A Maximal Inequality of Non-negative

Similar documents
Brownian Motion and Stochastic Calculus

Self-normalized laws of the iterated logarithm

an Off-Diagonal Block of

Mi-Hwa Ko. t=1 Z t is true. j=0

Operator Inequalities Associated

A MARTINGALE INEQUALITY FOR THE SQUARE AND MAXIMAL FUNCTIONS LOUIS H.Y. CHEN TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 31 MARCH 15, 1979

Institut für Mathematik

(3) 6(t) = /(* /(* ~ t), *(0 - /(* + 0 ~ /(* ~t)-l,

A Remark on Polynomial Norms and

-Tr4j0(.= On the Kolmogorov-Stein Inequality* C,nllfllnoo-llf<nll), IIf()llo _< gn_ / g(n n-k)

Fixed Points of Log-Linear Discrete Dynamics

Projection Theorem 1

Optional Stopping Theorem Let X be a martingale and T be a stopping time such

ADJOINTS, ABSOLUTE VALUES AND POLAR DECOMPOSITIONS

Injective semigroup-algebras

Selected Exercises on Expectations and Some Probability Inequalities

Let D = R R and let V : D R be a function, not necessarily Borel or

Friedrich symmetric systems

Lecture # 3 Orthogonal Matrices and Matrix Norms. We repeat the definition an orthogonal set and orthornormal set.

Chapter 1. Poisson processes. 1.1 Definitions

ACI-matrices all of whose completions have the same rank

REPRESENTATION THEOREM FOR HARMONIC BERGMAN AND BLOCH FUNCTIONS

(Lj DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION WITH OPERATOR COEFFICIENTS ON THE INTITIAL VALUE PROBLEM FOR A PARTIAL

Itô isomorphisms for L p -valued Poisson stochastic integrals

176 5 t h Fl oo r. 337 P o ly me r Ma te ri al s

Prime and Irreducible Ideals in Subtraction Algebras

Notes to G. Bennett s Problems

MAT 570 REAL ANALYSIS LECTURE NOTES. Contents. 1. Sets Functions Countability Axiom of choice Equivalence relations 9

A SYNOPSIS OF HILBERT SPACE THEORY

Lecture 19 L 2 -Stochastic integration

ON THE DIFFUSION OPERATOR IN POPULATION GENETICS

ON BURKHOLDER'S BICONVEX-FUNCTION CHARACTERIZATION OF HILBERT SPACES

The Arzelà-Ascoli Theorem

MAA6617 COURSE NOTES SPRING 2014

Notes on Equidistribution

Controlling Hopf Bifurcations: Discrete-Time Systems

Lecture 21 Representations of Martingales

A Present Position-Dependent Conditional Fourier-Feynman Transform and Convolution Product over Continuous Paths

Pointwise convergence rates and central limit theorems for kernel density estimators in linear processes

COMPLETE METRICS CONFORMAL TO THE HYPERBOLIC DISC

ULTRAHYPERBOLIC DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION

Jumping Sequences. Steve Butler Department of Mathematics University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA

HIGHER-ORDER DIFFERENCES AND HIGHER-ORDER PARTIAL SUMS OF EULER S PARTITION FUNCTION

Research Article A New Roper-Suffridge Extension Operator on a Reinhardt Domain

T h e C S E T I P r o j e c t

Lecture 11: Introduction to Markov Chains. Copyright G. Caire (Sample Lectures) 321

EULER MARUYAMA APPROXIMATION FOR SDES WITH JUMPS AND NON-LIPSCHITZ COEFFICIENTS

ON GENERALIZED n-inner PRODUCT SPACES

Educjatipnal. L a d ie s * COBNWALILI.S H IG H SCHOOL. I F O R G IR L S A n B k i n d e r g a r t e n.

