arxiv: v1 [math.pr] 20 May 2018

Transcription

1 arxiv: v1 mathr 20 May 2018 A DOOB-TYE MAXIMAL INEQUALITY AND ITS ALICATIONS TO VARIOUS STOCHASTIC ROCESSES Abstract We show how an improvement on Doob s inequality leads to new inequalities for several stochastic processes: Lévy processes, processes with independent increments in general, branching processes, and time homogeneous Markov processes 1 Introduction The aim of this note is to show how an improvement on Doob s inequality, already pointed out in 1, leads to new inequalities for various stochastic processes, such as Lévy processes, random walks, processes with independent increments in general, branching processes and continuous state branching processes, as well as some Markov processes, including geometric Brownian motion Despite the proofs being very simple, the inequalities obtained seem to be novel and quite useful 2 Improving Doob s inequality Although the proofs of Theorems A and B below are almost identical to the ones of Theorems 521 and 719 in 4, we present their brief proofs for the sake of completeness As usual, EX;A will denote EX1 A The following maximal inequality is precisely Doob s inequality when a = 1; when a < 1, however, the submartingale property is no longer assumed and so Doob s inequality is not available Theorem A Improved Doob; discrete Let N 0 Let X n,f n, 0 n N be a discrete stochastic process with the last variable satisfying that 0 X N L 1, and assume that 1 EX N F n ax n holds for all 0 n < N with some 0 < a Then max X n α 0 n N where ã := min{a,1} 1 αã E X N ; max 0 n N X n α, α > 0, 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification 60E15, 60G45, 60G48, 60G51, 60J80 Key words and phrases Doob s inequality, maximal-inequalities, Lévy processes, processes with independent increments, submartingales, random walks, branching processes, superprocesses, Markov-processes, geometric Brownian motion 1

2 2 roof It is enough to treat the case when a < 1, otherwise one is simply looking at Doob s inequality Define the mutually disjoint events A 0 := {X 0 α}; A n := {X n α but max 0 m<n X m < α} F n, n = 1,2, Since a < 1 and X N 0, the bound 1 holds even for n = N, and thus N N max X EX n ;A n N EX N ;A n n α = A n 0 n N α αa n=0 n=0 n=0 1 αa E X N ; max X n α, 0 n N as claimed Next, we treat the continuous counterpart Theorem B Improved Doob; continuous Let T > 0 Let Z t,f t, t 0,T be a right-continuous stochastic process with the last variable satisfying that 0 Z T L 1, and assume that EZ T F t az t holds for all 0 t < T where 0 < a Then, for α > 0, sup Z s α 1 αã E Z T ; sup Z s α, where ã := min{a,1} roof We will write Zs instead of Z s for convenience Let n N be given and apply Theorem A to the discrete parameter process W m, G m, 0 m 2 n := Z mt 2,, and N := n FmT 2 n 0 m 2 2n, yielding n max 0 m 2 nw m α Exploiting right-continuity, one has max 0 m 2 nw m = max 0 m 2 nz 1 αã E Z T ; max 0 m 2 nw m α mt 2 n ր sup Zs, as n, and we are done by letting n and using dominated convergence theorem 3 Applications to various processes We now present some useful inequalities which are straightforward applications of Theorems A and B 31 Application to processes with independent increments If the rightcontinuos process Z t,f t, on 0,T has independent increments, then Let Ee ZT F s e Zs = E e ZT Zs F s = E e Z T Z s a := inf EeZT Zs

3 A Doob-type maximal inequality and its applications 3 If 0 < a, then the conditions of Thm B are satisfied for the process Ẑ := ez Therefore, we have Theorem 1 Independent increments If the right-continuos process Z t,f t, on 0,T has independent increments, then for α R, sup Z s α e α ã E e ZT ; sup Z s α Remark If the righthand side is infinite, we still consider the bound valid in the broader sense, and therefore we do not assume any moment condition on Z T As a particular case, we let S n,f n, 0 n N be a a random walk on Z with S 0 = 0 Let the steps Y n := S n+1 S n be independent, and define φ i := Ee Yi and π n := Π N 1 i=n φ i Choosing we obtain a := min 0 n N EeSN Sn = min 0 n N π n, Corollary 1 Random walks with time-inhomogeneous steps For α R, { } max S n α e α max 1, max π n 1 E S N ; max S n α 0 n N 0 n N 0 n N 32 Application to Lévy-processes If we assume even more, namely that Z is actually a Lévy-process, 1 then, for T > 1, the Lévy-Khintchine Theorem implies that a = inf E e ZT Zs = inf E e ZT s = inf Ee Z 1 T s Observethat the infimum is either at 0 or at T So, assuming as usual, that Z 0 0, in terms of the Lévy exponent ψ, we obtain that a = 1 when ψ1 0; a = Ee ZT when ψ1 0 Clearly, T > 1 is not important in the argument above, and so we have obtained that a = min{1,ee ZT } This gives the following result Theorem 2 Lévyprocess A Lévy process Z t,f t, on 0,T satisfies assuming Z 0 0 that for α R, sup Z s α e αe e ZT ; sup Z s α min{1,ee ZT } In particular, sup Z s α e α max{1,ee ZT } Remark i Again, the righthand sides of the bounds are allowed to be infinite, and so we make no moment assumptions on Z T ii When a = 1, that is, ψ1 0, the theorem is simply an exponential Doob s inequality For example, that is the case for standard Brownian motion Nonetheless, when Ee ZT 1, ie ψ1 0, we obtain a new inequality Let a 0, b R, and Λ be the characteristics of Z 1 That is, with hx := x1 x 1, let Z 1 have 1 For background on Lévy processes, see eg 3

4 4 log-characteristic function Φt = ibt 1 2 at2 eitx 1 ithxλdx Then ψ1 0 is equivalent to b a 2 e x 1 hxλdx Of course, this condition is only meaningful when the Lévy measure has light enough tail, guaranteeing that ex 1 hxλdx < 33 Application to subcritical branching processes Let Z t t 0 be a subcritical branching process, with mean offspring number 0 < µ < 1, and with exponential branching clock with rate b > 0 Let m := µ 1 < 0 Since, by the branching property, EZ T Z s = e bmt s Z s for T > s, we pick a = e bmt and obtain that Theorem 3 Subcritical branching processes For α > 0, sup Z s α α 1 e bmt E Z T ; sup Z s α Note: The righthand side is of course bounded by α 1 for any T and µ < 1, in accordance with the fact that for the µ = 1 case, Doob s inequality gives precisely the α 1 bound But if α is large relative to T, our bound is much tighter, as the expectation term tends to zero as α Remark CSB s For a continuous state branching process CSB X that can also be thought of as the total mass of a superprocess, with branching mechanism βu ku 2 with β < 0, k > 0, we get, by a similar argument, that sup X s α α 1 e βt E X T ; sup X s α, α > 0 For background on CSB s, see 3 For another, superprocess-related application, see 1 34 Application to time-homogeneous Markov processes If X is a timehomogenous Markov process, then our condition becomes E Xs X T ax s, s 0,T where a = at > 0 This, besides branching processes, is also satisfied for example by a geometric Brownian motion S solving the stochastic differential equation ds t = µs t dt+σs t dw t, with S 0 = z > 0 Here µ R, σ > 0, while W is a standard Brownian motion Indeed, E r S T = re µt s ra, 0 s T, where a := 1 for µ 0 and a := e µt for µ < 0 In the latter case for instance, we obtain that, Theorem 4 GBM; µ < 0 Assume that the geometric Brownian motion S has drift µ < 0 and S 0 = z Then, for α > z, z t > 0 : S t α z α

5 A Doob-type maximal inequality and its applications 5 roof Using continuity, z t > 0 : S t α = lim T z max S t α 0 t T Now, Theorem B along with the previous comments yields for α > z and T > 0, that z max S t α E zs T = zeµt 0 t T aα e µt α = z α, and we are done For some related results on geometric Brownian motion, see 2 35 Application to proving limits We conclude with a simple application to proving limit theorems The point is that even though the process is defined for continuous times, there is no need to go through the ubiquitous and rather unpleasant discrete time skeleton first procedure This has been utilized in 1 for superprocesses Theorem 5 Almost sure convergence Let X t,f s, t 0 be a nonnegative real valued, filtered stochastic process, such that m t := EX t < Assume that 1 there is an a 0,1 such that EX t F s ax s, 0 s < t; 2 t i i N sequence such that t i as i and i m t i < Then lim t X t = 0 -as roof By Borel-Cantelli, it is enough to show that for any given ǫ > 0, sup X s > ǫ < s t i 1,t i i i 0 By our first assumption along with Theorem B, the lefthand side is bounded by aǫ 1 i i 0 EXt i, and we are done, given our second assumption References 1 Engländer, J; Ren, Y-X; Song, R Weak extinction versus global exponential growth of total mass for superdiffusions Ann Inst Henri oincaré robab Stat , no 1, Graversen, S E; eskir, G Optimal stopping and maximal inequalities for geometric Brownian motion J Appl robab , no 4, Kyprianou, A E Fluctuations of Lévy processes with applications Introductory lectures Second edition Universitext Springer, Heidelberg, Stroock, D W robability theory An analytic view Second edition Cambridge University ress, Cambridge, 2011 Department of Mathematics, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO , USA address: janosenglander@coloradoedu URL: