If $X$ is an Ito process, is $mathbb E(int X mathrm d X)$ convex?
$begingroup$
Consider the functional $F$, which is defined for each Ito process
$$X(t) = int_0^t mu(s) mathrm d s + int_0^t sigma(s) mathrm d W(s)$$
as
$$F(X) := mathbb Ebigg(int_0^T X(s) mathrm dX(s)bigg)$$
Now I would like to prove that $F$ is convex, which seems to be intuitive because it is true for absolutely continuous processes.
Due to the Ito formula / product rule,
$$
int_0^T X(s) mathrm dX(s)
= frac 1 2 X(T)^2 - int_0^T sigma(s)^2 mathrm ds
$$
If we restrict ourselves on Ito processes for which we have $sigma = 0$, the proof is thus very easy. However, the quadratic variation term for $sigma ne 0$ seems to mess everything up. On the other hand, the $sigma$ is also included in the $X(T)^2$ term, so we don't immediately get a counterexample.
Is there another proof for the claim? Or is the claim wrong and there is a counterexample?
functional-analysis stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus stochastic-analysis
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider the functional $F$, which is defined for each Ito process
$$X(t) = int_0^t mu(s) mathrm d s + int_0^t sigma(s) mathrm d W(s)$$
as
$$F(X) := mathbb Ebigg(int_0^T X(s) mathrm dX(s)bigg)$$
Now I would like to prove that $F$ is convex, which seems to be intuitive because it is true for absolutely continuous processes.
Due to the Ito formula / product rule,
$$
int_0^T X(s) mathrm dX(s)
= frac 1 2 X(T)^2 - int_0^T sigma(s)^2 mathrm ds
$$
If we restrict ourselves on Ito processes for which we have $sigma = 0$, the proof is thus very easy. However, the quadratic variation term for $sigma ne 0$ seems to mess everything up. On the other hand, the $sigma$ is also included in the $X(T)^2$ term, so we don't immediately get a counterexample.
Is there another proof for the claim? Or is the claim wrong and there is a counterexample?
functional-analysis stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus stochastic-analysis
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider the functional $F$, which is defined for each Ito process
$$X(t) = int_0^t mu(s) mathrm d s + int_0^t sigma(s) mathrm d W(s)$$
as
$$F(X) := mathbb Ebigg(int_0^T X(s) mathrm dX(s)bigg)$$
Now I would like to prove that $F$ is convex, which seems to be intuitive because it is true for absolutely continuous processes.
Due to the Ito formula / product rule,
$$
int_0^T X(s) mathrm dX(s)
= frac 1 2 X(T)^2 - int_0^T sigma(s)^2 mathrm ds
$$
If we restrict ourselves on Ito processes for which we have $sigma = 0$, the proof is thus very easy. However, the quadratic variation term for $sigma ne 0$ seems to mess everything up. On the other hand, the $sigma$ is also included in the $X(T)^2$ term, so we don't immediately get a counterexample.
Is there another proof for the claim? Or is the claim wrong and there is a counterexample?
functional-analysis stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus stochastic-analysis
$endgroup$
Consider the functional $F$, which is defined for each Ito process
$$X(t) = int_0^t mu(s) mathrm d s + int_0^t sigma(s) mathrm d W(s)$$
as
$$F(X) := mathbb Ebigg(int_0^T X(s) mathrm dX(s)bigg)$$
Now I would like to prove that $F$ is convex, which seems to be intuitive because it is true for absolutely continuous processes.
Due to the Ito formula / product rule,
$$
int_0^T X(s) mathrm dX(s)
= frac 1 2 X(T)^2 - int_0^T sigma(s)^2 mathrm ds
$$
If we restrict ourselves on Ito processes for which we have $sigma = 0$, the proof is thus very easy. However, the quadratic variation term for $sigma ne 0$ seems to mess everything up. On the other hand, the $sigma$ is also included in the $X(T)^2$ term, so we don't immediately get a counterexample.
Is there another proof for the claim? Or is the claim wrong and there is a counterexample?
functional-analysis stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus stochastic-analysis
functional-analysis stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus stochastic-analysis
edited Jan 12 at 15:47
Kolodez
asked Jan 12 at 14:47
KolodezKolodez
776
776
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I believe that $F$ fails to be convex.