Functional Limit theorems for the quadratic variation of a continuous time random walk and for certain stochastic integrals

METAMAGNETIC MATERIALS WITH VOLUME-DEPENDENT

THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO UNDERGRADUATE MATHEMATICS COMPETITION. Sunday, March 14, 2004 Time: hours No aids or calculators permitted.

(A n + B n + 1) A n + B n

17 Advancement Operator Equations

A CLT FOR MULTI-DIMENSIONAL MARTINGALE DIFFERENCES IN A LEXICOGRAPHIC ORDER GUY COHEN. Dedicated to the memory of Mikhail Gordin

Lecture Note 7: Iterative methods for solving linear systems. Xiaoqun Zhang Shanghai Jiao Tong University

A NOTE ON ALMOST PERIODIC VARIATIONAL EQUATIONS

Notes on Poisson Approximation

DECAY AND GROWTH FOR A NONLINEAR PARABOLIC DIFFERENCE EQUATION

u(x,t)= í /(e^wv^dí.

EXAMINATION SOLUTIONS

The Geometry of Hyperbolic Manifolds via the Curve Complex

Some topics in analysis related to Banach algebras, 2

Additive functionals of infinite-variance moving averages. Wei Biao Wu The University of Chicago TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 535

Probability approximation by Clark-Ocone covariance representation

Exercise Exercise Homework #6 Solutions Thursday 6 April 2006

Regularity of the density for the stochastic heat equation

Elementary linear algebra

Mathematics Department Stanford University Math 61CM/DM Inner products

An introduction to some aspects of functional analysis

Math 118B Solutions. Charles Martin. March 6, d i (x i, y i ) + d i (y i, z i ) = d(x, y) + d(y, z). i=1

Thus f is continuous at x 0. Matthew Straughn Math 402 Homework 6

Normal approximation of Poisson functionals in Kolmogorov distance

COVARIANCE IDENTITIES AND MIXING OF RANDOM TRANSFORMATIONS ON THE WIENER SPACE

Two Lemmas in Local Analytic Geometry

g(t) = f(x 1 (t),..., x n (t)).

I ƒii - [ Jj ƒ(*) \'dzj'.

BOUNDEDNESS AND EXPONENTIAL STABILITY OF SOLUTIONS TO DYNAMIC EQUATIONS ON TIME SCALES

FIBONACCI NUMBERS AND DECIMATION OF BINARY SEQUENCES

Eigenvalues, random walks and Ramanujan graphs

BUILDING MODULES FROM THE SINGULAR LOCUS

The Azéma-Yor Embedding in Non-Singular Diffusions

Estimates for sums over primes

Bessel Processes. Maximal Inequalities for. 0_<,<_:rmaX Z2t) S.E. GRAVERSEN and G. PEKIR * < G(oOV/-(T) 8000 Aarhus, Denmark

4 Sums of Independent Random Variables

Doléans measures. Appendix C. C.1 Introduction

A note on the growth rate in the Fazekas Klesov general law of large numbers and on the weak law of large numbers for tail series

fffl R2(z,a)dxdy and R(z, f) is the conformal radius of f at a point z. Rigidity in the Complex Plane Isoperimetric Inequality fortorsional

Complex Variables. Chapter 2. Analytic Functions Section Harmonic Functions Proofs of Theorems. March 19, 2017

DISCUSSION CLASS OF DAX IS ON 22ND MARCH, TIME : 9-12 BRING ALL YOUR DOUBTS [STRAIGHT OBJECTIVE TYPE]

UNIQUENESS OF MEROMORPHIC FUNCTIONS SHARING THREE VALUES

Best approximation in the 2-norm

MAXIMAL CLADES IN RANDOM BINARY SEARCH TREES

QUIVERS AND LATTICES.

