In the previous post I introduced the definitions of the dual optional and predictable projections, firstly for processes of integrable variation and, then, generalised to processes which are only required to be locally (or prelocally) of integrable variation. We did not look at the properties of these dual projections beyond the fact that they exist and are uniquely defined, which are significant and important statements in their own right.
To recap, recall that an IV process, A, is right-continuous and such that its variation
(1) |
is integrable at time , so that
. The dual optional projection is defined for processes which are prelocally IV. That is, A has a dual optional projection
if it is right-continuous and its variation process is prelocally integrable, so that there exist a sequence
of stopping times increasing to infinity with
integrable. More generally, A is a raw FV process if it is right-continuous with almost-surely finite variation over finite time intervals, so
(a.s.) for all
. Then, if a jointly measurable process
is A-integrable on finite time intervals, we use
to denote the integral of with respect to A over the interval
, which takes into account the value of
at time 0 (unlike the integral
which, implicitly, is defined on the interval
). In what follows, whenever we state that
has any properties, such as being IV or prelocally IV, we are also including the statement that
is A-integrable so that
is a well-defined process. Also, whenever we state that a process has a dual optional projection, then we are also implicitly stating that it is prelocally IV.
From theorem 3 of the previous post, the dual optional projection is the unique prelocally IV process satisfying
for all measurable processes with optional projection
such that
and
are IV. Equivalently,
is the unique optional FV process such that
for all optional such that
is IV, in which case
is also IV so that the expectations in this identity are well-defined.
I now look at the elementary properties of dual optional projections, as well as the corresponding properties of dual predictable projections. The most important property is that, according to the definition just stated, the dual projection exists and is uniquely defined. By comparison, the properties considered in this post are elementary and relatively easy to prove. So, I will simply state a theorem consisting of a list of all the properties under consideration, and will then run through their proofs. Starting with the dual optional projection, the main properties are listed below as Theorem 1.
Note that the first three statements are saying that the dual projection is indeed a linear projection from the prelocally IV processes onto the linear subspace of optional FV processes. As explained in the previous post, by comparison with the discrete-time setting, the dual optional projection can be expressed, in a non-rigorous sense, as taking the optional projection of the infinitesimal increments,
(2) |
As is interpreted via the Lebesgue-Stieltjes integral
, it is a random measure rather than a real-valued process. So, the optional projection of
appearing in (2) does not really make sense. However, Theorem 1 does allow us to make sense of (2) in certain restricted cases. For example, if A is differentiable so that
for a process
, then (9) below gives
. This agrees with (2) so long as
is interpreted to mean
. Also, restricting to the jump component of the increments,
, (2) reduces to (11) below.
We defined the dual projection via expectations of integrals with the restriction that this is IV. An alternative approach is to first define the dual projections for IV processes, as was done in theorems 1 and 2 of the previous post, and then extend to (pre)locally IV processes by localisation of the projection. That this is consistent with our definitions follows from the fact that (pre)localisation commutes with the dual projection, as stated in (10) below.
Theorem 1
- A raw FV process A is optional if and only if
exists and is equal to A.
- If the dual optional projection of A exists then,
(3) - If the dual optional projections of A and B exist, and
,
are
-measurable random variables then,
(4) - If the dual optional projection
exists then
is almost-surely finite and
(5) - If U is a random variable and
is a stopping time, then
is prelocally IV if and only if
is almost surely finite, in which case
(6) - If the prelocally IV process A is nonnegative and increasing then so is
and,
(7) for all nonnegative measurable
with optional projection
. If A is merely increasing then so is
and (7) holds for nonnegative measurable
with
.
- If A has dual optional projection
and
is an optional process such that
is prelocally IV then,
is
-integrable and,
(8) - If A is an optional FV process and
is a measurable process with optional projection
such that
is prelocally IV then,
is A-integrable and,
(9) - If A has dual optional projection
and
is a stopping time then,
(10) - If the dual optional projection
exists, then its jump process is the optional projection of the jump process of A,
(11) - If A has dual optional projection
then
(12) for all nonnegative measurable
with optional projection
.
- Let
be a sequence of right-continuous processes with variation
If
is prelocally IV then,
(13)
The proofs of these statements are all relatively direct applications of the definition of the dual optional projection but, as it is a rather long list, I leave the proof until later and, instead, move directly on to the properties of dual predictable projections. Recall that a process A is locally IV if there exists a sequence of stopping times increasing to infinity such that
are IV. For such a process, its dual predictable projection
is the unique locally IV process satisfying
for all measurable with predictable projection
such that
and
are IV. Equivalently,
is the unique predictable FV process such that
for all predictable such that
is IV, in which case
is also IV.
The list of properties stated in Theorem 1 above carry across to the dual predictable projection. The only significant difference here is the addition of an extra property in statement 13 below, which interprets the dual predictable projection of an adapted locally IV process as its compensator.
Below, whenever we state that the dual predictable projection of a process A exists then we are implicitly also saying that A is locally IV.
Theorem 2
- A raw FV process A is predictable if and only if
exists and is equal to A.
- If the dual predictable projection of A exists then,
(14) - If the dual predictable projections of A and B exist, and
,
are
-measurable random variables then,
(15) - If the dual predictable projection
exists then
is almost-surely finite and
(16) - If U is a random variable and
is a predictable stopping time, then
is locally IV if and only if
is almost surely finite, in which case
(17) - If the locally IV process A is nonnegative and increasing then so is
and,
(18) for all nonnegative measurable
with predictable projection
. If A is merely increasing then so is
and (18) holds for nonnegative measurable
with
.
- If A has dual predictable projection
and
is a predictable process such that
is locally IV then,
is
-integrable and,
(19) - If A is a predictable FV process and
is a measurable process with predictable projection
such that
is locally IV then,
is A-integrable and,
(20) - If A has dual predictable projection
and
is a stopping time then,
(21) If
is a predictable stopping time then,
(22) - If the dual predictable projection
exists, then its jump process is the predictable projection of the jump process of A,
(23) - If A has dual predictable projection
then
(24) for all nonnegative measurable
with predictable projection
.
- Let
be a sequence of right-continuous processes with variation
If
is locally IV then,
(25) - If A is an adapted locally IV process then
is the unique predictable FV process such that
is a local martingale starting from 0.
As with Theorem 1, we leave the proof of the above until further down in this post. For now, we show the following property combining the dual optional and projections.
Theorem 3 Let A be locally an IV process. Then,
is locally IV and
Proof: As A is locally IV, there exists a sequence of stopping times increasing to infinity such that
are IV. So, A is prelocally IV and, from (10),
is IV. So, is locally IV. If
is a predictable process such that
is IV, then
and, hence,
, are IV and,
From the definition, this means that is the dual predictable projection of A. Finally, as
is predictable and, hence, optional, it is equal to its optional projection
. ⬜
Finally, the difference between the dual optional and predictable projections is always a local martingale.
Lemma 4 Let A be a locally IV process. Then,
is a local martingale.
Proof: By theorem 3,
which, by statement 13 of theorem 2, is a local martingale. ⬜
Proof of Theorem 1
I will now go through and prove each of the statements of theorem 1 in turn. It should be noted that the statements all follow quite directly from theorems 1 and 2 of the previous post, so along as all the processes to which optional projection is applied are actually IV and all integrands are bounded. Extending to prelocally IV processes and unbounded integrands can be done in several ways. One method is to choose a localising sequence of stopping times and apply the results to the prestopped processes
, taking the limit
to extend the results to the prelocally IV process A. Dominated convergence can be used to remove the boundedness requirements for the integrands. An alternative approach, which is closer to the definitions we are using for the dual projections, is to choose an optional process
such that
is IV, in the same way as in the proof of theorem 3 of the previous post. The result for
can be extended to apply to A by simply cancelling out the
term at the end. We use this approach for statements 6, 7, 8 and 12 below.
Proof of 1: First, by definition, the dual optional projection is optional and so, if , then A is optional. Conversely, suppose that A is an optional FV process. Then it is adapted and so its variation process (1) is also adapted and, hence, is prelocally integrable. This shows that A is prelocally IV so has an optional projection which, from the definition, is equal to A.
Proof of 2: By definition, is optional and prelocally IV and, hence, is equal to its own dual optional projection.
Proof of 3: We start with the case where A and B are IV, and and
are uniformly bounded. Then, for bounded measurable
, applying theorem 1 of the previous post,
Again, by theorem 1 of the previous post, this implies (4).
We generalise to the case where it is only assumed that A and B are prelocally IV, and and
are
-measurable. By definition, there exists stopping times
increasing to infinity as
, and such that
and
are IV. Also define stopping times
on
and
otherwise. Setting
then
and
are bounded. We will apply statement 9, which will be proven below, in order to commute the dual optional projection with pre-stopping at time
.
The second equality is an application of (4) for the case proven above. This shows that (4) holds on the interval and letting n go to infinity gives the result.
Proof of 4: As A is prelocally IV, is integrable with respect to
. Also, as it is optional,
is
-measurable. Then, if U is an
-measurable random variable such that
is integrable then,
By definition of conditional expectations, this is equivalent to (5).
Proof of 5: Writing , if A is prelocally IV then
is integrable w.r.t.
. So,
almost surely. Conversely, if is almost surely finite, we can define a sequence of stopping times
increasing to infinity by,
whenever
and
when
. Then,
has variation bounded by n and, hence, A is prelocally IV.
Writing then, for optional
,
whenever and
are IV, showing that
.
Proof of 6: Let A be a nonnegative increasing prelocally IV process. By definition, there exists stopping times increasing to infinity such that
are IV and, by theorem 1 of the previous post, have nonnegative and increasing dual optional projections. We apply statement 9, which will be proven below, in order to commute the dual optional projection with pre-stopping at time
to see that
is nonnegative and increasing. Letting n go to infinity shows that is nonnegative and increasing. We show that (7) holds for nonnegative measurable
. Although it need not be the case that
is
integrable or that
is A-integrable, as the integrals are nonnegative, the expectations in (7) are well-defined although, possibly, infinite. First (7) holds whenever
and
are integrable, from the definition of the dual optional projection. Furthermore, as A is prelocally IV, there exists an optional
such that
and, hence,
are IV. We can approximate
by a sequence of optional processes
. Then, (7) holds with
in place of
and,
. By dominated convergence of optional projections,
as n goes to infinity. So, by monotone convergence of the expectations, (7) holds for all nonnegative measurable
.
Next, suppose that A is increasing but not necessarily nonnegative. Then is nonnegative and, applying statement 5 above,
is increasing. If is a nonnegative measurable process with
then
and, as
, we also have
. Hence, (7) follows by applying the equality to B.
Proof of 7: As is prelocally IV, there exists an optional process
such that
is IV. From the definition of the dual optional projection,
is also IV, so, integrating over
shows that
is A-integrable and,
holds for all bounded measurable . Therefore,
Integrating with respect to both sides gives (8).
Proof of 8: As A is optional FV, statement 1 says that it is prelocally IV with dual optional projection . As
is prelocally IV, there exists an optional
so that
is IV. From the definition of the dual optional projection,
is also IV. Similarly, there is an optional
such that
is IV and, by choosing
we can ensure that
is IV. Then, applying the definition of the dual optional projection and using
gives
for all bounded measurable . So,
Integrating with respect to both sides gives (9).
Proof of 9: If is a stopping time then
is optional (in fact, it is predictable). Applying statement 7 above,
Similarly, is optional and
. Again applying statement 7,
as required.
Proof of 10: As A is prelocally IV, is almost surely finite for each stopping time
, so its optional projection exists. Next, as
is left-continuous and adapted, it is optional (in fact, it is predictable). So,
is optional. In particular, this means that
is
-measurable. We procede in a similar fashion as in the proof of statement 4. For any
-measurable random variable such that
is integrable, then
is optional and,
So, by definition of the conditional expectation, is equal to
, showing that
is the optional projection of
.
Proof of 11: Denoting the increasing part of A by
then and
are nonnegative and increasing. By statement 6 above, this means that
and
are nonnegative and increasing. So,
and
is increasing, for nonnegative bounded
. Denoting the increasing part of
by
this means that is increasing. Taking expectations and applying (7),
This proves the second of equalities (12) for bounded and, by monotone convergence, shows that it holds for all nonnegative
. The third equality of (12) follows from the second one applied to
, and the first follows from adding together the second and third ones.
Proof of 12: As are nonnegative increasing processes, we have
. By the hypothesis of the theorem,
is prelocally integrable and, hence,
so the sum is absolutely convergent and
is increasing. This shows that the variation of A is bounded by V, so A is prelocally IV. Next, by statement 6 above,
and
are nonnegative increasing processes. So,
Therefore, is also absolutely convergent. This shows that, at least, both sides of (13) are well-defined. We just need to demonstrate that they are equal. To do this, we make use of the identities
For of the form
, for a random variable U and time
, these are trivial, and extends to arbitrary bounded measurable
by the functional monotone class theorem. Then, if
is any bounded process such that
and
are IV, we have
In particular, as V is prelocally integrable, there will be a bounded optional such that
and, hence,
are prelocally IV. Then, for any bounded measurable
, we can apply the identity above with
in place of
,
As this holds for all bounded measurable , we have
and, integrating over
, gives
as required.
Proof of Theorem 2
The first 12 statements of theorem 1 correspond directly to the 12 statements of theorem 1 and, for the main part, the proofs given above carry across directly. We simply replace `optional’ with `predictable’, `prelocally IV’ with `locally IV’, the prestopped process by the stopped processes
, and `stopping time’ by `predictable stopping time’ (and
by
) where necessary. Here, I will merely mention the points where the argument does not directly carry across and say how it can be modified.
First, in the proof of statement 1, we used the fact that if A is adapted then so is its variation V which, consequently, is prelocally IV. In the case where A is predictable then, by approximating the variation V along partitions of (see (17) from the previous post), it can be seen that V is also predictable. This is enough to show that V is locally bounded. This fact follows from the fact that, for the stopping times
, the stochastic intervals
are equal to
and, hence,
are predictable stopping times. If
announce
, then the stopping times
are increasing to infinity, and
. In particular, V is locally integrable as required.
In the proof of statement 5, we showed that, for a stopping time and random variable
, then the process
is prelocally IV so long as V is almost surely finite. This follows from the fact that
is prelocally integrable. In the case where
is a predictable stopping time and the sigma-algebra
is replaced by
, then the process B will be an increasing predictable process, so will be locally IV by the argument in the previous paragraph.
In statement 9 of theorem 2, identity (22) only applies when is a predictable stopping time, whereas the equivalent statement (10) of theorem 1 applied for all stopping times. This is because they are applications of (8,19) with
, which is optional for any stopping time
, but requires
to be a predictable stopping time for
to be predictable so that (19) applies.
Finally, statement 13 of theorem 2 does not correspond to any of the statements of theorem 1, so I give a proof here.
Proof of 13: Starting with the case where A is IV, then is an adapted process satisfying
for bounded predictable . In particular, it holds for bounded elementary
, showing that M is a martingale. Next suppose that A is locally IV. Then, there are stopping times
increasing to infinity such that
is IV. Then,
is a martingale, so M is a local martingale. To show uniqueness, suppose that B is a predictable FV process such that is a local martingale starting from zero. Then,
is a predictable local martingale starting from zero. By the first statement of Theorem 2, C is a locally IV process starting from zero and with dual predictable projection equal to itself. Letting
be a sequence of stopping times increasing to infinity such that
are IV. Then, as they are class (D) local martingales,
are proper martingales and hence,
for bounded elementary . By the functional monotone class theorem, this extends to all bounded predictable
. Then, as C is its own dual predictable projection,
for all bounded measurable . So,
and, letting n go to infinity,
.