Show that a process is a local martingale The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Show that this continuous local martingale is a martingaleForming a local martingale with continuous increasing processlocal martingale bounded below by a DL processIs this process a martingale?Can Local Martingales be characterized only using their FV process and BM?Stopped local martingale as a martingaleHow can I show that the stochastic integral of a jump process w.r.t. Brownian motion is a local martingale by using this special localizing sequence?Show a Continuous Local Martingale is a MartingaleHow to prove that the process $Y_t$ is martingale?Second order derivatives in Ito formula for Brownian motion and local martingale
How to pronounce 1ターン?
How to test the equality of two Pearson correlation coefficients computed from the same sample?
Can undead you have reanimated wait inside a portable hole?
Why did all the guest students take carriages to the Yule Ball?
The following signatures were invalid: EXPKEYSIG 1397BC53640DB551
Who or what is the being for whom Being is a question for Heidegger?
Simulation of a banking system with an Account class in C++
Is it ethical to upload a automatically generated paper to a non peer-reviewed site as part of a larger research?
How to copy the contents of all files with a certain name into a new file?
Why does the Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) not include telescopes from Africa, Asia or Australia?
Is every episode of "Where are my Pants?" identical?
How do I add random spotting to the same face in cycles?
How is simplicity better than precision and clarity in prose?
Can a 1st-level character have an ability score above 18?
Are my PIs rude or am I just being too sensitive?
How to delete random line from file using Unix command?
Derivation tree not rendering
He got a vote 80% that of Emmanuel Macron’s
How to stretch delimiters to envolve matrices inside of a kbordermatrix?
Cooking pasta in a water boiler
Didn't get enough time to take a Coding Test - what to do now?
How do you keep chess fun when your opponent constantly beats you?
Segmentation fault output is suppressed when piping stdin into a function. Why?
How does ice melt when immersed in water?
Show that a process is a local martingale
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Show that this continuous local martingale is a martingaleForming a local martingale with continuous increasing processlocal martingale bounded below by a DL processIs this process a martingale?Can Local Martingales be characterized only using their FV process and BM?Stopped local martingale as a martingaleHow can I show that the stochastic integral of a jump process w.r.t. Brownian motion is a local martingale by using this special localizing sequence?Show a Continuous Local Martingale is a MartingaleHow to prove that the process $Y_t$ is martingale?Second order derivatives in Ito formula for Brownian motion and local martingale
$begingroup$
We have the following setting
We have a 2-dimensional Brownian motion $(X,Y)$, and we define the process $M_t$ as $$M_t=e^X_tcos(Y_t)$$
The problem is to show that the process $M_t$ is a local martingale, and that we have that $$langle Mrangle_t=int^t_0e^X_sds$$
I know that $M_t$ would be a local martingale if it is a continuous, adapted process and if there exists a sequence of stopping times $(tau_n)_ngeq0$, such that $tau_nuparrowinfty$ almost surely, and that $(M_tau_nwedge t-M_0)_tgeq0$ is a uniformly integrable martingale for all $n$.
However, I am not aware of any straight forward way to proving that something is a local martingale, and I do not see an easy approach to proving it directly from the definition. Are there ''standard'' routes to follow when trying to prove that a process is/isn't a local martingale?
Moreover, when trying to show that the quadratic variation of $M$ can be written in such a way, I cannot figure out why the cosine term would drop out.
Any help is appreciated!
probability-theory stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales local-martingales
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
We have the following setting
We have a 2-dimensional Brownian motion $(X,Y)$, and we define the process $M_t$ as $$M_t=e^X_tcos(Y_t)$$
The problem is to show that the process $M_t$ is a local martingale, and that we have that $$langle Mrangle_t=int^t_0e^X_sds$$
I know that $M_t$ would be a local martingale if it is a continuous, adapted process and if there exists a sequence of stopping times $(tau_n)_ngeq0$, such that $tau_nuparrowinfty$ almost surely, and that $(M_tau_nwedge t-M_0)_tgeq0$ is a uniformly integrable martingale for all $n$.
However, I am not aware of any straight forward way to proving that something is a local martingale, and I do not see an easy approach to proving it directly from the definition. Are there ''standard'' routes to follow when trying to prove that a process is/isn't a local martingale?
Moreover, when trying to show that the quadratic variation of $M$ can be written in such a way, I cannot figure out why the cosine term would drop out.
