Show that the stochastic exponential is a true martingale

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $W = W_t : tge0$ be a standard Brownian motion on a probability space $(Omega,mathcalF,mathbbP)$, and let $f$ be a deterministic function such that
$$
int_0^tf^2(s),ds<infty
$$
for all $tge 0$. Show that the stochastic exponential
$$
M_t = expleft(int_0^tf(s),dW_s - frac12int_0^tf^2(s),dsright)
$$
is a martingale.
I'm aware that this can be verified immediately using Novikov's criterion, for example, but I'm looking for a more direct proof than this. It's easy to demonstrate using Ito's lemma that
$$
M_t = 1 + int_0^tf(s)M_s,dW_s,
$$
and so the result can be boiled down to showing that
$$
mathbbEleft[int_0^tf^2(s)M_s^2,dsright]<infty.
$$
This seems promising, but I'm unsure how to proceed. I should mention that the subsequent part of the exercise I'm trying to solve asks to use the martingale property of $M_t$ to show that
$$
int_0^tf(s)dW_ssim Nleft(0,int_0^tf^2(s),dsright).
$$
This is straightforward to do, but it suggests that the martingale property can be demonstrated without appealing to these facts. Any suggestions or references would be greatly appreciated.
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus brownian-motion martingales
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $W = W_t : tge0$ be a standard Brownian motion on a probability space $(Omega,mathcalF,mathbbP)$, and let $f$ be a deterministic function such that
$$
int_0^tf^2(s),ds<infty
$$
for all $tge 0$. Show that the stochastic exponential
$$
M_t = expleft(int_0^tf(s),dW_s - frac12int_0^tf^2(s),dsright)
$$
is a martingale.
I'm aware that this can be verified immediately using Novikov's criterion, for example, but I'm looking for a more direct proof than this. It's easy to demonstrate using Ito's lemma that
$$
M_t = 1 + int_0^tf(s)M_s,dW_s,
$$
and so the result can be boiled down to showing that
$$
mathbbEleft[int_0^tf^2(s)M_s^2,dsright]<infty.
$$
This seems promising, but I'm unsure how to proceed. I should mention that the subsequent part of the exercise I'm trying to solve asks to use the martingale property of $M_t$ to show that
$$
int_0^tf(s)dW_ssim Nleft(0,int_0^tf^2(s),dsright).
$$
This is straightforward to do, but it suggests that the martingale property can be demonstrated without appealing to these facts. Any suggestions or references would be greatly appreciated.
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus brownian-motion martingales
I guess this should not make much sense since you need $mathbb EM_s^2ds<infty$ to prove your last line, which is just equivalently to $M$ being a martingale.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:04
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1529726/â¦.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:09
1
If @saz isn't sure then we probably don't have much hope.
â Alex W
Aug 25 at 15:30
For a deterministic $f$, $int_0^t f(s), dW_s$ is Gaussian with mean zero and variance $int_0^t f(s) ^2 ds$. Nothing else is needed.
â zhoraster
Aug 25 at 15:56
1
@AlexW you are doing me too much honour.
â saz
Aug 25 at 17:43
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
Let $W = W_t : tge0$ be a standard Brownian motion on a probability space $(Omega,mathcalF,mathbbP)$, and let $f$ be a deterministic function such that
$$
int_0^tf^2(s),ds<infty
$$
for all $tge 0$. Show that the stochastic exponential
$$
M_t = expleft(int_0^tf(s),dW_s - frac12int_0^tf^2(s),dsright)
$$
is a martingale.
I'm aware that this can be verified immediately using Novikov's criterion, for example, but I'm looking for a more direct proof than this. It's easy to demonstrate using Ito's lemma that
$$
M_t = 1 + int_0^tf(s)M_s,dW_s,
$$
and so the result can be boiled down to showing that
$$
mathbbEleft[int_0^tf^2(s)M_s^2,dsright]<infty.
$$
This seems promising, but I'm unsure how to proceed. I should mention that the subsequent part of the exercise I'm trying to solve asks to use the martingale property of $M_t$ to show that
$$
int_0^tf(s)dW_ssim Nleft(0,int_0^tf^2(s),dsright).
$$
This is straightforward to do, but it suggests that the martingale property can be demonstrated without appealing to these facts. Any suggestions or references would be greatly appreciated.
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus brownian-motion martingales
Let $W = W_t : tge0$ be a standard Brownian motion on a probability space $(Omega,mathcalF,mathbbP)$, and let $f$ be a deterministic function such that
$$
int_0^tf^2(s),ds<infty
$$
for all $tge 0$. Show that the stochastic exponential
$$
M_t = expleft(int_0^tf(s),dW_s - frac12int_0^tf^2(s),dsright)
$$
is a martingale.
