.M. Meerschaert an P. Straka. Semi-Markov approach to continuous time ranom walk limit processes. The Annals of Probability, 42(4) : , 214. [33] M.M. Meerschaert an B. Toalo, Relaxation patterns an semi-markov ynamics. arxiv: