arxiv: v1 [math.ds] 19 Jun 2012

Transcription

1 Rates in the strong invariance rincile for ergodic autoorhiss of the torus Jérôe Dedecker a, Florence Merlevède b and Françoise Pène c 1 a Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Laboratoire MAP5 and CNRS UMR Eail: jeroe.dedecker@arisdescartes.fr arxiv: v1 [ath.ds] 19 Jun 2012 b Université Paris Est, LAMA and CNRS UMR E-ail: florence.erlevede@univ-lv.fr c Université de Brest, Laboratoire de Mathéatiques de Bretagne Atlantique UMR CNRS E-ail: francoise.ene@univ-brest.fr Key words: Invariance rinciles, strong aroxiations, ergodic autoorhiss of the torus. Matheatical Subject Classification (2010): 37D30, 60F17. Abstract Let T be an ergodic autoorhis of the d-diensional torus T d. In the sirit of Le Borgne [10], we give conditions on the Fourier coefficients of a function f fro T d to R under which the artial sus f T+f T 2 + +f T n satisfies a strong invariancerincile. Next, reinforcing the condition on the Fourier coefficients in a natural way, we obtain exlicit rates of convergence in the strong invariance rincile, u to n 1/4 logn. 1 Introduction We endow the d-diensional torus T d = R d /Z d with the Lebesgue easure λ, and we denote by E( ) the exectation with resect to λ. As usual, the L nor of a f fro T d to R is denoted by f = (E( f )) 1/. For d 2, let T be an ergodic autoorhis of T d, and let f be a function fro T d to R such that E(f 2 ) < and E(f) = 0. In [10], Le Borgne has roved that if the Fourier coefficients (c k ) k Z d of f are such that, for θ > 2 and every integer b > 1, c k 2 Rlog θ (b), where k = k i, (1.1) 1 i d k b then the artial sus rocess { [nt] } f T i,t [0,1] roerly noralized, satisfies both the weak and strong invariance rinciles. More recisely, Le Borgne has introduced in [10] an aroriate σ-field F 0 such that F 0 T 1 (F 0 ), for which the quantities E(f T k F 0 ) 2 and f T k E(f T k F 0 ) 2 can be controlled for any ositive integer k. The weak and strong invariance rinciles follow then, by alying Gordin s result (see [8]) and Heyde s result (see [9]) resectively. (1.2) 1 Suorted in art by the ANR roject PERTURBATIONS 1

2 In Theore 2.1 of this aer, we show that the weak and strong invariance rinciles still hold for functions f satisfying (1.1) with θ > 1 only, and we give a ultivariate version of these results. For the weak invariance rincile, this follows fro an iroveent of Gordin s criterion, which was already known in the univariate case (see [7]). For the strong invariance rincile, this will follow fro a new criterion for stationary sequences, resented in Theore 4.1 of the aendix. Note that the condition (1.1) with θ > 1 is satisfied if, for a ositive constant A, d c k 2 1 A (1+ k i )log 1+α (2+ k i ) for soe α > 1, (1.3) iroving on the condition α > 2 given by Leonov in 1969 (see [11], Reark 1). Note that Leonov has also given a condition in ters of the odulus of continuity of f in L 2. The strong invariance rincile eans that, enlarging T d if necessary, there exists a sequence of indeendent identically distributed (iid) Gaussian rando variables Z i such that su 1 k n k f T i k ( Z i = o n 1/2 (loglogn) 1/2) alost surely, as n. (1.4) It is also ossible to exhibit rates of convergence in (1.4), rovided that we reinforce the assution (1.1). This has been done recently, thanks to a general result giving rates of convergence in the strong invariance rincile for artial sus of stationary sequences. More recisely, let ]2, 4] and q = /( 1). We have roved in Theore 2.1 of [6] that if there exists R > 0 such that for every integer b > 1, c k q Rlog θ (b) for soe θ > 2 2 ( 1), (1.5) and k b k b c k 2 Rlog β (b) for soe β > 3 4, (1.6) then the strongaroxiation(1.4) holdstrue with anerrorofordero ( n 1/ (logn) (t+1)/2), fort > 2/. Acondition onthe l q nor of(c k ) k Z d seesaroriatein this context, since this l q -nordoinates the L nor of f, which is required to be finite to get the rate o(n 1/ ) in the iid situation. If we assue that the Fourier coefficients of f are such that, c k q A d 1 (1+ k i )log 1+α (2+ k i ), (1.7) then the conditions (1.5) and (1.6) are both satisfied rovided that α > ( 2 2)/( 2 ). Now, considering (1.3), one can wonder if α > 1 in (1.7) is enough to get an aroxiation error of order o(n 1/ L(n)) in (1.4), where L(n) is a slowly varying function. The ain result of this aer, Theore 2.2 below, shows that the answer is ositive. 2 Invariance rinciles for ergodic autoorhiss of the torus Let us first recall soe robabilistic notations. A easurable function f : T d R (with coordinates f 1,...,f ) is said to be centered if every f i is integrable and centered. Such a function f is said to be square integrable if every f i is square integrable. Now, for every centered and square integrable 2