I'm aware that this can be verified immediately using Novikov's criterion, for example, but I'm looking for a more direct proof than this. It's easy to demonstrate using Ito's lemma that
$$
M_t = 1 + int_0^tf(s)M_s,dW_s,
$$
and so the result can be boiled down to showing that
$$
mathbbEleft[int_0^tf^2(s)M_s^2,dsright]<infty.
$$
This seems promising, but I'm unsure how to proceed. I should mention that the subsequent part of the exercise I'm trying to solve asks to use the martingale property of $M_t$ to show that
$$
int_0^tf(s)dW_ssim Nleft(0,int_0^tf^2(s),dsright).
$$
This is straightforward to do, but it suggests that the martingale property can be demonstrated without appealing to these facts. Any suggestions or references would be greatly appreciated.
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus brownian-motion martingales
edited Aug 26 at 6:08
saz
73.4k553113
73.4k553113
asked Aug 25 at 0:25
Alex W
1327
1327
I guess this should not make much sense since you need $mathbb EM_s^2ds<infty$ to prove your last line, which is just equivalently to $M$ being a martingale.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:04
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1529726/â¦.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:09
1
If @saz isn't sure then we probably don't have much hope.
â Alex W
Aug 25 at 15:30
For a deterministic $f$, $int_0^t f(s), dW_s$ is Gaussian with mean zero and variance $int_0^t f(s) ^2 ds$. Nothing else is needed.
â zhoraster
Aug 25 at 15:56
1
@AlexW you are doing me too much honour.
â saz
Aug 25 at 17:43
 |Â
show 1 more comment
I guess this should not make much sense since you need $mathbb EM_s^2ds<infty$ to prove your last line, which is just equivalently to $M$ being a martingale.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:04
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1529726/â¦.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:09
1
If @saz isn't sure then we probably don't have much hope.
â Alex W
Aug 25 at 15:30
For a deterministic $f$, $int_0^t f(s), dW_s$ is Gaussian with mean zero and variance $int_0^t f(s) ^2 ds$. Nothing else is needed.
â zhoraster
Aug 25 at 15:56
1
@AlexW you are doing me too much honour.
â saz
Aug 25 at 17:43
I guess this should not make much sense since you need $mathbb EM_s^2ds<infty$ to prove your last line, which is just equivalently to $M$ being a martingale.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:04
I guess this should not make much sense since you need $mathbb EM_s^2ds<infty$ to prove your last line, which is just equivalently to $M$ being a martingale.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:04
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1529726/â¦.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:09
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1529726/â¦.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:09
1
1
If @saz isn't sure then we probably don't have much hope.
â Alex W
Aug 25 at 15:30
If @saz isn't sure then we probably don't have much hope.
â Alex W
Aug 25 at 15:30
For a deterministic $f$, $int_0^t f(s), dW_s$ is Gaussian with mean zero and variance $int_0^t f(s) ^2 ds$. Nothing else is needed.
â zhoraster
Aug 25 at 15:56
For a deterministic $f$, $int_0^t f(s), dW_s$ is Gaussian with mean zero and variance $int_0^t f(s) ^2 ds$. Nothing else is needed.
â zhoraster
Aug 25 at 15:56
1
1
@AlexW you are doing me too much honour.
â saz
Aug 25 at 17:43
@AlexW you are doing me too much honour.
â saz
Aug 25 at 17:43
 |Â
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Itô's formula shows that
$$M_t = 1+ int_0^t f(s) M_s , dW_s tag1$$
and this implies, in particular, that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a local martingale. (Note that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ has continuous sample paths, and therefore the stochastic integral on the right-hand side is well-defined.) On the other hand, it follows from the very definition that $M_t geq 0$ for each $t geq 0$. Since any non-negative local martingale is a supermartingale (see e.g. this question for details), we conclude that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a supermartingale. Thus,
$$mathbbE(M_t) leq mathbbE(M_0) leq 1$$
which implies
$$mathbbE exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( frac12 int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right)$$
for each $t geq 0$. Replacing $f$ by $2f$ we find in particular that
$$mathbbE left| exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) right|^2 = mathbbEexp left( int_0^t 2f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right) < infty,$$
and so
$$mathbbE(M_t^2) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right).$$
Using this estimate and the fact that $f$ is deterministic, we can easily check that the stochastic integral $int_0^t f(s) M(s) , dW_s$ is a true martingale, and now $(1)$ shows that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a martingale.
