Proof that a stochastic process isn't a Markov Process

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on proving that a specific stochastic process does not satisfy the Markovian Property while also satisfying the Chapman-Kolmogorov equations. The key argument presented is that the conditional probabilities P(X_{3(m-1)+3}=1|X_{3(m-1)+2}=1 and X_{3(m-1)+1}=1) and P(X_{3(m-1)+3}=1|X_{3(m-1)+2}=1) yield different results, confirming the process is not Markovian. Additionally, the Chapman-Kolmogorov equation is referenced, indicating that the left-hand side can be shown to equal the right-hand side through proper substitution of conditional probabilities.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of stochastic processes
  • Familiarity with Markov Processes and the Markovian Property
  • Knowledge of Chapman-Kolmogorov equations
  • Basic probability theory and conditional probabilities
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of Markov Processes in detail
  • Learn how to derive and apply the Chapman-Kolmogorov equations
  • Explore counterexamples in stochastic processes to solidify understanding
  • Investigate the implications of non-Markovian processes in real-world applications
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, statisticians, and researchers in stochastic processes, particularly those interested in the distinctions between Markov and non-Markov processes and their applications in probability theory.

gesteves
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I've been trying to solve this problem for a week now, but haven't been able to. Basically I need to prove that a certain process satisfies Chapman-Kolmogorov equations, yet it isn't a Markov Process (it doesn't satisfy the Markovian Property).

I attached the problem as a .doc below.

Please, I really need a little help here.
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
hi gesteves!

I read your question, and I think it is readily seen to be not markov (because it is easily seen that P(X_{3(m-1)+3}=1|X_{3(m-1)+2}=1 \mbox{ and }X_{3(m-1)+1}=1) does not equal P(X_{3(m-1)+3}=1|X_{3(m-1)+2}=1)). In other words, since X_{3(m-1)+3}, X_{3(m-1)+2}, X_{3(m-1)+1} are giving information about the *same draw* from the mth box, most probably these variables are not independent and the proof should take into account of this.

Also note that X_{3(n-1)+i}, X_{3(m-1)+j}, 1\leq i, j\leq 3 are independent when m and n are different, as they correspond to different draws.

Since X_{3(n-1)+i}, X_{3(m-1)+j}, 1\leq i, j\leq 3 are independent when m and n are different, then P(X_{3(n-1)+i}=l|X_{3(m-1)+j}=k) = P(X_{3(n-1)+i}=l) = \frac{1}{2}, 0\leq l,k\leq 1 for different m and n.

As to the case when m and n are the same, it is necessary to calculate the probability explicity. But amazingly you will find that P(X_{3(m-1)+i}=l|X_{3(m-1)+j}=k)=\frac{1}{2}, 1\leq i,j\leq 3, 0\leq l,k \leq 1. For example, P(X_{3(1-1)+2}=1|X_{3(m-1)+1}=1)=P(\mbox{1 or 2 in the first draw}|\mbox{1 or 4 in the first draw}) = \frac{1}{2}.

Since all conditional probabilities are essentially 1/2, I think the assertion thus holds.
 
Last edited:
Hi Wong,

Thanks for your quick reply! If I understood correctly, all I need to prove that it isn't a Markov Process is a counterexample that shows that P(X_{3(m-1)+3}=1|X_{3(m-1)+2}=1 \mbox{ and }X_{3(m-1)+1}=1) doesn't equal P(X_{3(m-1)+3}=1|X_{3(m-1)+2}=1). For m = 1, P(X_{3}=1|X_{2}=1 \mbox{ and }X_{1}=1) = 0 and P(X_{3}=1|X_{2}=1)=1/2. Therefore it isn't a Markov Process.

But how can I prove that it satisfies Chapman-Kolmogorov? I'll try to prove it on my own, but I could use some pointers.

Thanks in advance.
 
Yes, gesteves, you got the non-markov part.

As for the Chapman-Kolmogorov part, you may first think of the form of the equation. If I am not mistaken, the Chapman-Kolmogorov equation says that P(X_{m+n+l}=i|X_{l}=j) = \sum_{k}P(X_{m+n+l}=i|X_{m+l}=k)P(X_{m+l}=k|X_{l}=j). In my first post, I already gave you the various conditional probabilities for the equation. You may just "plug in" and see whether the LHS agrees with the RHS.
 
I finally finished it. Thanks for all your help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
544
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K