First of all, if $sigma$ is a "nice" function, then the stochastic integral $M_t := int_0^{t} sigma(s) , dW_s$ is a martingale which implies that $$mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s , dM_s right)=0,$$ i.e.
$$F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s mu(s) , ds right). tag{1}$$
Now consider $$X_t := int_0^t W_s , ds. $$ It follows from the very definition of $F$ that $$F(W) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s , dW_s right)=0,$$ and $(1)$ yields $$begin{align*} F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right) &= mathbb{E} left( int_0^T int_0^s W_s W_r , dr , ds right) \ &= int_0^T int_0^s underbrace{mathbb{E}(W_s W_r)}_{=r} , dr , ds \ &= frac{T^3}{6}. end{align*}$$For any $lambda in [0,1]$ we have by (1) that
$$begin{align*} F(lambda X + (1-lambda) W) &= mathbb{E} bigg( int_0^T (lambda X_s + (1-lambda) W_s) (lambda W_s+0) , ds bigg) \ &=lambda^2 underbrace{mathbb{E}left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right)}_{stackrel{(2)}{=} T^3/6} + lambda (1-lambda) mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s^2 , ds right) \ &= lambda^2 frac{T^3}{6} + lambda (1-lambda) frac{T^2}{2}. end{align*}$$
If we choose $lambda=1/2$ and $T$ small enough (e.g. $T=1$), then
$$F(tfrac{1}{2} X + tfrac{1}{2} W) = frac{T^3}{24} + frac{T^2}{8}$$
is strictly larger than
$$frac{1}{2} F(X) + frac{1}{2} F(W) = frac{T^3}{12}.$$
This means that $F$ is not convex.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3070975%2fif-x-is-an-ito-process-is-mathbb-e-int-x-mathrm-d-x-convex%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I believe that $F$ fails to be convex.
First of all, if $sigma$ is a "nice" function, then the stochastic integral $M_t := int_0^{t} sigma(s) , dW_s$ is a martingale which implies that $$mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s , dM_s right)=0,$$ i.e.
$$F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s mu(s) , ds right). tag{1}$$
Now consider $$X_t := int_0^t W_s , ds. $$ It follows from the very definition of $F$ that $$F(W) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s , dW_s right)=0,$$ and $(1)$ yields $$begin{align*} F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right) &= mathbb{E} left( int_0^T int_0^s W_s W_r , dr , ds right) \ &= int_0^T int_0^s underbrace{mathbb{E}(W_s W_r)}_{=r} , dr , ds \ &= frac{T^3}{6}. end{align*}$$For any $lambda in [0,1]$ we have by (1) that
$$begin{align*} F(lambda X + (1-lambda) W) &= mathbb{E} bigg( int_0^T (lambda X_s + (1-lambda) W_s) (lambda W_s+0) , ds bigg) \ &=lambda^2 underbrace{mathbb{E}left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right)}_{stackrel{(2)}{=} T^3/6} + lambda (1-lambda) mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s^2 , ds right) \ &= lambda^2 frac{T^3}{6} + lambda (1-lambda) frac{T^2}{2}. end{align*}$$
If we choose $lambda=1/2$ and $T$ small enough (e.g. $T=1$), then
$$F(tfrac{1}{2} X + tfrac{1}{2} W) = frac{T^3}{24} + frac{T^2}{8}$$
is strictly larger than
$$frac{1}{2} F(X) + frac{1}{2} F(W) = frac{T^3}{12}.$$
This means that $F$ is not convex.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I believe that $F$ fails to be convex.
First of all, if $sigma$ is a "nice" function, then the stochastic integral $M_t := int_0^{t} sigma(s) , dW_s$ is a martingale which implies that $$mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s , dM_s right)=0,$$ i.e.
$$F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s mu(s) , ds right). tag{1}$$
Now consider $$X_t := int_0^t W_s , ds. $$ It follows from the very definition of $F$ that $$F(W) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s , dW_s right)=0,$$ and $(1)$ yields $$begin{align*} F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right) &= mathbb{E} left( int_0^T int_0^s W_s W_r , dr , ds right) \ &= int_0^T int_0^s underbrace{mathbb{E}(W_s W_r)}_{=r} , dr , ds \ &= frac{T^3}{6}. end{align*}$$For any $lambda in [0,1]$ we have by (1) that
$$begin{align*} F(lambda X + (1-lambda) W) &= mathbb{E} bigg( int_0^T (lambda X_s + (1-lambda) W_s) (lambda W_s+0) , ds bigg) \ &=lambda^2 underbrace{mathbb{E}left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right)}_{stackrel{(2)}{=} T^3/6} + lambda (1-lambda) mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s^2 , ds right) \ &= lambda^2 frac{T^3}{6} + lambda (1-lambda) frac{T^2}{2}. end{align*}$$
If we choose $lambda=1/2$ and $T$ small enough (e.g. $T=1$), then
$$F(tfrac{1}{2} X + tfrac{1}{2} W) = frac{T^3}{24} + frac{T^2}{8}$$
is strictly larger than
$$frac{1}{2} F(X) + frac{1}{2} F(W) = frac{T^3}{12}.$$
This means that $F$ is not convex.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I believe that $F$ fails to be convex.
