I Martingale, Optional sampling theorem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the properties of a simple, nonsymmetric random walk characterized by parameters q and the martingale properties of related sequences. It establishes that S_n is a submartingale, and M_n = S_n - rn is a martingale only when r equals 0 or 2q-1. The optional sampling theorem is applied to determine the probability that the random walk reaches b before -a, yielding a probability of a/(a+b) when q = 1/2, while for 1/2 < q < 1, the probability is q^b. Participants express confusion over the differing results based on the value of q and emphasize that the outcomes should logically depend on both a and b. The conversation highlights the complexities of probability theory in the context of random walks and martingales.
WMDhamnekar
MHB
Messages
376
Reaction score
28
In this exercise, we consider simple, nonsymmetric random walk. Suppose 1/2 < q < 1 and ##X_1, X_2, \dots## are independent random variables with ##\mathbb{P}\{X_j = 1\} = 1 − \mathbb{P}\{X_j = −1\} = q.## Let ##S_0 = 0## and ##S_n = X_1 +\dots +X_n.## Let ##F_n## denote the information contained in ##X_1, \dots , X_n##
1. Which of these is ##S_n##: martingale, submartingale, supermartingale (more than one answer is possible)?

2. For which values of r is ##M_n = S_n − rn ## a martingale?

3. Let ##\theta = (1 − q)/q## and let ##M_n =\theta^{S_n}## . Show that ##M_n## is a martingale.

4. Let a, b be positive integers, and ##T_{a,b} = \min\{j : S_j = b \text{or} S_j = −a\}.## Use the optional sampling theorem to determine ##\mathbb{P}\{ S_{T_{a,b} }= b\}## .

5. Let ##T_a = T_{a,\infty}.## Find ##\mathbb{P}\{T_a < \infty\}##

My answers:

1. ##S_n## is a submartingale. This is because ##E[S_{n+1} | F_n] \geq qS_n + (1 − q)S_n = S_n##, and ##S_n## is increasing in n.

2. ##M_n## is a martingale if and only if r = 0. This is because ##E[M_{n+1} | F_n] = E[S_{n+1} − r(n+1)| F_n] =(S_n - rn) = q(S_n − rn) + (1 − q)(S_n − rn) = S_n − rn##, so ##r = 0## is required for ##M_n## to be a martingale.

3. We have ##E[\theta^{S_{n+1}} | F_n] = \theta^{qS_n + (1 − q)S_n} = \theta^{S_n} = M_n##, so ##M_n## is a martingale.

4. Using the optional sampling theorem and the fact that ##S_j## is likely to increase by 1 in each step with ##\mathbb{P}[\frac12 < q < 1]##, we have ##\mathbb{P}\{ S_{T_{a,b}} = b\} = q^a##.

5. Since ##S_n## is a submartingale, ##T_a < \infty## is unsure. ##T_a## is the stopping time where ##n## is the first time ##S_n## reaches −a, so ##\mathbb{P}\{T_a < \infty\} = 0 \leq p <q## where (p +q)=1
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If ##M_n## is a Martingale when ##r=0##, wouldn't that make ##S_n## a martingale for #1?
 
  • Like
Likes WMDhamnekar
Office_Shredder said:
If ##M_n## is a Martingale when ##r=0##, wouldn't that make ##S_n## a martingale for #1?
In this case, ##M_n = S_n - rn## is a martingale if ##r = \mathbb{E}[X_1]##. Since ##\mathbb{P}\{X_1 = 1\} = q## and ##\mathbb{P}\{X_1 = -1\} = 1-q##, we have ##\mathbb{E}[X_1] = 2q-1##. Therefore, ##M_n## is a martingale if ##r=2q-1##.
Credit goes to microsoft new bing Chat generative pre-training transformer.
 
My answer to 4 is wrong. Correct answer is ##(q)^b## where 1/2 < q < 1 as given in the question.
But if p = q = 1/2, then the answer is
This is a problem in probability theory involving a random walk. The optional stopping theorem can be used to determine the probability that the random walk reaches b before reaching ##-a##. Let ##p = \mathbb{P}\{S_{T_{a,b}} = b\}## and note that ##\mathbb{E}[S_{T_{a,b}}] = pb + (1-p)(-a)##. By the optional stopping theorem applied to the martingale ##S_n##, we have ##\mathbb{E}[S_{T_{a,b}}] = \mathbb{E}[S_0] = 0##. Solving for p gives us ##p = \frac{a}{a+b}##.

So, the probability that the random walk reaches b before reaching -a is ##\frac{a}{a+b}##.
 
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe that if ##q=0.5## you get ##a/(a+b)## and if ##q=0.500001## you get ##(.500001)^b##, which are very different numbers for lots of choices of ##a## and ##b## (e.g. ##a=b=10##)

Shouldn't the answer to 4 depend on both a and b at least?
 
Office_Shredder said:
I find it hard to believe that if ##q=0.5## you get ##a/(a+b)## and if ##q=0.500001## you get ##(.500001)^b##, which are very different numbers for lots of choices of ##a## and ##b## (e.g. ##a=b=10##)

Shouldn't the answer to 4 depend on both a and b at least?
Can you prove answer to 4 depends upon a and b ?🤔🤔
 
WMDhamnekar said:
Can you prove answer to 4 depends upon a and b ?🤔🤔

I just feel like, "does it hit a or b first" obviously depends on a? If a=1 and b=100 the odds you hit a first are decent, if a=1,000,000 and b=100 the odds you hit a first are infinitesimal.
 
Back
Top