Any help is appreciated!
probability-theory stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales local-martingales
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
We have the following setting
We have a 2-dimensional Brownian motion $(X,Y)$, and we define the process $M_t$ as $$M_t=e^X_tcos(Y_t)$$
The problem is to show that the process $M_t$ is a local martingale, and that we have that $$langle Mrangle_t=int^t_0e^X_sds$$
I know that $M_t$ would be a local martingale if it is a continuous, adapted process and if there exists a sequence of stopping times $(tau_n)_ngeq0$, such that $tau_nuparrowinfty$ almost surely, and that $(M_tau_nwedge t-M_0)_tgeq0$ is a uniformly integrable martingale for all $n$.
However, I am not aware of any straight forward way to proving that something is a local martingale, and I do not see an easy approach to proving it directly from the definition. Are there ''standard'' routes to follow when trying to prove that a process is/isn't a local martingale?
Moreover, when trying to show that the quadratic variation of $M$ can be written in such a way, I cannot figure out why the cosine term would drop out.
Any help is appreciated!
probability-theory stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales local-martingales
$endgroup$
We have the following setting
We have a 2-dimensional Brownian motion $(X,Y)$, and we define the process $M_t$ as $$M_t=e^X_tcos(Y_t)$$
The problem is to show that the process $M_t$ is a local martingale, and that we have that $$langle Mrangle_t=int^t_0e^X_sds$$
I know that $M_t$ would be a local martingale if it is a continuous, adapted process and if there exists a sequence of stopping times $(tau_n)_ngeq0$, such that $tau_nuparrowinfty$ almost surely, and that $(M_tau_nwedge t-M_0)_tgeq0$ is a uniformly integrable martingale for all $n$.
However, I am not aware of any straight forward way to proving that something is a local martingale, and I do not see an easy approach to proving it directly from the definition. Are there ''standard'' routes to follow when trying to prove that a process is/isn't a local martingale?
Moreover, when trying to show that the quadratic variation of $M$ can be written in such a way, I cannot figure out why the cosine term would drop out.
Any help is appreciated!
probability-theory stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales local-martingales
probability-theory stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales local-martingales
edited Mar 31 at 15:18
S. Crim
asked Mar 31 at 14:33
S. CrimS. Crim
4081212
4081212
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
If we apply Ito's lemma to the function $f(x,y) = e^x cos(y)$ you'll find that
$$dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$$
since $langle X rangle_t = langle Y rangle_t = t$ and $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$. Since the stochastic integral against a continuous local martingale is again a local martingale, this shows that $M_t$ is a continuous local martingale. We also deduce from this that
$$d langle M rangle_t = M_t^2 d langle X rangle_t + e^2X_t sin(Y_t)^2 dlangle X rangle_t = e^2X_t (cos^2(Y_t) + sin^2(Y_t))dt = e^2X_t dt$$
(where we have again used that $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$) and so
$$langle M rangle_t = int_0^t e^2X_s ds$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Sure. Written out fully $dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$ means $M_t - M_0 = int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s$ and so $langle M rangle_t = bigg langle int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s bigg rangle_t$. Now use bilinearity and symmetry of the quadratic variation since $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ for continuous local martingale $N,K$ and an adapted process $F$ such that $int F dN$ makes sense. Note that we don't get any cross terms between $X$ and $Y$ since $langle X,Y rangle =0$
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:22
1
$begingroup$
I've just seen the edit to your comment. It looks like you didn't know about the behaviour of the Ito integral with respect to the quadratic variation. This is an important property to keep in mind. In fact $int_0^t F_s dN_s$ is the unique process such that for all continuous local martingales $K_t$ we have $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ (and one can even use this observation to give an alternative construction of the Ito integral).
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:25
1
$begingroup$
Oh shoot, the $t$ in my comment should be a $cdot$, I just copy-pasted that expression and forgot to change it. The thing inside the covariation should always be a process and not a fixed random variable; that $cdot$ just means you consider the integral as a process and not the integral at any fixed time. You're completely right to point this out. Sorry for the source of confusion.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
It's nothing to do with that. Try applying Ito's lemma to both of them and then use the resulting formula to compute the covariation. Recall that $langle X,Y rangle = 0$ and that if $V_t$ is a finite variation process then $langle M,V rangle = 0$ for any semimartingale $M$.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:08
1
$begingroup$
In general, when you see a function of a continuous local martingale (/semimartingale) then you should almost immediately try seeing if applying Ito's lemma can help you.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:10
|
show 6 more comments
Your Answer
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%2f3169450%2fshow-that-a-process-is-a-local-martingale%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
$begingroup$
If we apply Ito's lemma to the function $f(x,y) = e^x cos(y)$ you'll find that
$$dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$$
since $langle X rangle_t = langle Y rangle_t = t$ and $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$. Since the stochastic integral against a continuous local martingale is again a local martingale, this shows that $M_t$ is a continuous local martingale. We also deduce from this that
$$d langle M rangle_t = M_t^2 d langle X rangle_t + e^2X_t sin(Y_t)^2 dlangle X rangle_t = e^2X_t (cos^2(Y_t) + sin^2(Y_t))dt = e^2X_t dt$$
(where we have again used that $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$) and so
$$langle M rangle_t = int_0^t e^2X_s ds$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Sure. Written out fully $dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$ means $M_t - M_0 = int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s$ and so $langle M rangle_t = bigg langle int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s bigg rangle_t$. Now use bilinearity and symmetry of the quadratic variation since $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ for continuous local martingale $N,K$ and an adapted process $F$ such that $int F dN$ makes sense. Note that we don't get any cross terms between $X$ and $Y$ since $langle X,Y rangle =0$
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:22
1
$begingroup$
I've just seen the edit to your comment. It looks like you didn't know about the behaviour of the Ito integral with respect to the quadratic variation. This is an important property to keep in mind. In fact $int_0^t F_s dN_s$ is the unique process such that for all continuous local martingales $K_t$ we have $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ (and one can even use this observation to give an alternative construction of the Ito integral).
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:25
1
$begingroup$
Oh shoot, the $t$ in my comment should be a $cdot$, I just copy-pasted that expression and forgot to change it. The thing inside the covariation should always be a process and not a fixed random variable; that $cdot$ just means you consider the integral as a process and not the integral at any fixed time. You're completely right to point this out. Sorry for the source of confusion.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
It's nothing to do with that. Try applying Ito's lemma to both of them and then use the resulting formula to compute the covariation. Recall that $langle X,Y rangle = 0$ and that if $V_t$ is a finite variation process then $langle M,V rangle = 0$ for any semimartingale $M$.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:08
1
$begingroup$
In general, when you see a function of a continuous local martingale (/semimartingale) then you should almost immediately try seeing if applying Ito's lemma can help you.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:10
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
If we apply Ito's lemma to the function $f(x,y) = e^x cos(y)$ you'll find that
$$dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$$
since $langle X rangle_t = langle Y rangle_t = t$ and $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$. Since the stochastic integral against a continuous local martingale is again a local martingale, this shows that $M_t$ is a continuous local martingale. We also deduce from this that
$$d langle M rangle_t = M_t^2 d langle X rangle_t + e^2X_t sin(Y_t)^2 dlangle X rangle_t = e^2X_t (cos^2(Y_t) + sin^2(Y_t))dt = e^2X_t dt$$
(where we have again used that $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$) and so
$$langle M rangle_t = int_0^t e^2X_s ds$$
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Sure. Written out fully $dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$ means $M_t - M_0 = int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s$ and so $langle M rangle_t = bigg langle int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s bigg rangle_t$. Now use bilinearity and symmetry of the quadratic variation since $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ for continuous local martingale $N,K$ and an adapted process $F$ such that $int F dN$ makes sense. Note that we don't get any cross terms between $X$ and $Y$ since $langle X,Y rangle =0$
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:22
1
$begingroup$
I've just seen the edit to your comment. It looks like you didn't know about the behaviour of the Ito integral with respect to the quadratic variation. This is an important property to keep in mind. In fact $int_0^t F_s dN_s$ is the unique process such that for all continuous local martingales $K_t$ we have $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ (and one can even use this observation to give an alternative construction of the Ito integral).