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Itô's formula shows that
$$M_t = 1+ int_0^t f(s) M_s , dW_s tag1$$
and this implies, in particular, that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a local martingale. (Note that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ has continuous sample paths, and therefore the stochastic integral on the right-hand side is well-defined.) On the other hand, it follows from the very definition that $M_t geq 0$ for each $t geq 0$. Since any non-negative local martingale is a supermartingale (see e.g. this question for details), we conclude that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a supermartingale. Thus,
$$mathbbE(M_t) leq mathbbE(M_0) leq 1$$
which implies
$$mathbbE exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( frac12 int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right)$$
for each $t geq 0$. Replacing $f$ by $2f$ we find in particular that
$$mathbbE left| exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) right|^2 = mathbbEexp left( int_0^t 2f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right) < infty,$$
and so
$$mathbbE(M_t^2) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right).$$
Using this estimate and the fact that $f$ is deterministic, we can easily check that the stochastic integral $int_0^t f(s) M(s) , dW_s$ is a true martingale, and now $(1)$ shows that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a martingale.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Itô's formula shows that
$$M_t = 1+ int_0^t f(s) M_s , dW_s tag1$$
and this implies, in particular, that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a local martingale. (Note that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ has continuous sample paths, and therefore the stochastic integral on the right-hand side is well-defined.) On the other hand, it follows from the very definition that $M_t geq 0$ for each $t geq 0$. Since any non-negative local martingale is a supermartingale (see e.g. this question for details), we conclude that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a supermartingale. Thus,
$$mathbbE(M_t) leq mathbbE(M_0) leq 1$$
which implies
$$mathbbE exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( frac12 int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right)$$
for each $t geq 0$. Replacing $f$ by $2f$ we find in particular that
$$mathbbE left| exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) right|^2 = mathbbEexp left( int_0^t 2f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right) < infty,$$
and so
$$mathbbE(M_t^2) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right).$$
Using this estimate and the fact that $f$ is deterministic, we can easily check that the stochastic integral $int_0^t f(s) M(s) , dW_s$ is a true martingale, and now $(1)$ shows that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a martingale.
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
up vote
3
down vote
accepted
Itô's formula shows that
$$M_t = 1+ int_0^t f(s) M_s , dW_s tag1$$
and this implies, in particular, that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a local martingale. (Note that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ has continuous sample paths, and therefore the stochastic integral on the right-hand side is well-defined.) On the other hand, it follows from the very definition that $M_t geq 0$ for each $t geq 0$. Since any non-negative local martingale is a supermartingale (see e.g. this question for details), we conclude that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a supermartingale. Thus,
$$mathbbE(M_t) leq mathbbE(M_0) leq 1$$
which implies
$$mathbbE exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( frac12 int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right)$$
for each $t geq 0$. Replacing $f$ by $2f$ we find in particular that
$$mathbbE left| exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) right|^2 = mathbbEexp left( int_0^t 2f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right) < infty,$$
and so
$$mathbbE(M_t^2) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right).$$
Using this estimate and the fact that $f$ is deterministic, we can easily check that the stochastic integral $int_0^t f(s) M(s) , dW_s$ is a true martingale, and now $(1)$ shows that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a martingale.
Itô's formula shows that
$$M_t = 1+ int_0^t f(s) M_s , dW_s tag1$$
and this implies, in particular, that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a local martingale. (Note that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ has continuous sample paths, and therefore the stochastic integral on the right-hand side is well-defined.) On the other hand, it follows from the very definition that $M_t geq 0$ for each $t geq 0$. Since any non-negative local martingale is a supermartingale (see e.g. this question for details), we conclude that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a supermartingale. Thus,
$$mathbbE(M_t) leq mathbbE(M_0) leq 1$$
which implies
$$mathbbE exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( frac12 int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right)$$
for each $t geq 0$. Replacing $f$ by $2f$ we find in particular that
$$mathbbE left| exp left( int_0^t f(s) , dW_s right) right|^2 = mathbbEexp left( int_0^t 2f(s) , dW_s right) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right) < infty,$$
and so
$$mathbbE(M_t^2) leq exp left( int_0^t f(s)^2 , ds right).$$
Using this estimate and the fact that $f$ is deterministic, we can easily check that the stochastic integral $int_0^t f(s) M(s) , dW_s$ is a true martingale, and now $(1)$ shows that $(M_t)_t geq 0$ is a martingale.
edited Aug 30 at 7:35
TheBridge
3,64111324
3,64111324
answered Aug 25 at 18:29
saz
73.4k553113
73.4k553113
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
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%2f2893696%2fshow-that-the-stochastic-exponential-is-a-true-martingale%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
I guess this should not make much sense since you need $mathbb EM_s^2ds<infty$ to prove your last line, which is just equivalently to $M$ being a martingale.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:04
Related: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1529726/â¦.
â Cave Johnson
Aug 25 at 1:09
1
If @saz isn't sure then we probably don't have much hope.
â Alex W
Aug 25 at 15:30
For a deterministic $f$, $int_0^t f(s), dW_s$ is Gaussian with mean zero and variance $int_0^t f(s) ^2 ds$. Nothing else is needed.
â zhoraster
Aug 25 at 15:56
1
@AlexW you are doing me too much honour.
â saz
Aug 25 at 17:43