3 functions f,g : T d R (with f = (f 1,...,f ) and g = (g 1,...,g )), we define the covariance atrix Cov(f,g) of f and g and the variance atrix Var(f) by Cov(f,g) = (E(f i g j )) i,j=1,...,, and Var(f) = Cov(f,f). Let us now recall soe facts about ergodic autoorhiss of T d. A grou autoorhis T of T d is the quotient a of a linear a T : R d R d given by T(x) = S.x (. being the atrix roduct), where S is a d d-atrix with integer entries and with deterinant ±1. Any autoorhis T of T d reserves the Lebesgue easure λ. Therefore (T d,b(t d ),T, λ) is a robability dynaical syste (where B(T d ) stands for the Borel σ-algebra of T d ). This dynaical syste is ergodic if and only if no root of the unity is an eigenvalue of the atrix S associated to T. In this case, we say that T is an ergodic autoorhis of T d. An autoorhis T of T d is said to be hyerbolic if the atrix S associated to T adits no eigenvalue of odulus one. With the receding characterization of ergodic autoorhiss of T d, it is clear that every hyerbolic autoorhis of T d is ergodic. Ergodic autoorhiss of T d are artially hyerbolic but not necessarily hyerbolic (an exale of a non-hyerbolic ergodic autoorhis of T d can be found in [10]). In the next Theore, we give weak and strong invariance rinciles for the artial su rocess (1.2) of R -valued functions. Theore 2.1. Let T be an ergodic autoorhis of T d. For any j {1,...,}, let f j : T d R be a centered function and assue that its Fourier coefficients (c k,j ) k Z d satisfy the following condition: there exists a ositive constant R such that for every integer b > 1, c k,j 2 Rlog θ (b) for soe θ > 1. (2.1) k b Let f = (f 1,...,f ) : T d R. Then the series Σ = k Z Cov(f,f Tk ) converges, and In addition, 1 ( n li n n Var f T i) = Σ. (2.2) 1. The rocess {n 1/2 [nt] f Ti,t [0,1]} converges in D([0,1],R ) equied with the unifor toology to a Wiener rocess {W(t),t [0,1]} with variance atrix Var(W(1)) = Σ. 2. Enlarging T d if necessary, there exists a sequence (Z i ) i 1 of iid R -valued Gaussian rando variables with zero ean and variance atrix Var(Z 1 ) = Σ such that su 1 k n k f T i k ( Z i = o n 1/2 (loglogn) 1/2) alost surely, as n. When = 1, it is also ossible to exhibit rates of convergence in (1.4) rovided that we reinforce Condition (2.1). Theore 2.2. Let T be an ergodic autoorhis of T d. Let ]2,4] and q := /( 1). Let f : T d R be a centered function with Fourier coefficients (c k ) k Z d satisfying the following conditions: there exists a ositive constant R such that for every integer b > 1, c k q Rlog θ (b) for soe θ > 1, (2.3) k b 3

4 and Then the series c k 2 Rb ζ for soe ζ > 0. (2.4) k b σ 2 = k ZE(f.f T k ) (2.5) converges absolutely and, enlarging T d if necessary, there exists a sequence (Z i ) i 1 of iid Gaussian rando variables with zero ean and variance σ 2 such that su 1 k n k f T i k ( Z i = o n 1/ logn ) alost surely, as n. (2.6) Observe that if (1.7) holds with α > 1 then (2.3) and (2.4) are both satisfied, so that the strong aroxiation (2.6) holds. However Theore 2.1 in [6] and Theore 2.2 above have different ranges of alicability. Indeed, let γ > 1, and define c k = l γ/q if k = (2 l,0,...,0), c k = l γ/q if k = ( 2 l,0,...,0) for l N, and c k = 0 otherwise. Let now b and r be ositive integers such that 2 r 1 < b 2 r. Since c k q = 2 1 l γ, l r k b it followsthat λ 1 (logb) 1 γ k b c k q λ 2 (logb) 1 γ (whereλ 1 andλ 2 aretwoositiveconstants). Siilarly λ 1 (logb) 1 2γ/q k b c k 2 λ 2 (logb) 1 2γ/q. In this situation, the conditions (1.5) and (1.6) are both satisfied rovided that γ > 1+( 2 2)/( 2 ) whereas condition (2.4) fails. To rove Theore 2.2, we shall still use artingale aroxiations as done in [6], but with the following odifications: Condition (2.4) allows us to consider a non stationary sequence X l = f l T l, where the functions f l are defined through a truncated series of the Fourier coefficients of f. For the artial sus associated to this non stationary sequence, the aroxiation error by a non stationary artingale can be suitably handled with the hel of Condition (2.3). 3 Proofs of Theores 2.1 and 2.2 As in [6], we consider the filtration as defined in [12, 10] that enables to suitably aroxiate the artial sus n f Ti by a artingale. To be ore recise, given a finite artition P of T d, we define the easurable artition P0 by : x T d, P 0 ( x) := k 0T k P(T k ( x)) and, for every integer n, the σ-algebra F n generated by x T d, P n( x) := T k P(T k ( x)) = T n (P0 (T n ( x)). k n These definitions coincide with the ones of [10] alied to the ergodic toral autoorhis T 1. We obviously have F n F n+1 = T 1 F n. Note that the sequence (f T i ) i 1 is non adated to (F i ) i 1. In what follows, we use the notation E n (f) = E(f F n ). 4

5 3.1 Proof of Theore 2.1 According to Theore 4.1 and Reark 4.3 given in Aendix, it suffices to verify that condition (4.35) is satisfied. Therefore, it suffices to verify that for any j {1,...,}, n 3 logn n 1/2 (loglogn) 1/2 E 0(f j T n ) 2 < and n 3 logn n 1/2 (loglogn) 1/2 f j E n (f j ) 2 <. (3.1) But, according to the roof of Proositions 4.2 and 4.3 of [6] (see also [10]), for any f j satisfying (2.1), Since θ > 1, (3.1) is satisfied. 3.2 Proof of Theore 2.2 E n (f j ) 2 + f E n (f j ) 2 n θ/2. Let f : T d R be a centered function with Fourier coefficients (c k ) k Z d. For every nonnegative integer, we write f := c k e 2iπ k,. (3.2) Notice that if f satisfies (2.4), then and if f satisfies (2.3), then k f f 2 R ζ/2, (3.3) f f R(log()) θ( 1)/. (3.4) According to the roofs of Proositions 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 of [6], there exist c 1 and γ,λ (0,1) such that, setting b(n) := [γ n ], we have (according to (4.50), (4.51) and (4.53) of [6]), and su su su ( E n (f ) + f E n (f ) ) λ n (3.5) b(n) su N cn b(n) l {0,...,n} E N (f f T l ) E(f f T l ) /2 λ n (3.6) (according to (4.61) and (4.62) of [6]). Moreover, according to the roof of Proositions 4.2 and 4.3 of [6], we have, for any f satisfying (2.3), and su( E n (f ) + f E n (f ) ) n θ( 1)/, (3.7) 1 E n (f) + f E n (f) n θ( 1)/. (3.8) In addition, according to the roof of Proosition 4.4 of [6], there exists a ositive integer c, such that for any f satisfying (2.3) and (2.4), E nc(sk(f)) E(S 2 k(f)) 2 /2 n 2 2θ( 1)/. (3.9) 1 k n For any f satisfying (2.4), using the arguents develoed in the roofs of Proositions 4.2 and 4.3 of [6], we infer that there exists β (0,1) such that su( E n (f ) 2 + f E n (f ) 2 ) β n, (3.10) 1 5

6 and E n (f) 2 + f E n (f) 2 β n. (3.11) Let us write P l ( ) = E l ( ) E l 1 ( ). Now, let α be a ositive real such that αζ 3 2/. We then define d 1 := k ZP 1 ( f1 T k), X 1 := f 1 T, and, for every j 0 and every l {2 j +1,...,2 j+1 }, d l := k ZP l ( f[2 αj ] T k), X l := f [2 αj ] T l. For every ositive integer n, we define n Mn (f) := n d l and Sn (f) := Xl. The conclusion of Theore 2.2 coes fro the three following leas. Lea 3.1. We have S n (f) S n(f) = o(n 1/ (logn)) alost surely. Lea 3.2. We have S n(f) M n(f) = o(n 1/ (logn)) alost surely. Lea 3.3. The conclusion of Theore 2.2 holds with M n(f) relacing S n (f). Proof of Lea 3.1. For any nonnegative integer j, let D j := su 1 k 2 j k+2 j l=2 j +1 (X l X l ). Let N N and let k ]1,2 N ]. We first notice that D j 2 j+1 l=2 j +1 (X l Xl ), so if K is the integer such that 2 K 1 < k 2 K, then Consequently, since K N, Sk Sk X1 X1 + K 1 j=0 D j. N 1 S k S 1 k 2 N k X 1 X1 + D j. (3.12) Therefore, by standard arguents, Lea 3.1 will follow if we can rove that D j = o ( j2 j/) alost surely. This will hold true as soon as j 1 We shall verify (3.13) for q = 2. Notice that D j 2 = su 1 k 2 j j=0 D j q q < for soe q [1,]. (3.13) 2 jq/ jq k+2 j l=2 j +1 (f f [2 αj ]) T l 2 2 j f f [2 αj ] 2. 6

7 Hence, by using (2.4), D j j 2 ζαj, which together with the fact that αζ 2 2/ ilies (3.13) with q = 2, and then Lea 3.1. Proof of Lea 3.2. Without loss of generality, we assue that θ < ( 2 2)/(( 1)). Following the beginning of the roof of Lea 3.1, Lea 3.2 will be roven if (3.13) holds with D j defined by D j = su 1 k 2 j With this ai, setting, for every k {1,...,2 j }, R j,k = we first observe that k k+2 j l=2 j +1 ( f [2 αj ] T l ZP l ( f[2 αj ] T )) = (Xl d l). (3.14) k+2 j l=2 j +1 (X l d l) T 2j, j D j = su R j,k 2 j/ 2 k/ R j,2 k, (3.15) 1 k 2 j (where for the inequality we have used inequality (6) in [15]). Now, according to the roof of Proosition 5.1 in [6] with X l = f [2 αj ] T l and using again stationarity, we get that for any integer k 0 and any integer N 2 k, R j, 1 2 k N ( 2 k + =1 N 1 E l (f [2 αj ]) + f [2 αj ] E l (f [2 αj ]) l +N l=0 P l (f [2 αj ]) T l 2 ) 1/2 + ( 2 k =1 l +N P l (f [2 αj ]) T l 2 ) 1/2. (3.16) Let us first consider the case where [2 αj ] b(2 k ). Starting fro (3.16) with N = 2 k and using the fact that P l (f [2 αj ]) 2 E l (f [2 αj ]) and that P l (f [2 αj ]) f [2 αj ] E l 1 (f [2 αj ]), we get that 1 2 k R j, 2 k 2 k 1 E l (f [2 αj ]) + f [2 αj ] E l (f [2 αj ]) l=0 +2 k/2 l 2 k +1 E l (f [2 αj ]) +2 k/2 l 2 k f [2 αj ] E l (f [2 αj ]). Therefore, taking into account the uer bound (3.7) for the two first ters in the right hand side, and the uer bound (3.5) to handle the two last ters (since [2 αj ] b(2 k )), we derive that R j, 2 k(1 θ( 1)/) (3.17) 1 2 k (recall that θ( 1)/ < 1). On the other hand, starting fro (3.16) with N = 2[2 k/2 ] and using Lea 5.1 in [6], we get that 2[2 k/2 ] 2[2 k/2 ] R j, E l (f [2 αj ]) + f [2 αj ] E l (f [2 αj ]) 1 2 k +2 k/2 l [2 k/2 ] l=0 E l (f [2 αj ]) l 1/ +2 k/2 l [2 k/2 ] f [2 αj ] E l (f [2 αj ]) l 1/. 7

8 Therefore, it follows fro (3.7) that Let 1 2 k R j, 2 (k(1 θ( 1)/))/2. (3.18) C = [α 1 (log(γ 1 ))/(log2)] and j 0 = (log2) 1 (logj logc). (3.19) Clearly, if j 0 k then [2 αj ] b(2 k ). Therefore using the uer bound (3.18) when k < j 0 and the uer bound (3.17) when k j 0, we get that for any ositive integer j j 2 k/ j /2 R j,2 k j 1/ j, θ( 1)/2 since θ < ( 2 2)/(( 1)). Now, since θ > 1, it follows that j ( j ) 2 k/ R j,2 k <. j 1 Fro (3.15), this ilies that (3.13) holds with D j defined by (3.14) and q =. This ends the roof of lea 3.2. Proof of Lea 3.3. Let M n = n d l where d l = d 0 T l with d 0 = i Z P 0(f T i ). Notice that the uer bound (3.8) and the fact that θ > 1 ily in articular that n>1n 1/ E n (f) < and n 1/ f E n (f) <, n>1 and then that k Z P 0(X k ) < (use for instance Lea 5.1 in [6] to see this). Therefore k Z P 0(X k ) 2 <. Using (4.2) of Lea 4.1, we get that S n (f) M n 2 = o( n). (3.20) Fro (2.2) of Theore 2.1, we know that n 1 S n (f) 2 2 converges to σ2. It follows fro (3.20) that σ 2 = n 1 E(M 2 n) = E(d 2 0). We shall rove now that M n M n 2 = O ( n 1/). (3.21) Let N be the ositive integer such that 2 N 1 < n 2 N. Since Mn M n, is a artingale, we have that n Mn M n 2 2 = N 1 E((d l d l) 2 ) E((d 1 d 2 j+1 1) 2 )+ E((d l d l) 2 ). (3.22) By stationarity, for any l [2 j +1,2 j+1 ] N we get that j=0 l=2 j +1 d l d l 2 = 0 ((f f [2 αj ]) T i ZP i ) 2 2 j+3 f f [2 αj ] 2 + P i (f f [2 αj ]) 2 + P i (f f [2 αj ]) 2. i 2 j+1 i 2 j+1 According to (3.3) f f [2 αj ] 2 R2 ζαj/2. (3.23) 8

9 On the other hand, by Lea 5.1 in [6], i 2 j+1 P i (f f [2 αj ]) 2 and i 2 j+1 P i (f f [2 αj ]) 2 k 2 j k 1/2 E k (f f [2 αj ]) 2 k 2 j k 1/2 f f [2 αj ] +E k (f f [2 αj ]) 2. Using the estiate (3.10) and (3.11), it follows that ( ) P i (f f [2 αj ]) 2 + P i (f f [2 αj ]) 2 = O(β 2 j ). (3.24) i 2 j+1 Cobining the uer bounds (3.23) and (3.24) with the fact that αζ 3 2/, it follows that d l d l 2 2 j( 2)/(2). Using this estiate in (3.22), we obtain that Mn M n 2 2 n 2/, roving (3.21). Now, let us recall Theore 2.1 in [13] (used with a n = n 2/ (logn)): if there exists a finite constant K such that su d k K, (3.25) k 1 and if n ( E((d i ) 2 F i 1 ) E((d i) 2 ) ) = o ( n 2/ (logn) ) a.s., (3.26) then, since E((M n) 2 ) nσ 2, enlarging T d if necessary, there exists a sequence (Z l ) l 1 of indeendent Gaussian rando variables with zero ean and variance E(Z l )2 = E(d l )2 = (σ l )2 such that su 1 k n k Mk Z l = o ( n 1/ (logn) ) alost surely, as n. (3.27) Let (δ k ) k 1 be a sequence of iid Gaussian rando variables with ean zero and variance σ 2, indeendent of the sequence (Zl ) l 1. We now construct a sequence (Z l ) l 1 as follows. If σl = 0, then Z l = δ l, else Z l = (σ/σl )Z l. By construction, the Z l s are iid Gaussian rando variables with ean zero and variance σ 2. Let G l = Z l Zl and note that (G l) l 1 is a sequence of indeendent Gaussian rando variables with ean zero and variances Var(G l ) = (σ σl )2. Notice now that Fro the basic inequality ( n vn 2 = Var ) G i = ( P 1 k n k n ( di 2 d i ) 2 2 Mn Mn 2 2. ) ) G i > x 2ex ( x2 2vn 2, and the fact that by (3.21), v 2 n n2/, it follows that for any ε > 0, n>1 ( n 1 P 1 k n k ) G i > εn 1/ (logn) <, 9

10 showing that 1 k n k G i = o(n 1/ (logn)) alost surely. Therefore starting fro (3.27), we conclude that if (3.25) and (3.26) hold then Lea 3.3 does; naely, enlarging T d if necessary, there exists a sequence (Z l ) l 1 of iid Gaussian rando variables with zero ean and variance σ 2 such that k su Mk Z l = o(n 1/ (logn)) alost surely, as n. 1 k n It reains to show that (3.25) and (3.26) are satisfied. We start with (3.25). Notice that d 1 k Z P k(f 1 ) and that, for every j 0 and every l {2 j +1,...,2 j+1 }, d l k Z P k (f [2 αj ]). By Lea 5.1 in [6], k Z P k (g) k 1k 1/ E k (g) + k 1 k 1/ g E k (g), with constants non deending on g. Hence, using the estiate (3.7) and the fact that θ > 1, we get that, for every j 0 and every l {2 j +1,...,2 j+1 }, there exists a constant K non deending on j such that d l K. This ends the roof of (3.25). To rove (3.26), we roceed as follows. Following the beginning of the roof of Lea 3.1, we infer that (3.26) will be roven if we can show that D j := su 1 l 2 j This will hold true as soon as 2 j +l i=2 j +1 (E((d i )2 F i 1 ) E((d i )2 )) = o ( j2 2j/) a.s.. (3.28) D j /2 j 1 /2 <. (3.29) 2 j j/2 For any j fixed and any i Z, let d j,i = k Z P i( f[2 αj ] T k). By stationarity D j /2 := su 1 l 2 j l (E(d 2 j,i F i 1) E(d 2 j,i )) /2. Observe now that, for any j fixed, (d j,i ) i Z is a stationary sequence of artingale differences in L. Let n M j,n := d j,i. Alying Theore 3 in [16] (since 1 < /2 2) and using the artingale roerty of the sequence (M j,n ) n 1, we get that ( E su 1 l 2 j l (E(d 2 j,i F i 1 ) E(d 2 j,i)) /2) 2 j d 2 j,1 /2 /2 +2j ( j 1 ) /2 E(M 2 j,2 F k 0 ) E(M 2 j,2 ) k /2. Using the fact that d 2 j,1 /2 = d j,1 2 K where K does not deend on j, the convergence (3.29) will be then roven if we can show that 1 ( j 1 /2 2 2k/ E j /2 0 (Mj,2 2 k) E(M2 j,2 /2) k) <. j 1 2 2k/ 10