CS Foundations of Communication Complexity

On Wald-Type Optimal Stopping for Brownian Motion

Theorems. Theorem 1.11: Greatest-Lower-Bound Property. Theorem 1.20: The Archimedean property of. Theorem 1.21: -th Root of Real Numbers

Local null controllability of the N-dimensional Navier-Stokes system with N-1 scalar controls in an arbitrary control domain

Upper Bounds for Partitions into k-th Powers Elementary Methods

A COMPOUND POISSON APPROXIMATION INEQUALITY

Transcription:

J. oflnequal. & Appl., 1999, Vol. 3, pp. 285-291 Reprints available directly from the publisher Photocopying permitted by license only (C) 1999 OPA (Overseas Publishers Association) N.V. Published by license under the Gordon and Breach Science Publishers imprint. Printed in Malaysia. A Maximal Inequality of Non-negative Submartingale YOUNG-HO KIM Department of Mathematics, Chang-Won National University, Chang-Won 641-773, Korea (Received 26 March 1998; Revised 17 August 1998) In this paper, we prove the maximal inequality P(sup, >_ 0(f, + Ignl) ) (Q(1) + 2)llflll, > o, between a non-negative submartingale f, g is strongly subordinate to f and 2fn-1 Q(1) < 0,where Q is real valued function such that 0 < Q(s) < s for each s > 0, Q(0) 0. This inequality improves Burkholder s inequality in which Q(1) 1. Keywords: Maximal inequality; Submartingale; Strongly subordinate; Inner product 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 60G42; Secondary 60G46 1. A MAXIMAL INEQUALITY Suppose that f= (fn),,>o and g (g,,),,_>o are adapted to a filtration ()Vn)n >_ 0 of a probability space (f,.t,p). Here f is a non-negative submartingale and g is R-valued, where u is positive integer. With fn do +... + d. and g, e0 +... + e (n >_ 0). Consider the two conditions; lenl < Idnl for n > 0, (1.1) IE(en lgrn_l)l < IW.(4 ]grn-1)l for n _> 1. (1.2) The process g is called differentially subordinate to f if (1.1) holds. If (1.2) is satisfied, then g is conditionally differentially subordinate to f 285

286 Y.-H. KIM If both of the conditions (1.1) and (1.2) are satisfied, then g is strongly differentially subordinate to f, or more simply, g is strongly subordinate to f. Of course, if f and g are martingales, then both sides of (1.2) vanish and (1.2) is trivially satisfied. It will be convenient to allow g to have its values in a space of possibly more than one dimension. So we assume throughout this paper that the Euclidean norm of y E is denoted by lyl and the inner product of y and k E I by y. k. We set [[f[[1 supn>_o[[fn[[1, the maximal function of g is defined by g* supn _> o [g, and the function -- Q is -- real valued function such that 0 < Q(s) <_ s for each s > O, Q(O) O. THEOREM 1.1 If f is a non-negative submartingale, g is strongly subordinate tofand 2fn-1 Q(1) < o, then, for all A > O, AP(sup(fn>_0 %- Ign[) ) (Q(1)-1-2)l[fll COROLLARY 1.2 If f is a non-negative submartingale, g is strongly subordinate tofand 2f,_ Q(1) _< 0, then, for all A > O, AP(supg* _>n>_o A) _< (Q(1)+ 2)[If[[ 1. COROLLARY 1.3 (D.L. Burkholder [2]) If f is a non-negative submartingale and g is strongly subordinate to f, then, for all A > O, AP( sup(f -+- [gnl) ") -< 3[If Ill" Remark 1.1 In [2] Burkholder proved the inequality in Theorem when Q(1) 1. 2. TECHNICAL LEMMAS Put S {(x, y): x > 0 and y E with [y[ > 0}. Define two functions U and V on S by u(x,y) f [lyl- (Q(1) 4-1)x](x + lyl) 1/(o(1)+l) (Q(1) + 2)x ifx+lyl< 1, if x + lyl ->

A MAXIMAL INEQUALITY OF SUBMARTINGALE 287 and V(x,y) -(Q(1) + 2)x 1-(Q(1)+2)x if x [yl < 1, if x + lyl 1. Observe that U is continuous on S. LFMMA 2.1 (a) V <_ U on S. (b) U(x, y) <_ 0 ifx >_ lyl. Proof For (a) we may assume x + lyl < 1. Write x + lyl R()+. Since 0 < R < 1, we have V(x,y) U(x,y) -R Q()+2 -(1 R)(Q(1)+ 2)x < 0. In order to prove (b) assume x> [y[. If x+lyl < 1, then ly[- (a(1) + 1)x _< lyl x <_ 0. Hence U(x, y) < O. Ifx + lyl >-, then U(x, y) (a(1) + 2)x <_ x + [y[- (O(1) + 2)x lyl- (Q(1) + 1)x <_ o. LEMMA 2.2 [Uy(x, Y)I < 0. Proof If x / lyl < and 2x Q(1) < 0, then Ux(x, y) + If x + ]y] < 1, then differentiation gives Ux(x,y) y(x,y) On the other hand, since -(Q(1) + 1)(Q(1) + 2)x + Q(1)(Q(1) + 2)ly (Q(1) + 1)(x + ly[) (Q(1) + 2)y (Q(1) + 1)(x + lyl) Q( )/(Q()+I)" -(Q(1) + 1)(Q(1) + 2)x- Q(1)(Q(1) + 2)lyl + (Q(1) + 2)lyl [Q(1) + 2][-(Q(1) + 1)x + (1 Q(1))ly[] < [a(1) + 2][1 2x- O(1)], hence Ux(x, y) + Uy(x, Y)I < 0 by the assumption and above inequality. LEMMA 2.3 If (X, y) E S, h IR, x + h > O, k IR, Ihl >_ Ikl and [y + kt > O for all IR, then U(x + h, y + k) <_ U(x, y) + Ux(x, y)h + Uy(x, y) k. (2.1)

288 Y.-H. KIM Proof Put I= { E N: x + th > O, [y + tk[ > 0} and observe that 0 E I and I is an open set. Define a function G on I by G(t) U(x + ht, y + kt). From the chain rule we have G (t) Ux(x + th, y + tk)h + Uy(x + th, y + tk) k. Thus it suffices to show G(1)N G(0)+ G (0). For this we define more functions r, N and m on I by r( t) m( t) + N( t), m(t)=x+ht and N(t) ly + ktl we will write m for re(t), etc. Therefore, put I1 {t : re(t) > 0, N(t) > 0 and r(t) < } and 12 {t : re(t) > 0, N(t) > 0 and r(t) > }. On I1, we have G(t) r (Q(1)+2)/(Q(1)+I) (Q(1) + 2)mr 1/(Q(1)+I). Differentiating G, we get ag" (t) r"r 2 + (r ) 2r 2hrr mrr" + Q(1) + where Q(1) + r(2q(1)+i)/(q(1)+i Q(1) +2 Rearranging terms and inserting (/)2 r- r(r )2, we have ag"(t) (r"r mr" 2hr + (r )2)r + -r + Q(1) +-------r + ) )2 Q(1) + m (r (Ik[ 2 h2)r- Q(1) Q(1) + Q(I) m(r,)2 Q(1) + N(r,)2 < (ikl2_ hz)r" Here we used the observation that m h, N r h, NN k (y + tk) and Nr"= NN" [kl 2- (N )2. On 12 we have G(t) (Q(1) + 2)(x + ht).

