MHB What is the probability density for a given exponential functional integral?

gnob
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Good day!
I have a question regarding the law of the ff:
$$
\int_0^t h(s) e^{2\beta(\mu(s) + W_s)}
$$
where $\beta >0;$ $h,\mu$ are continuous functions on $\mathbb{R}_+$ with $h\geq 0;$
and $W=\{W_s,s\geq 0\}$ is a standard Brownian motion.

Thanks for any help.:D
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gnob said:
Good day!
I have a question regarding the law of the ff:
$$
\int_0^t h(s) e^{2\beta(\mu(s) + W_s)}
$$
where $\beta >0;$ $h,\mu$ are continuous functions on $\mathbb{R}_+$ with $h\geq 0;$
and $W=\{W_s,s\geq 0\}$ is a standard Brownian motion.

Thanks for any help.:D

Please, can You better explain what is the question You have?...

Kind regards

$\chi$ $\sigma$
 
gnob said:
Good day!
I have a question regarding the law of the ff:
$$
\int_0^t h(s) e^{2\beta(\mu(s) + W_s)}
$$
where $\beta >0;$ $h,\mu$ are continuous functions on $\mathbb{R}_+$ with $h\geq 0;$
and $W=\{W_s,s\geq 0\}$ is a standard Brownian motion.

Thanks for any help.:D

Many thanks for the reply. What I meant of "law" is the probability density of the given integral. For the case $\mu(s) = -\nu s$ where $\nu$ is a positive constant and $h(s)=1,$ the law was already known (Corollary 1.2, p95) from Mar Yor's book given here Exponential Functionals of Brownian Motion and Related Processes - Marc Yor - Google Books .

Thanks again for any insights. :D
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top