11 According to the arguents develoed in the roof of Theores 3.1 and 3.2 in [6] (see (3.19) and (3.20) of [6]), since (M j,k ) k 1 is a sequence of artingales, we infer that this last convergence will be satisfied as soon as there exists a ositive integer c such that 1 ( j 2 2k/ ) /2 E j /2 c2 k(m 2 j,2 k) E(M2 j,2 k) /2 <. (3.30) j 1 We shall rove in what follows that this convergence holds as soon as c is chosen in such a way that (3.9) holds true. For any ositive integer n, let n S j,n = f [2 αj ] T l and R j,n = S j,n M j,n. We first write that E c2 k(m 2 j,2 k) E(M2 j,2 k) /2 E c2 k(s 2 j,2 k) E(S2 j,2 k) /2 +4 E c2 k(s j,2 kr j,2 k) /2 +2 R j,2 k 2. (3.31) Let j 0 be defined as in (3.19). Using the uer bound (3.18) when k < j 0 and the uer bound (3.17) when k j 0, we get that for any ositive integer j, j 2 2k/ 1 2 k R j, 2 j j 2/ j θ( 1), since we can assue without loss of generality that θ < ( 2 1)/(( 1)). Now, since θ > 1, it follows that 1 ( j ) /2 2 2k/ R j /2 j, k <. (3.32) j 1 On an other hand, c being chosen such that (3.9) holds true, the uer bound in (3.9) together with the fact that θ > 1, ilies that j j 2 2k/ E c2 k(s k j, ) E(S2 j, ) /2 2 2k/ 2 2k(1 θ( 1)/) = O(1). Therefore, j 1 1 ( j 2 2k/ E j /2 c2 k(sj,) E(S 2 j,) ) / k /2 <. (3.33) Starting fro (3.31), and taking into account (3.32) and (3.33), we then infer that (3.30) will hold true if we can show that 1 ( j 2 2k/ E j /2 c2 k(s j,2 kr j,2 k) ) /2 /2 <. (3.34) j 1 With this ai, we use Inequality (3.24) in [6] (taking n = 2 k, u n = [2 k/2 ], r = c2 k ). Therefore, E c2 k(s j,2 kr j,2 k) /2 2 k/4( E 0 (S j,2 k) 2 + S j,2 k E 2 k(s j,2 k) 2 ) + ={2 k,2 k [2 k/2 ]} R j, 2 +2 k/2( ) E [2 ](S k/2 j,2 k) 2 + S j,2 k E 2 k +[2 ](S k/2 j,2 k) 2 + E c2 k(sj,) E(S 2 j,) 2 /2 +2 k P 0 (f [2 jα ] T l ) 2. (3.35) ={2 k,[2 k/2 ]} l 2 k 11

12 By stationarity, E 0 (S j,2 k) 2 + S j,2 k E 2 k(s j,2 k) 2 Hence by using (3.10), 2 k 2 k 1 E l (f [2 jα ]) 2 + f [2 jα ] E l (f [2 jα ]) 2. 2 k/4( E 0 (S j,2 k) 2 + S j,2 k E 2 k(s j,2 k) 2 ) 2 k/4. (3.36) Using again (3.10) and the stationarity, we get that Therefore E [2 k/2 ](S j,2 k) 2 + S j,2 k E 2k +[2 k/2 ](S j,2 k) 2 2 k 2 k 1 E ([2 k/2 ]+l)(f [2 jα ]) 2 + f [2 jα ] E [2 k/2 ]+l(f [2 jα ]) 2 β 2k/2. l=0 2 k/2( E [2 k/2 ](S j,2 k) 2 + S j,2 k E 2k +[2 k/2 ](S j,2 k) 2 ) = O(1). (3.37) On an other hand, using again (3.10) and the stationarity, P 0 (f [2 jα ] T l ( ) ) 2 E l (f [2 jα ]) 2 + f [2 jα ] E l 1 (f [2 jα ]) 2 β 2 k, l 2 k l 2 k which ilies that 2 k l=0 l 2 k P 0 (f [2 jα ] T l ) 2 = O(1). (3.38) Starting fro (3.35) and taking into account the convergence (3.32) and (3.33), and the uer bounds (3.36), (3.37) and (3.38), we then derive that (3.34) holds. This ends the roof of (3.26) and therefore of Lea Aendix Let (Ω, A, P) be a robability sace, and T : Ω Ω be a bijective bieasurable transforation reserving the robability P. Let us denote by the euclidean nor on R and by <, > the associated scalar roduct. For a σ-algebra F 0 satisfying F 0 T 1 (F 0 ), we define the nondecreasing filtration (F i ) i Z by F i = T i (F 0 ). Let F = k Z F k and F = k Z F k. For a rando variable X with values in R, we denote by X, = (E( X )) 1/ its nor in L (R ). In what follows X 0 is a rando variable with values in R, and we define the stationary sequence (X i ) i Z by X i = X 0 T i. We shall use the notations E k (X) = E(X F k ), E (X) = E(X F ), E (X) = E(X F ), and P k (X) = E k (X) E k 1 (X). The ai of this section is to collect soe results about invariance rinciles for stationary sequences that are non necessarily adated to the underlying filtration. We start with a artingale aroxiation result. The estiate (4.2) of Proosition 4.1 below is a generalization of Ite 2 of Theore 1 in [15] to the ultidiensional case and to the case where the variables are non necessarily adated to the filtration under consideration. The convergence (4.3) is new. Notice that the roof of the next lea is based on algebraic coutations and on Burkholder s inequality. Burkholder s inequality being also valid in Hilbert saces (see [2]), the aroxiation lea below is then also valid for variables taking values in a searable Hilbert sace, H, by relacing the nor by the nor on H, let say H. 12