A MAXIMAL INEQUALITY OF SUBMARTINGALE 289 Differentiating G, we get G"(t)=0. Therefore, on each component of I1 LI I2, the derivative G" is non-positive and G - is non-increasing. So, by Mean Value Theorem we have G(1) G(0) G (-) (0 < < 1). Hence G(1) G(0) < G (0). The case x + lyl follows by replacing x by x + 2 j in the inequality (2.1) and then taking the limit of both sides as j cx. This proves the lemma. 3. PROOF OF THE INEQUALITY IN THEOREM 1.1 We can assume that Ilfl]l is finite. A stopping time argument leads to a further reduction: it is enough to prove that if n > 0, then We may further assume that e(f + Ignl >- 1) <_ (a(1) + 2)Efn. (3.1) fn-1 > 0 and Ign-1 + tenl > 0 for all E N and n > 1. (3.2) Indeed, for each 0 < e < 1, the processesf and g, wheref g process in IR+1. Now, the inequality fn + e and (g,, e), satisfy (3.2) and all the assumptions in Section 1. Here g is a P(f + Igl -> 1) _< (Q(1) + 2)Efn yields, as e+0, the inequality (3.1) because P(fn+lgl>_ P(fn + e + I(gn, e)l > 1) and Ef, < Efn + e. Let the functions U and Vbe as in the previous section. Observe, from the assumption (3.2), that (fn-l,gn-1) ES. The inequality (3.1) is equivalent to EV(fn,gn) < O. According to (a) of Lemma 2.1 it suffices to prove U(fn,gn) <_ O.

290 Y.-H. KIM Also, (b) of Lemma 2.1 and the Assumption (1.1) imply U(f0, go) _< 0. Hence the proof is complete if we can show EU(fn, gn) <_ EU(fn-1, gn-1), which holds for all n _> 1. By Lemma 2.3 we have, with x =fn-1, h- dn, Y gn-1 and k en, U(fn, gn) U(fn-1, gn-) <_ Ux(fn-1, gn-1)dn + Uy(fn-1, gn-1) en (3.3) where all the random variables are integrable. The integrability follows from the boundedness offn-1 and gn-1 although, of course, g need not be uniformly bounded. Also observe that U(fn-l,gn-1), Ux(fn-l,g,,-1) and Uy(fn-l,gn-a) are n- measurable. Thus conditioning on 9c,_ we get E(U(fn, gn)-u(fn-l,gn-1) l.t n-1)--e(u(fn, gn) l.t n-)-u(fn-l,gn_o, E(Ux(fn-l,gn-1)dn l.t n-)- Ux(fn-,gn-1)E(dn f n-) and (Uy(fn-l,gn-1) en n-,) Uy(fn-l,gn-1) E(en From (3.3) we get E(U(fn,gn) l.t n-) U(fn-l,gn-1) < Ux(f-,gn-)E(dn l.t n-) + Uy(fn-l,gn-1) (en I.T n_). Sincefis a submartingale, Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and the assumption (1.2) we have Uy(fn-l,gn-1)" ](en n-1) IUy(fn-,gn-1)II (en n-1)l < Uy(fn-, gn-1)i E(dn.T n-1).

A MAXIMAL INEQUALITY OF SUBMARTINGALE 291 Hence or I(U(fn, gn) n-1) U(fn-1, gn-1 (Ux(fn-1, gn-1) + ]Uy(fn-1, gn-1)]) ((dn I.]:n-1)) 0 E(U(fn,gn) In-1) U(fn-l,gn-1). (3.4) In the above we used Lemma 2.2. But from the definition of conditional expectation we have (](U(fn, gn) f n-1)) U(fn, gn). Thus taking expectation in (3.4), we get EU(fn, gn) <_ EU(fn-1, gn-1). This completes the proof of the inequality in Theorem 1.1. References [1] D.L. Burkholder, Differential subordination of harmonic functions and martingales, Harmonic Analysis and Partial Differential Equation (El Escorial, 1987), Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1384 (1989), 1-23. MR 90 k:31004. [2] Strong differential subordination and stochastic integration, Ann. Probab. 22 (1994), 995--1025. MR 95 k:60085. [3] C.S. Choi, A weak-type inequality for Differentially Subordinate harmonic functions, Transactions of the A.M.S. (to appear).

2024 © sciencedocbox.com Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Feedback