Definition of a âboundedâ stochastic process (Bass, Protter)
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am currently reading through Protter's 'stochastic integration and differential equations' and Bass' 'stochastic processes' books.
Both seem to make use of "bounded" stochastic processes. I am unsure of whether this means
1) there exists $K > 0$ such that for each $(t, omega) in [0,infty) times Omega$, $|X(t,omega)| < K$
or
2) for each $omega in Omega$, there exists $K > 0$ such that for each $t in [0,infty)$, $|X(t, omega)| <K$.
I could not find the definition in either of these books, so I could be missing it, or it could be assumed to be known? If you know a page number then that would be great.
I suspect that definition 1) is the case, but I just wanted to make sure because I want to show that "a bounded increasing cadlag process is a submartingale" (which I think should be adapted as well?) (Bass pg 130)
Bass then goes on to use the Doob Meyer Decomposition on this process, but I think that it should be of class D. I think it would be easier to show it is of class D if the definition of "bounded" was that of 1).
stochastic-processes stochastic-analysis
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am currently reading through Protter's 'stochastic integration and differential equations' and Bass' 'stochastic processes' books.
Both seem to make use of "bounded" stochastic processes. I am unsure of whether this means
1) there exists $K > 0$ such that for each $(t, omega) in [0,infty) times Omega$, $|X(t,omega)| < K$
or
2) for each $omega in Omega$, there exists $K > 0$ such that for each $t in [0,infty)$, $|X(t, omega)| <K$.
I could not find the definition in either of these books, so I could be missing it, or it could be assumed to be known? If you know a page number then that would be great.
I suspect that definition 1) is the case, but I just wanted to make sure because I want to show that "a bounded increasing cadlag process is a submartingale" (which I think should be adapted as well?) (Bass pg 130)
Bass then goes on to use the Doob Meyer Decomposition on this process, but I think that it should be of class D. I think it would be easier to show it is of class D if the definition of "bounded" was that of 1).
stochastic-processes stochastic-analysis
1
There is no common definition for "bounded process", I think; the definition varies from book to book. In this particular case you are mentioning I agree that 1) is more reasonable. Note that 2) does not ensure integrability of $X_t$ which is clearly a necessary ingredient for $X_t$ to be a submartingale.
â saz
Aug 19 at 9:07
Thanks saz! I will emphasize this in the notes that I am writing up so that it is explicit for me in the future.
â Ceeerson
Aug 19 at 9:12
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I am currently reading through Protter's 'stochastic integration and differential equations' and Bass' 'stochastic processes' books.
Both seem to make use of "bounded" stochastic processes. I am unsure of whether this means
1) there exists $K > 0$ such that for each $(t, omega) in [0,infty) times Omega$, $|X(t,omega)| < K$
or
2) for each $omega in Omega$, there exists $K > 0$ such that for each $t in [0,infty)$, $|X(t, omega)| <K$.
I could not find the definition in either of these books, so I could be missing it, or it could be assumed to be known? If you know a page number then that would be great.
I suspect that definition 1) is the case, but I just wanted to make sure because I want to show that "a bounded increasing cadlag process is a submartingale" (which I think should be adapted as well?) (Bass pg 130)
Bass then goes on to use the Doob Meyer Decomposition on this process, but I think that it should be of class D. I think it would be easier to show it is of class D if the definition of "bounded" was that of 1).
stochastic-processes stochastic-analysis
I am currently reading through Protter's 'stochastic integration and differential equations' and Bass' 'stochastic processes' books.
Both seem to make use of "bounded" stochastic processes. I am unsure of whether this means
1) there exists $K > 0$ such that for each $(t, omega) in [0,infty) times Omega$, $|X(t,omega)| < K$
or
2) for each $omega in Omega$, there exists $K > 0$ such that for each $t in [0,infty)$, $|X(t, omega)| <K$.
I could not find the definition in either of these books, so I could be missing it, or it could be assumed to be known? If you know a page number then that would be great.
I suspect that definition 1) is the case, but I just wanted to make sure because I want to show that "a bounded increasing cadlag process is a submartingale" (which I think should be adapted as well?) (Bass pg 130)
Bass then goes on to use the Doob Meyer Decomposition on this process, but I think that it should be of class D. I think it would be easier to show it is of class D if the definition of "bounded" was that of 1).
stochastic-processes stochastic-analysis
edited Aug 19 at 9:34
asked Aug 19 at 8:40
Ceeerson
434
434
1
There is no common definition for "bounded process", I think; the definition varies from book to book. In this particular case you are mentioning I agree that 1) is more reasonable. Note that 2) does not ensure integrability of $X_t$ which is clearly a necessary ingredient for $X_t$ to be a submartingale.
â saz
Aug 19 at 9:07
Thanks saz! I will emphasize this in the notes that I am writing up so that it is explicit for me in the future.
â Ceeerson
Aug 19 at 9:12
add a comment |Â
1
There is no common definition for "bounded process", I think; the definition varies from book to book. In this particular case you are mentioning I agree that 1) is more reasonable. Note that 2) does not ensure integrability of $X_t$ which is clearly a necessary ingredient for $X_t$ to be a submartingale.
â saz
Aug 19 at 9:07
Thanks saz! I will emphasize this in the notes that I am writing up so that it is explicit for me in the future.
â Ceeerson
Aug 19 at 9:12
1
1
There is no common definition for "bounded process", I think; the definition varies from book to book. In this particular case you are mentioning I agree that 1) is more reasonable. Note that 2) does not ensure integrability of $X_t$ which is clearly a necessary ingredient for $X_t$ to be a submartingale.
â saz
Aug 19 at 9:07
There is no common definition for "bounded process", I think; the definition varies from book to book. In this particular case you are mentioning I agree that 1) is more reasonable. Note that 2) does not ensure integrability of $X_t$ which is clearly a necessary ingredient for $X_t$ to be a submartingale.
â saz
Aug 19 at 9:07
Thanks saz! I will emphasize this in the notes that I am writing up so that it is explicit for me in the future.
â Ceeerson
Aug 19 at 9:12
Thanks saz! I will emphasize this in the notes that I am writing up so that it is explicit for me in the future.
â Ceeerson
Aug 19 at 9:12
add a comment |Â
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2887496%2fdefinition-of-a-bounded-stochastic-process-bass-protter%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
1
There is no common definition for "bounded process", I think; the definition varies from book to book. In this particular case you are mentioning I agree that 1) is more reasonable. Note that 2) does not ensure integrability of $X_t$ which is clearly a necessary ingredient for $X_t$ to be a submartingale.
â saz
Aug 19 at 9:07
Thanks saz! I will emphasize this in the notes that I am writing up so that it is explicit for me in the future.
â Ceeerson
Aug 19 at 9:12