13 Proosition 4.1. Let [1, [ and = in(2,). Assue that E (X 0 ) = 0 alost surely, that E (X 0 ) = X 0 alost surely, and that P 0 (X i ), <. (4.1) i Z Let d 0 = i Z P 0(X i ), M n := n d 0 T i and R n := S n M n. For any ositive integer n, In addition, R n, n ( ) P l (X 0 ),. (4.2) l k 1 k n R k = o(n 1/ ) as n. (4.3) Reark 4.1. The constant aearing in (4.2) deends only on and not on (Ω,A,P,T,X 0,F 0 ). Proof of Proosition 4.1. It will be useful to note that P i (X j ) = P i j (X 0 ) T j = P 0 (X j i ) T i alost surely. The following decoosition is valid: R n = n ( X k = E 0 (S n ) n j=1 n j n+1 ) P j (X k ) n j n+1 P k (X j ) P k (X j )+S n E n (S n ) n j=0 n j=0 P k (X j ) P k (X j ). (4.4) Alying Burkholder s inequality for ultivariate artingales, and using the stationarity, we obtain that there exists a ositive constant c such that, for any ositive integer n, and n j n+1 P k (X j ) c, n P k (X j ) c, j 0 n j n+1 P k (X j ) c, n k (X j ) j 0P = c, n ( ) P 0 (X j ),, (4.5) j k n ( ) P 0 (X j ),. (4.6) On an other hand, since E (X 0 ) = 0 alost surely, we have E 0 (S n ) = k 0 P k(s n ) alost surely. Hence by Burkholder s inequality for ultivariate artingales together with stationarity, there exists a ositive constant c deending only on such that ( n ) E 0 (S n ), c P k (S n ), c P k (X l ), k 0 l k+1 k 0 n 1 ( ) c P l (X 0 ), +c l k+1 i n+1 k n ( k+n l=k+1 n 1 ( ) ( ) 1 c P l (X 0 ), +c P i (X 0 ), l k+1 j k P l (X 0 ), ) k+n k nl=k+1 n 1 ( ) ( c P l (X 0 ), +c n l n+1 P l (X 0 ), ) P l (X 0 ),. 13

14 Therefore E 0 (S n ), 2c n ( ) P l (X 0 ),. (4.7) l k We handle now the quantity S n E n (S n ),. Since E (X 0 ) = X 0 alost surely, we first write that S n E n (S n ) = k n+1 P k(s n ). Hence, alying Burkholder s inequality for ultivariate artingales and using the stationarity, we infer that there exists a ositive constant c deending only on such that S n E n (S n ), c Therefore c 2n l k k=n+1 k n+1 ( k 1 l=k n P k (S n ), c k n+1 ( n ) P k (X l ), ) P l (X 0 ), +c i n+1 k 2n+1 ( k 1 l=k n n ( ) ( ) 1 c P l (X 0 ), +c P i (X 0 ), P l (X 0 ), ) k 1 k 2n+1l=k n n ( ) ( c P l (X 0 ), +c n S n E n (S n ), 2c l k l n+1 P l (X 0 ), ) P l (X 0 ),. n ( ) P l (X 0 ),. (4.8) Starting fro (4.4) and taking into account the uer bounds (4.5), (4.6), (4.7) and (4.8), the inequality (4.2) follows. We turn now to the roof of (4.3). Let r be soe fixed ositive integer. Since M k = k d 0 T i and d 0 T i = j Z P i(x j ), the following decoosition holds: R k = k X i k r+i l= r i P i (X l ) k l k l r+i+1 P i (X l ) k l r+i+1 P i (X l ). (4.9) Alying Burkholder s inequality for ultivariate artingales and using the stationarity, we infer that there exists a ositive constant c deending only on such that, for any ositive integer n, k l r+i+1 n P i (X l ) c since P i (X l ) = P 0 (X l i ) T i. Siilarly We write now that k X i k l r+i+1 k r+i l= r i l r+i+1 P i (X l ), j r+1 ( c n j r+1 P 0 (X j ), ),(4.10) ( P i (X l ) c ) n P 0 (X j ),. (4.11) P i (X l ) = k X i k r+i P i (X l ) k r+i P i (X l ). (4.12) l=0 14

15 The following decoosition holds Now, and k r+i k r r+i P i (X l ) = P i (X l )+ = k k r 1 i l r P i (X l ) = k i=k r+1 1 i l r P i (X l ) = k k r k i=k r+1 1 i l r P i (X l )+ r k r P i (X l )+ k i=l r r+i P i (X l ) k i=k r+1 k r P i (X l ) = E k r (S r ) E 0 (S r )+E k r (S k S r ) = E k r (S k ) E 0 (S r ) k k i=k r+1 P i (X l )+ k 1 i l r P i (X l ). (4.13) k E l r 1 (X l ) E l r 1 (X l ), (4.14) k l=k+1 i=l r P i (X l ) = E k (S k ) E k r (S k )+E k (S S k ) = E k (S ) E k r (S k ) l=k+1 l=k+1 E l r 1 (X l ) E l r 1 (X l ). (4.15) Therefore starting fro (4.12), and considering the decoositions (4.13), (4.14) and (4.15), we get that k X i k r+i l= r i P i (X l ) = S k E k (S )+E 0 (S r )+ E l r 1 (X l ) k r+i P i (X l ). (4.16) l=0 The decoosition (4.9) together with the uer bounds (4.10), (4.11) and (4.16) ily that R k ( n j r+1 + P 0 (X j ), ) + E l r 1 (X l ) + S k E k (S ) + E 0(S r ), k r+i P i (X l ). (4.17) l=0 Alying Burkholder s inequality for ultivariate artingales and using the stationarity, there exists a ositive constant c deending only on such that, for any ositive integer n, k r+i P i (X l ) c l=0 n r+i P i (X l ) c, l=0 n ( ) P 0 (X j ),. (4.18) j i 15

16 To handle the fourth ter in the right-hand side of (4.17) we roceed as follows. Since E (X l ) = 0 alost surely, we first write that Then Let now E l r 1 (X l ) = E l r 1 (X l ) j=r+1 u i = P 0 (X i ),, C r = P l j (X l ). j=r+1 i r+1 P l j (X l ). u i and α i = C 1 r u i. By using the facts that for any 1, x x is convex and that α i 0 with i r+1 α i = 1 and writing j a j = j α j(a j /α j ), we obtain that E l r 1 (X l ) j=r+1 ( α 1 j E P l j (X l ) Alying Burkholder s inequality for ultivariate artingales and using the stationarity, we infer that there exists a ositive constant c deending only on such that, for any ositive integer n, So, overall P l j (X l ) E l r 1 (X l ) (c n) / n+r c j=r+1 ). P l j (X l ), c n P 0 (X j ),. α 1 j u j = (c n) /( ). P 0 (X j ) (4.19) j=r+1 We handle now the second ter in the right-hand side of (4.17). We first write that Let With this notation, S k E k (S ) = S k S k r E k (S S k r )+S k r E k (S k r ). (4.20) Y r = 0 i= (r 1) X i r i= (r 1) E 0 (X i ). S k S k r E k (S S k r ) = Y r T k. Hence, for any ositive real A, Sk S k r E k (S S k r ) 2 A +2 Y r1 Yr >A T k 2 A +2 n Y r 1 Yr >A,. Since Y r, K r where K r is a constant deending on r, we get that li lisu 1 Sk S k r E k (S S k r ) A n n = 0. (4.21) 16

17 We deal now with the ter S k r E k (S k r ). Since E (X 0 ) = X 0 alost surely, we have that, alost surely Therefore k r S k r E k (S k r ) = l k 1 j= S k r E k (S k r ) r j= r P l j (X l ) = j= k j= k r P l j (X l )+ k r P l j (X l ) + k r P l j (X l ) + r 1 j= n+1 + r 1 r 1 r 1 k r j= k+1 l=k+j+1 j= n+1 k r l=r n j= n+1 k r l=k+j+1 P l j (X l ) k+j l=r n P l j (X l ). P l j (X l ) P l j (X l ). (4.22) Let u i = P 0 (X i ),, C r = r i= u i and α i = C 1 r u i. As before, using the facts that for any 1, x x is convex and that α i 0 with r i= α i = 1, we obtain that r j= k r P l j (X l ) r j= ( α 1 j E k r P l j (X l ) Alying Burkholder s inequality for ultivariate artingales and using the stationarity, we infer that there exists a ositive constant c deending only on such that, for any ositive integer n, r j= k r P l j (X l ) (c n) /( ). P 0 (X i ) (4.23) With siilar arguents, we derive that r 1 j= n+1 k r l=r n r 1 P l j (X l ) + j= n+1 k+j l=r n i r P l j (X l ) 2(2c n) /( n 1 i=r+1 ). P 0 (X i ) ). (4.24) Starting fro (4.22) and considering the uer bounds (4.23) and (4.24), we get that S k r E k (S k r ) n 1/ P 0 (X i ). (4.25) Fro the decoosition (4.20) together with (4.21) and (4.25), it follows that S k E k (S ) n 1/ P 0 (X i ) +o(n 1/ ). (4.26) Starting fro (4.17) and considering (4.18), (4.19), (4.26) and the condition (4.1), we derive that R k n 1/ P 0 (X j ), +o(n 1/ )+r 1/, j r i r i r 17

18 (with the decoosition of (4.18) in r ilies that R k R k + 1 k n 1 k r + n i=r+1 ) which, cobined with (4.2) and Condition (4.1), R k r 2 +n 1/ P 0 (X j ), +o(n 1/ ). j r Letting first n tend to infinity and next r tend to infinity, (4.3) follows. Starting fro Proosition 4.1 one can rove the following theore concerning the weak and strong invariance rinciles for non-adated sequences. Theore 4.1. Let X 0 be a zero ean rando variable in L 2 (R ) and F 0 a σ-algebra satisfying F 0 T 1 (F 0 ). For any i Z, let X i = X 0 T i and F i = T i (F 0 ). Let S n = X 1 + +X n. Assue that T is ergodic, that E (X 0 ) = 0 alost surely, and that E (X 0 ) = X 0 alost surely. 1. Assue that P 0 (X n ) 2, <. (4.27) Then n 1 Var(S n ) converges to n Z C = k ZCov ( X 0,X k ). (4.28) In addition the rocess {n 1/2 S [nt],t [0,1]} converges in D([0,1],R ) equied with the unifor toology to a Wiener rocess {W(t),t [0,1]} with variance atrix Var(W(1)) = C. 2. Assue that n 3 logn( P 0 (X n ) 2, + P 0 (X n ) 2, ) (loglogn) 1/2 <. (4.29) Then, enlarging the robability sace if necessary, there exists a sequence (Z i ) i 1 of iid Gaussian rando variables in R with zero ean and variance atrix Var(Z i ) = C given by (4.28), such that su 1 k n k X 0 T i k Z i = o ( (nloglogn) 1/2) alost surely, as n. (4.30) Reark 4.2. The weak invariance rincile (Ite 1 of Theore 4.1) still holds if T is not ergodic, but in that case the liiting distribution is a ixture of Brownian otion (this has been roved in [7] when = 1). This weak invariance rincile can be also extended to searable Hilbert saces, with the aroriate covariance oerator. In the adated case (i.e. X 0 is F 0 -easurable), the non ergodic Hilbert-valued version of Ite 1 has been roved in [4]. Proof of Theore 4.1. Let S,1 = {x R : x = 1}. For a atrix A fro R to R, let A = su x S,1 Ax. By stationarity n 1 Var(S n ) = n 1 k <n (n k )Cov(X 0,X k ). Hence n 1 Cov(S n ) converges to C rovided that k Z Cov(X 0,X k ) <. Since E (X k ) = 0 alost surely and E (X k ) = X k alost surely, it follows that X k = i Z P i(x k ) alost surely. Moreover Cov(P i (X 0 ),P j (X k )) = 0 for i j. Hence, Cov(X 0,X k ) = i ZCov(P i (X 0 ),P i (X k )), 18

