Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am reading Shreve's "Stochastic Calculus for Finance II". In it, he states (Theorem 1.6.1) that if $Z$ is an almost-surely strictly positive random variable on a probability space $(\Omega, \mathcal F, P)$ with $E(Z) = 1$, then the probability measure defined as $\widetilde P(A) := \int_A Z d P$ satisfies $$ E(Y) = \widetilde E(Y/Z) $$ for any random variable Y (here E and $\widetilde E$ are the expected values in the respective measures). I don't understand the meaning of this expression; $Y/Z$ is not a random variable since there may be $\omega \in \Omega$ upon which $Z$ vanishes.

Is $Y/Z$ a valid expression, or is it shorthand for something more rigorous?

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 5 down vote accepted

EDIT: Replacing $\tilde \cdot$ (tilde) by $\widetilde \cdot$ (wide tilde); for some reason still does not appear like a (wide) tilde.

To complete Nate's answer, it is important to consider here $Y/Z$ and $\tilde E(Y/Z):=\int_\Omega {(Y/Z)d\tilde P} $ with respect to the probability measure $\tilde P$. As Nate noted, there is no problem with $Y/Z$ with respect to the probability measure $P$ (since $P(Z=0)=0$). Let's see that there is also no problem with respect to $\tilde P$, which amounts to showing that $\tilde P(Z=0)=0$. Indeed, let $A$ denote the event $\{Z=0\}:=\{ \omega \in \Omega : Z(\omega) = 0\}$. Then, $$ \tilde P(Z=0) = \tilde P(A) := \int_A {ZdP} = \int_A {Z(\omega )dP(\omega )}. $$ So, there is no problem here for two (independent) reasons. First, by definition, $Z(\omega) = 0$ for $\omega \in A$, hence $$ \int_A {Z(\omega )dP(\omega )} = \int_A {0dP(\omega )} = 0. $$ Second, by assumption, $P(Z=0)=0$, that is $P(A)=0$; hence, $\int_A {ZdP} = 0$ (recall from measure theory that $ \int_E {fd\mu } = 0$ if $\mu(E)=0$).

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks for adding this. I wrote mine in haste and forgot to address this very important point. –  Nate Eldredge May 17 '11 at 18:26
    
@Nate: Thanks... –  Shai Covo May 17 '11 at 18:32
    
So Y/Z is not a random variable (a function), but it is integrable with respect to this measure? Is there a name for this kind of "function"? –  James Davidoff May 22 '11 at 2:18
    
James, if $Y/Z = \pm \infty$ on some parts of $\Omega$, it may be called an "extended random variable". More precisely, see Definition 2.30 in books.google.co.il/…. –  Shai Covo May 22 '11 at 5:17
    
However, when $Y/Z = \pm \infty$ on a set $A$ of probability zero, you can consider a modification of $Y/Z$ which is equal to $0$ (or any finite number) on $A$ (and to $Y/Z$ on $\Omega-A$), which is a random variable having the same probabilistic properties of the original $Y/Z$. –  Shai Covo May 22 '11 at 5:26
add comment

You can think of it as the following shorthand: $$(Y/Z)(\omega) := \begin{cases} Y(\omega)/Z(\omega), & Z(\omega) \ne 0 \\ 43.7, & Z(\omega) = 0 \end{cases} $$

(Exercise: check that $Y/Z$ thusly defined is measurable.)

The point being: you can consider $Y/Z$ to be whatever you want on the event $\{Z=0\}$. Since the event has probability zero, it doesn't matter what you pick.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.