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:25
1
$begingroup$
Oh shoot, the $t$ in my comment should be a $cdot$, I just copy-pasted that expression and forgot to change it. The thing inside the covariation should always be a process and not a fixed random variable; that $cdot$ just means you consider the integral as a process and not the integral at any fixed time. You're completely right to point this out. Sorry for the source of confusion.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
It's nothing to do with that. Try applying Ito's lemma to both of them and then use the resulting formula to compute the covariation. Recall that $langle X,Y rangle = 0$ and that if $V_t$ is a finite variation process then $langle M,V rangle = 0$ for any semimartingale $M$.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:08
1
$begingroup$
In general, when you see a function of a continuous local martingale (/semimartingale) then you should almost immediately try seeing if applying Ito's lemma can help you.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:10
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
If we apply Ito's lemma to the function $f(x,y) = e^x cos(y)$ you'll find that
$$dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$$
since $langle X rangle_t = langle Y rangle_t = t$ and $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$. Since the stochastic integral against a continuous local martingale is again a local martingale, this shows that $M_t$ is a continuous local martingale. We also deduce from this that
$$d langle M rangle_t = M_t^2 d langle X rangle_t + e^2X_t sin(Y_t)^2 dlangle X rangle_t = e^2X_t (cos^2(Y_t) + sin^2(Y_t))dt = e^2X_t dt$$
(where we have again used that $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$) and so
$$langle M rangle_t = int_0^t e^2X_s ds$$
$endgroup$
If we apply Ito's lemma to the function $f(x,y) = e^x cos(y)$ you'll find that
$$dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$$
since $langle X rangle_t = langle Y rangle_t = t$ and $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$. Since the stochastic integral against a continuous local martingale is again a local martingale, this shows that $M_t$ is a continuous local martingale. We also deduce from this that
$$d langle M rangle_t = M_t^2 d langle X rangle_t + e^2X_t sin(Y_t)^2 dlangle X rangle_t = e^2X_t (cos^2(Y_t) + sin^2(Y_t))dt = e^2X_t dt$$
(where we have again used that $langle X,Y rangle_t = 0$) and so
$$langle M rangle_t = int_0^t e^2X_s ds$$
answered Mar 31 at 21:56
Rhys SteeleRhys Steele
7,9051931
7,9051931
1
$begingroup$
Sure. Written out fully $dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$ means $M_t - M_0 = int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s$ and so $langle M rangle_t = bigg langle int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s bigg rangle_t$. Now use bilinearity and symmetry of the quadratic variation since $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ for continuous local martingale $N,K$ and an adapted process $F$ such that $int F dN$ makes sense. Note that we don't get any cross terms between $X$ and $Y$ since $langle X,Y rangle =0$
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:22
1
$begingroup$
I've just seen the edit to your comment. It looks like you didn't know about the behaviour of the Ito integral with respect to the quadratic variation. This is an important property to keep in mind. In fact $int_0^t F_s dN_s$ is the unique process such that for all continuous local martingales $K_t$ we have $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ (and one can even use this observation to give an alternative construction of the Ito integral).
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:25
1
$begingroup$
Oh shoot, the $t$ in my comment should be a $cdot$, I just copy-pasted that expression and forgot to change it. The thing inside the covariation should always be a process and not a fixed random variable; that $cdot$ just means you consider the integral as a process and not the integral at any fixed time. You're completely right to point this out. Sorry for the source of confusion.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
It's nothing to do with that. Try applying Ito's lemma to both of them and then use the resulting formula to compute the covariation. Recall that $langle X,Y rangle = 0$ and that if $V_t$ is a finite variation process then $langle M,V rangle = 0$ for any semimartingale $M$.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:08
1
$begingroup$
In general, when you see a function of a continuous local martingale (/semimartingale) then you should almost immediately try seeing if applying Ito's lemma can help you.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:10
|
show 6 more comments
1
$begingroup$
Sure. Written out fully $dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$ means $M_t - M_0 = int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s$ and so $langle M rangle_t = bigg langle int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s bigg rangle_t$. Now use bilinearity and symmetry of the quadratic variation since $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ for continuous local martingale $N,K$ and an adapted process $F$ such that $int F dN$ makes sense. Note that we don't get any cross terms between $X$ and $Y$ since $langle X,Y rangle =0$
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:22
1
$begingroup$
I've just seen the edit to your comment. It looks like you didn't know about the behaviour of the Ito integral with respect to the quadratic variation. This is an important property to keep in mind. In fact $int_0^t F_s dN_s$ is the unique process such that for all continuous local martingales $K_t$ we have $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ (and one can even use this observation to give an alternative construction of the Ito integral).
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:25
1
$begingroup$
Oh shoot, the $t$ in my comment should be a $cdot$, I just copy-pasted that expression and forgot to change it. The thing inside the covariation should always be a process and not a fixed random variable; that $cdot$ just means you consider the integral as a process and not the integral at any fixed time. You're completely right to point this out. Sorry for the source of confusion.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:40
1
$begingroup$
It's nothing to do with that. Try applying Ito's lemma to both of them and then use the resulting formula to compute the covariation. Recall that $langle X,Y rangle = 0$ and that if $V_t$ is a finite variation process then $langle M,V rangle = 0$ for any semimartingale $M$.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:08
1
$begingroup$
In general, when you see a function of a continuous local martingale (/semimartingale) then you should almost immediately try seeing if applying Ito's lemma can help you.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:10
1
1
$begingroup$
Sure. Written out fully $dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$ means $M_t - M_0 = int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s$ and so $langle M rangle_t = bigg langle int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s bigg rangle_t$. Now use bilinearity and symmetry of the quadratic variation since $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ for continuous local martingale $N,K$ and an adapted process $F$ such that $int F dN$ makes sense. Note that we don't get any cross terms between $X$ and $Y$ since $langle X,Y rangle =0$
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:22
$begingroup$
Sure. Written out fully $dM_t = M_t dX_t - e^X_t sin(Y_t) dY_t$ means $M_t - M_0 = int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s$ and so $langle M rangle_t = bigg langle int_0^t M_s dX_s - int_0^t e^X_ssin(Y_s) dY_s bigg rangle_t$. Now use bilinearity and symmetry of the quadratic variation since $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ for continuous local martingale $N,K$ and an adapted process $F$ such that $int F dN$ makes sense. Note that we don't get any cross terms between $X$ and $Y$ since $langle X,Y rangle =0$
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:22
1
1
$begingroup$
I've just seen the edit to your comment. It looks like you didn't know about the behaviour of the Ito integral with respect to the quadratic variation. This is an important property to keep in mind. In fact $int_0^t F_s dN_s$ is the unique process such that for all continuous local martingales $K_t$ we have $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ (and one can even use this observation to give an alternative construction of the Ito integral).
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:25
$begingroup$
I've just seen the edit to your comment. It looks like you didn't know about the behaviour of the Ito integral with respect to the quadratic variation. This is an important property to keep in mind. In fact $int_0^t F_s dN_s$ is the unique process such that for all continuous local martingales $K_t$ we have $langle int_0^t F_s dN_s, K_s rangle_t = int_0^t F_s d langle N,K rangle_s$ (and one can even use this observation to give an alternative construction of the Ito integral).
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:25
1
1
$begingroup$
Oh shoot, the $t$ in my comment should be a $cdot$, I just copy-pasted that expression and forgot to change it. The thing inside the covariation should always be a process and not a fixed random variable; that $cdot$ just means you consider the integral as a process and not the integral at any fixed time. You're completely right to point this out. Sorry for the source of confusion.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:40
$begingroup$
Oh shoot, the $t$ in my comment should be a $cdot$, I just copy-pasted that expression and forgot to change it. The thing inside the covariation should always be a process and not a fixed random variable; that $cdot$ just means you consider the integral as a process and not the integral at any fixed time. You're completely right to point this out. Sorry for the source of confusion.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 1 at 15:40
1
1
$begingroup$
It's nothing to do with that. Try applying Ito's lemma to both of them and then use the resulting formula to compute the covariation. Recall that $langle X,Y rangle = 0$ and that if $V_t$ is a finite variation process then $langle M,V rangle = 0$ for any semimartingale $M$.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:08
$begingroup$
It's nothing to do with that. Try applying Ito's lemma to both of them and then use the resulting formula to compute the covariation. Recall that $langle X,Y rangle = 0$ and that if $V_t$ is a finite variation process then $langle M,V rangle = 0$ for any semimartingale $M$.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:08
1
1
$begingroup$
In general, when you see a function of a continuous local martingale (/semimartingale) then you should almost immediately try seeing if applying Ito's lemma can help you.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:10
$begingroup$
In general, when you see a function of a continuous local martingale (/semimartingale) then you should almost immediately try seeing if applying Ito's lemma can help you.
$endgroup$
– Rhys Steele
Apr 3 at 18:10
|
show 6 more comments
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%2f3169450%2fshow-that-a-process-is-a-local-martingale%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