Similar or repeated topics in stochastic calculus/analysis

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
2












The following textbooks (line read in Kiefer Sutherland's voice) appear to have overlaps, as is expected :



  • David Williams: Probability with Martingales


  • Rogers and Williams' two volumes: Diffusions, Markov Processes and Martingales


  • Oksendal: Stochastic Differential Equations,


  • Karatzas and Shreve: Brownian Motion and Stochastic Calculus


  • Revuz and Yor: Continuous Martingales and Brownian Motion


  • Bobrowski: Functional Analysis for Probability and Stochastic Processes


Some of the overlaps include Girsanov's Theorem, Radon-Nikodym derivative and Feynman-Kac formula.



In general, what might one, who self-studies and hopes to do a PhD in these eventually ($liminf$), do about these?



What about in the specific case of these textbooks, not limited to these topics?



  1. Skip them after learning once.

  2. Study them every time regardless.

  3. Look through quickly to see if there's anything new to study

  4. Study intensely the first time, and continue to do so the second time onward but with less intensity.

  5. Study again if the topic appears to be presented with different proof or in a different context.

  6. (more of a continuation of #5) If the topic has different uses but similar proof and context, the former is worth studying, but the latter isn't.

  7. Some combination of above

  8. Something else






share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    1
    down vote

    favorite
    2












    The following textbooks (line read in Kiefer Sutherland's voice) appear to have overlaps, as is expected :



    • David Williams: Probability with Martingales


    • Rogers and Williams' two volumes: Diffusions, Markov Processes and Martingales


    • Oksendal: Stochastic Differential Equations,


    • Karatzas and Shreve: Brownian Motion and Stochastic Calculus


    • Revuz and Yor: Continuous Martingales and Brownian Motion


    • Bobrowski: Functional Analysis for Probability and Stochastic Processes


    Some of the overlaps include Girsanov's Theorem, Radon-Nikodym derivative and Feynman-Kac formula.



    In general, what might one, who self-studies and hopes to do a PhD in these eventually ($liminf$), do about these?



    What about in the specific case of these textbooks, not limited to these topics?



    1. Skip them after learning once.

    2. Study them every time regardless.

    3. Look through quickly to see if there's anything new to study

    4. Study intensely the first time, and continue to do so the second time onward but with less intensity.

    5. Study again if the topic appears to be presented with different proof or in a different context.

    6. (more of a continuation of #5) If the topic has different uses but similar proof and context, the former is worth studying, but the latter isn't.

    7. Some combination of above

    8. Something else






    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      2









      up vote
      1
      down vote

      favorite
      2






      2





      The following textbooks (line read in Kiefer Sutherland's voice) appear to have overlaps, as is expected :



      • David Williams: Probability with Martingales


      • Rogers and Williams' two volumes: Diffusions, Markov Processes and Martingales


      • Oksendal: Stochastic Differential Equations,


      • Karatzas and Shreve: Brownian Motion and Stochastic Calculus


      • Revuz and Yor: Continuous Martingales and Brownian Motion


      • Bobrowski: Functional Analysis for Probability and Stochastic Processes


      Some of the overlaps include Girsanov's Theorem, Radon-Nikodym derivative and Feynman-Kac formula.



      In general, what might one, who self-studies and hopes to do a PhD in these eventually ($liminf$), do about these?



      What about in the specific case of these textbooks, not limited to these topics?



      1. Skip them after learning once.

      2. Study them every time regardless.

      3. Look through quickly to see if there's anything new to study

      4. Study intensely the first time, and continue to do so the second time onward but with less intensity.

      5. Study again if the topic appears to be presented with different proof or in a different context.

      6. (more of a continuation of #5) If the topic has different uses but similar proof and context, the former is worth studying, but the latter isn't.

      7. Some combination of above

      8. Something else






      share|cite|improve this question














      The following textbooks (line read in Kiefer Sutherland's voice) appear to have overlaps, as is expected :



      • David Williams: Probability with Martingales


      • Rogers and Williams' two volumes: Diffusions, Markov Processes and Martingales


      • Oksendal: Stochastic Differential Equations,


      • Karatzas and Shreve: Brownian Motion and Stochastic Calculus


      • Revuz and Yor: Continuous Martingales and Brownian Motion


      • Bobrowski: Functional Analysis for Probability and Stochastic Processes


      Some of the overlaps include Girsanov's Theorem, Radon-Nikodym derivative and Feynman-Kac formula.



      In general, what might one, who self-studies and hopes to do a PhD in these eventually ($liminf$), do about these?



      What about in the specific case of these textbooks, not limited to these topics?



      1. Skip them after learning once.

      2. Study them every time regardless.

      3. Look through quickly to see if there's anything new to study

      4. Study intensely the first time, and continue to do so the second time onward but with less intensity.

      5. Study again if the topic appears to be presented with different proof or in a different context.

      6. (more of a continuation of #5) If the topic has different uses but similar proof and context, the former is worth studying, but the latter isn't.

      7. Some combination of above

      8. Something else








      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Aug 28 at 12:25

























      asked May 12 at 20:42









      Jack Bauer

      867526




      867526

























          active

          oldest

          votes











          Your Answer




          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2778446%2fsimilar-or-repeated-topics-in-stochastic-calculus-analysis%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest



































          active

          oldest

          votes













          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes















           

          draft saved


          draft discarded















































           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2778446%2fsimilar-or-repeated-topics-in-stochastic-calculus-analysis%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest













































































          這個網誌中的熱門文章

          How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

          Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?

          Is there any way to eliminate the singular point to solve this integral by hand or by approximations?