19 and consequently Cov(X 0,X k ) i Z P i(x 0 ) 2, P i (X k ) 2,. By (4.27) it follows that Cov(X 0,X k ) ( ) 2 P i (X 0 ) 2, P i (X k ) 2, = P 0 (X i ) 2, <, k Z k Z i Z i Z which roves the convergence of n 1 Var(S n ) to C. Let now d 0 := j Z P 0(X j ). Since (4.27) is assued, d 0 belongs to L 2 (R ). In addition E(d 0 F 1 ) = 0 alost surely. Let d i := d 0 T i for all i Z. Then (d i ) i Z is a stationary ergodic sequence of artingale differences in L 2 (R ). Let M n := n d i and R n := S n M n. Using (4.27), it follows fro (4.3) of Lea 4.1 that R 2 k = o(n). (4.31) 1 k n 2 Since n 1 Var(S n ) converges to C, it follows that Var(d 0 ) = C. Therefore, Ite 1 of Theore 4.1 follows fro the weak invariance rincile for artial sus of stationary ultivariate artingale differences in L 2 (R ) (see [4] for the non ergodic Hilbert-valued version) together with the ial artingale aroxiation given in (4.31). We turn now to the roof of Ite 2. According to Theore 3.1 in [1] (that is the generalization of the Strassen s invariance rincile [14] for real artingales with ergodic increents to the ultivariate case), enlarging the robability sace if necessary, there exists a sequence (Z i ) i 1 of iid Gaussian rando variables in R with zero ean and covariance Var(Z 1 ) = C such that su 1 k n k d 0 T i k Z i = o ( (nloglogn) 1/2) alost surely, as n. Therefore the strong aroxiation result (4.30) will follow if we can show that R n = o ( (nloglogn) 1/2) alost surely, as n. (4.32) Since R n = n (f d 0) T i, (4.32) will follow by Theore 4.7 in [3] if we can rove that n>3 R n 2 <. n 3/2 (loglogn) 1/2 Using (4.2) of Lea 4.1, this last convergence will hold rovided that n>3 ( n ( l k P l(x 0 ) 2, ) 2 ) 1/2 n 3/2 (loglogn) 1/2 <. (4.33) 19

20 Notice that n>3 ( n ( l k P l(x 0 ) 2, ) 2 ) 1/2 n 3/2 (loglogn) 1/2 k 2 k/2 (logk) 1/2( 2 ( ) 2 ) 1/2 ( P 0 (X l ) 2, + P 0 (X l ) 2, ) k>2 j=1 l j 2 k/2 (logk) 1/2( k 2 j( ) 2 ) 1/2. ( P 0 (X l ) 2, + P 0 (X l ) 2, ) k 0 j=0 l 2 j Now, using the subadditivity of x x 1/2, it follows that (4.33) will be satisfied as soon as k 2 k/2 (logk) 1/2 2 j/2 ( P 0 (X l ) 2, + P 0 (X l ) 2, ) <, l 2 j k>2 j=0 which holds as soon as (4.29) does (changing the order of suation in l j roof of Ite 2 of Theore 4.1. k ). This ends the For the sake of alications, we now give sufficient conditions for (4.27) and (4.29) to hold. Reark 4.3. The condition (4.27) is satisfied if we assue that n 1 1 n 1/2 E 0(X n ) 2, < and 1 n 1/2 X n E 0 (X n ) 2, <, (4.34) n 1 and the condition (4.29) holds if we assue that n 3 logn n 1/2 (loglogn) 1/2 E 0(X n ) 2, < and n 3 logn n 1/2 (loglogn) 1/2 X n E 0 (X n ) 2, <. (4.35) The roof of the reark above is oitted since it uses exactly the arguents develoed to rove Rearks 3.3 and 3.6 in [5] (see Section 5.5 of [5]). Notice that the conditions (4.34) or (4.35) ily clearly that E (X 0 ) = 0 alost surely and that E (X 0 ) = X 0 alost surely. References [1] Berger, E. An alost sure invariance rincile for stationary ergodic sequences of Banach sace valued rando variables, Probab. Theory Related Fields 84 (1990) [2] Burkholder, D. L. Shar inequalities for artingales and stochastic integrals. Colloque Paul Lévy sur les Processus Stochastiques (Palaiseau, 1987). Astérisque No (1988) [3] Cuny, C. and Merlevède, F. On artingale aroxiations and the quenched weak invariance rincile. (2012). arxiv: [4] Dedecker, J. and Merlevède, F. The conditional central liit theore in Hilbert saces. Stochastic Process. Al. 108 (2003)

21 [5] Dedecker, J., Merlevède, F. and Peligrad, M. Invariance rinciles for linear rocesses with alication to isotonic regression. Bernoulli 17 (2011) [6] Dedecker J., Merlevède F. and Pène F. Rates of convergence in the strong invariance rincile for non adated sequences. Alication to ergodic autoorhiss of the torus. (2012). arxiv: Acceted fo ublication in High Diensional Probability VI. [7] Dedecker, J., Merlevède, F. and Volnỳ, D. On the weak invariance rincile for non adated sequences under rojective criteria, J. Theoret. Probab. 20 (2007) no. 4, [8] Gordin, M. I. The central liit theore for stationary rocesses., Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR. 188 (1969) [9] Heyde, C. C. On the central liit theore and iterated logarith law for stationary rocesses, Bull. Austral. Math. Soc. 12 (1975) 1-8. [10] Le Borgne S. Liit theores for non-hyerbolic autoorhiss of the torus, Israel J. Math. 109 (1999) [11] Leonov V. P. Central liit theore for ergodic endoorhiss of coact coutative grous, Dokl. Acad. Sci. USSR 135 (1960) [12] Lind D. A. Dynaical roerties of quasihyerbolic toral autoorhiss, Ergodic Theory Dynaical Systes 2 (1982) [13] Shao, Q.M. Alost sure invariance rinciles for ixing sequences of rando variables, Stochastic Process. Al. 48 (1993) [14] Strassen, V. Alost sure behavior of sus of indeendent rando variables and artingales. Proc. Fifth Berkeley Syos. Math. Statist. and Probability (Berkeley, Calif., 1965/66) II Univ. California Press, Berkeley, Calif. (1967). [15] Wu, W. B. Strong invariance rinciles for deendent rando variables, Ann. Probab. 35 (2007) [16] Wu, W. B. and Zhao, Z. Moderate deviations for stationary rocesses, Statist. Sinica 18 (2008)