First of all, if $sigma$ is a "nice" function, then the stochastic integral $M_t := int_0^{t} sigma(s) , dW_s$ is a martingale which implies that $$mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s , dM_s right)=0,$$ i.e.
$$F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s mu(s) , ds right). tag{1}$$
Now consider $$X_t := int_0^t W_s , ds. $$ It follows from the very definition of $F$ that $$F(W) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s , dW_s right)=0,$$ and $(1)$ yields $$begin{align*} F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right) &= mathbb{E} left( int_0^T int_0^s W_s W_r , dr , ds right) \ &= int_0^T int_0^s underbrace{mathbb{E}(W_s W_r)}_{=r} , dr , ds \ &= frac{T^3}{6}. end{align*}$$For any $lambda in [0,1]$ we have by (1) that
$$begin{align*} F(lambda X + (1-lambda) W) &= mathbb{E} bigg( int_0^T (lambda X_s + (1-lambda) W_s) (lambda W_s+0) , ds bigg) \ &=lambda^2 underbrace{mathbb{E}left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right)}_{stackrel{(2)}{=} T^3/6} + lambda (1-lambda) mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s^2 , ds right) \ &= lambda^2 frac{T^3}{6} + lambda (1-lambda) frac{T^2}{2}. end{align*}$$
If we choose $lambda=1/2$ and $T$ small enough (e.g. $T=1$), then
$$F(tfrac{1}{2} X + tfrac{1}{2} W) = frac{T^3}{24} + frac{T^2}{8}$$
is strictly larger than
$$frac{1}{2} F(X) + frac{1}{2} F(W) = frac{T^3}{12}.$$
This means that $F$ is not convex.
$endgroup$
I believe that $F$ fails to be convex.
First of all, if $sigma$ is a "nice" function, then the stochastic integral $M_t := int_0^{t} sigma(s) , dW_s$ is a martingale which implies that $$mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s , dM_s right)=0,$$ i.e.
$$F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s mu(s) , ds right). tag{1}$$
Now consider $$X_t := int_0^t W_s , ds. $$ It follows from the very definition of $F$ that $$F(W) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s , dW_s right)=0,$$ and $(1)$ yields $$begin{align*} F(X) = mathbb{E} left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right) &= mathbb{E} left( int_0^T int_0^s W_s W_r , dr , ds right) \ &= int_0^T int_0^s underbrace{mathbb{E}(W_s W_r)}_{=r} , dr , ds \ &= frac{T^3}{6}. end{align*}$$For any $lambda in [0,1]$ we have by (1) that
$$begin{align*} F(lambda X + (1-lambda) W) &= mathbb{E} bigg( int_0^T (lambda X_s + (1-lambda) W_s) (lambda W_s+0) , ds bigg) \ &=lambda^2 underbrace{mathbb{E}left( int_0^T X_s W_s , ds right)}_{stackrel{(2)}{=} T^3/6} + lambda (1-lambda) mathbb{E} left( int_0^T W_s^2 , ds right) \ &= lambda^2 frac{T^3}{6} + lambda (1-lambda) frac{T^2}{2}. end{align*}$$
If we choose $lambda=1/2$ and $T$ small enough (e.g. $T=1$), then
$$F(tfrac{1}{2} X + tfrac{1}{2} W) = frac{T^3}{24} + frac{T^2}{8}$$
is strictly larger than
$$frac{1}{2} F(X) + frac{1}{2} F(W) = frac{T^3}{12}.$$
This means that $F$ is not convex.
edited Jan 12 at 20:44
answered Jan 12 at 18:23
sazsaz
81.7k861128
81.7k861128
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3070975%2fif-x-is-an-ito-process-is-mathbb-e-int-x-mathrm-d-x-convex%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown