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.

Consider a continuous time real-valued Markov process $X_t$ given by an SDE: $$ dX_t = \mu(X_t)dt+\sigma (X_t)dW_t. $$ Let $\mu,\sigma\in C^1(\mathbb R)$ and $\sigma\ge0$. Moreover let us assume that $\mu,\sigma$ are such that there exists a unique solution for any initial value $X_0 = x$.

I guess that if for some $x\in \mathbb R$ we have $\sigma(x)>0$ then there exist such a neighborhood $U(x)$ that for all $y\in U(x)$ and for any neighborhood $U(y)$ there exists $t'>0$ such that $$\mathsf P\{X_t \in U(y)|X_0 = x\}>0$$ for all $0<t\leq t'$. Does anybody have an idea how to prove it?

share|improve this question
    
Does the condition $\mu,\sigma\in C^1(\mathbb R)$ imply that those functions and their first derivatives are bounded on $ \mathbb R$? –  Andrew Jul 28 '11 at 14:48
    
@Andrew: no, just continuous first derivatives. Why did you ask about the boundness? –  Ilya Jul 28 '11 at 14:52
    
well, it is known that in order to have uniqueness for the heat's equation Cauchy problem one needs that initial data doesn't grow too quickly at infinity. In other words, to have a good problem one has to bear in mind some sort of physical plausibility. I just wondered is the statement plausible if the functions grow very quickly, say $\sigma(x)=e^{x^4}$. –  Andrew Jul 28 '11 at 15:15
    
@Andrew: I've edited the question - the first statement was not the right one. Anyway, with regards to the fast growth of functions - we can suppose the usual conditions on $\mu,\sigma$ to have a unique solution. –  Ilya Jul 28 '11 at 15:50
    
@Gortaur: Not only does there exist such a time $t^\prime$, but the inequality holds for all times $t^\prime$. In fact, if $\sigma$ is positive on $U(x)$, $t^\prime > 0$, $\epsilon > 0$ and $\gamma\colon[0,t^\prime]\to U(x)$ is continuous with $\gamma(0)=x$, then $\mathbb{P}(\sup_{t\le t^\prime}\vert X_t-\gamma(t)\vert < \epsilon)$ is positive. –  George Lowther Jul 28 '11 at 22:06

3 Answers 3

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Yes, your guess is correct, but we can say a lot more than that. If $\sigma,\mu$ are continuous, $X_0=x$ and $\sigma > 0$ on some connected neighbourhood $U$ of $x$, then $\mathbb{P}(X_t\in V) > 0$ for all positive times $t$ and nonempty open sets $V\subseteq U$. We can go even further than this though. If $\gamma\colon[0,t^\prime]\to\mathbb{R}$ is continuous with $\gamma(0)=x$ and $\sigma(\gamma(t)) > 0$, then $\mathbb{P}(\sup_{t\le t^\prime}\vert X_t-\gamma(t)\vert < \epsilon) > 0$ for all positive $\epsilon$. Stated another way, the support of the paths of $X$ (over a finite time interval) contains all continuous paths starting from $x$ along which $\sigma$ is positive. These statements also hold in the more general case of diffussions in $\mathbb{R}^n$.

In fact, it is not necessary to assume that $X$ is a diffusion at all, only that it can be expressed as a stochastic integral. That is, $\sigma,\mu$ do not have to be specified as functions of $X$. In the $n$-dimensional case, we can write $$ dX^i=\sum_{j=1}^m\sigma^{ij}_t\,dW^j_t+\mu^i_t\,dt. $$ Here, $X=(X^1,\ldots,X^n)$ is an $n$-dimensional process with $X_0=x\in\mathbb{R}^n$ and $W=(W^1,\ldots,W^m)$ is an $m$-dimensional Brownian motion. You can consider $\sigma^{ij}_t$ and $\mu^i_t$ to be functions of $X_t$ if you like, but that is not necessary. All that matters is that they are predictable processes (which includes all continuous and adapted processes).

First, supposing that $\mu,\sigma$ satisfy some boundedness conditions whenever $X$ is close to $x$, then there is a positive probability of $X$ remaining arbitrarily close to $x$. I will use $\Vert\cdot\Vert$ to denote the Euclidean norms on $\mathbb{R}^n$ and on the $n\times n$ matrices.

1) Suppose there exists $K > 0$ such that $\Vert(\sigma_t\sigma_t^T)^{-1}\Vert\le K$, $\Vert(\sigma_t\sigma_t^T)^{-1}\mu_t\Vert\le K$ and $\Vert\sigma_t\sigma^T_t\Vert\le K$ whenever $\Vert X_t - x\Vert < \delta$ (some positive $\delta$). Then, $\mathbb{P}(\sup_{t\le t^\prime}\Vert X_t-x\Vert < \epsilon) > 0$ for all positive $\epsilon$.

In the one dimensional case, we need only suppose that $\sigma^{-2}\mu\le K$ and $\sigma^2\le K$ (there is no need to assume that $\sigma$ is bounded away from zero). I'll prove (1) in a moment. First, it has the following consequence.

2) Let $\gamma\colon[0,t^\prime]\to\mathbb{R}^n$ be continuous such that $\gamma(0)=x$ and there is $K > 0$ with $\Vert(\sigma_t\sigma_t^T)^{-1}\Vert\le K$, $\Vert(\sigma_t\sigma_t^T)^{-1}\mu_t\Vert\le K$ and $\Vert\sigma_t\sigma^T_t\Vert\le K$ whenever $\Vert X_t-\gamma(t)\Vert < \delta$ (some positive $\delta$). Then, $\mathbb{P}(\sup_{t\le t^\prime}\Vert X_t-\gamma(t)\Vert < \epsilon) > 0$ for all positive $\epsilon$.

In particular, the conditions are satisfied if $\sigma_t=\sigma(X_t),\mu_t=\mu(X_t)$ are continuous functions of $X_t$ and $\sigma(\gamma_t)\sigma(\gamma_t)^T$ is nonsingular, implying the statements in the first paragraph of this post.

To see that (2) follows from (1), consider the case where $\gamma$ is continuously differentiable (this is enough, as all continuous functions can be uniformly approximated by smooth ones). Supposing that the requirements of (2) are met, look at $\tilde X_t=X_t-\gamma(t)$. This satisfies the requirements of (1) with $\mu$ replaced by $\mu-\gamma^\prime$. So, by (1), $\tilde X$ has positive probability of remaining arbitrarily close to 0, and $X$ has positive probability of remaining arbitrarily close to $\gamma$.

Now, let's prove (1). We can suppose that $\epsilon < \delta$ and, by stopping $X$ as soon as $\Vert X-x\Vert$ hits $\delta$, we can suppose that $\Vert(\sigma_t\sigma_t^T)^{-1}\Vert$, $\Vert(\sigma_t\sigma_t^T)^{-1}\mu_t\Vert$ and $\Vert\sigma_t\sigma_t^T\Vert$ are always bounded by $K$. Then, there is a predictable process $\nu$ with $\Vert\nu\Vert\le K$ and $\mu_t=\sigma_t\sigma_t^T\nu_t$. Define a new measure $\mathbb{Q}$ by the Girsanov transform $$ \frac{d\mathbb{Q}}{d\mathbb{P}}=\exp\left(-\sum_{j=1}^m\int_0^{t^\prime}(\sigma^T_t\nu_t)^j\,dW^j_t-\frac12\int_0^{t^\prime}\nu_t^T\sigma_t\sigma^T_t\nu_t\,dt\right) $$ This is an equivalent measure to $\mathbb{P}$ and, by the theory of Girsanov transforms, $\tilde W_t=W_t+\int_0^t\sigma^T_s\nu_s\,ds$ is a $\mathbb{Q}$-Brownian motion. As we have $$ dX^i_t=\sum_{j=1}^m\sigma^{ij}_t\,d\tilde W^j_t $$ this reduces the problem to the case where $\mu$ is zero. So, let's suppose that that $\mu=0$ from now on.

In the one dimensional case, where $dX_t=\sigma_t\,dW_t$, it is enough to suppose that $\sigma_t^2\le K$. This is because a stochastic time change can be used to write the local martingale $X$ as $X_t=x+B_{A_t}$ where $B$ is a Brownian motion with respect to its natural filtration and $A_t=\int_0^t\sigma_s^2\,ds\le Kt$. Then, $\sup_{t\le t^\prime}\vert X_t-x\vert < \epsilon$ whenever $\sup_{t\le Kt^\prime}\vert B_t\vert < \epsilon$. However, standard Brownian has nonzero probability of remaining within a positive distance $\epsilon$ of the origin (see the answers to this math.SE question), so $\{\sup_{t\le t^\prime}\vert X_t-x\vert < \epsilon\}$ has positive probability.

In the multidimensional case we need to also assume that $\Vert(\sigma\sigma^T)^{-1}\Vert\le K$. We can then reduce to the one-dimensional case. Setting $Y=\Vert X-x\Vert^2$, integration by parts gives $$ \begin{align} dY_t&=\tilde\sigma_t\,d\tilde W+\tilde\mu_t\,dt,\\ \tilde\sigma_t&=2\sqrt{(X_t-x)^T\sigma_t\sigma_t^T(X_t-x)},\\ \tilde\mu_t&={\rm Tr}(\sigma_t\sigma^T_t),\\ \tilde W_t&=2\sum_{i,j}\int_0^t1_{\{X_s\not=x\}}\tilde\sigma_s^{-1}(X^i_s-x^i)\sigma^{ij}_s\,dW^j_s. \end{align} $$ You can check that $\tilde W$ has quadratic variation $[\tilde W]_t=t$ so that, by Lévy's characterization of Brownian motion, $\tilde W$ is a standard Brownian motion. Then, $\tilde\sigma_t$, $\tilde\sigma_t^{-1}$ and $\tilde\mu_t$ are bounded for $Y_t$ lying in any given compact subset of $(0,\infty)$. If we let $\tau$ be the first time at which $Y$ hits $\epsilon^2/2$ then, applying (1) in the one-dimensional case to $Y_{\tau+t}$, there is a positive probability that $\sup_{t\le t^\prime}\vert Y_{\tau+t}-\epsilon^2/2\vert < \epsilon^2/2$. However, in this case, we have $\sup_{t\le t^\prime}\Vert X_t-x\Vert < \epsilon$.


Finally, in the $n$-dimensional case, I'll give an example to show that $X$ need not have a positive probability of remaining close to its starting point, even when $\mu=0$ and $\sigma$ is bounded. Consider the two dimensional case, $n=2$, with $m=1$ and $\sigma_t=R\hat X_t$, where $R$ is the linear map giving a rotation by 90 degrees and $\hat x\equiv1_{\{x\not=0\}}x/\Vert x\Vert$. So, $$ dX_t=R\hat X_t\,dW_t $$ for a Brownian motion $W$. Then, $X^T\,dX=0$ and integration by parts shows that if $X_0\not=0$ then $\Vert X\Vert$ increases deterministically, $$ \begin{align} \Vert X_t\Vert^2&=\Vert X_0\Vert^2+\sum_{i=1}^2[X^i]_t=\Vert X_0\Vert^2+\int_0^t\hat X_s^TR^TR\hat X_s\,ds\\ &=\Vert X_0\Vert^2+t. \end{align} $$

share|improve this answer

By path continuity alone, if $x$ is any starting point and $U$ is any neighborhood of $x$, then the exit time $T:=\inf\{t\ge 0: X_t\notin U\}$ is strictly positive, with probability 1. Thus for small enough $t>0$ (how small depends on both $x$ and $U$), $$ P\{X_s\in U\hbox{ for all } s\in[0,t] | X_0=x\}=P\{T>t | X_0=x\}>0. $$ There is no need to assume $\sigma(x)>0$.

share|improve this answer
    
I guess, you answered the first version of the question. Unfortunately, it was wrong and I've edited it 2 hours before you answer. –  Ilya Jul 28 '11 at 19:20

Let me try again, this time to answer the correct question!

If, in addition to your other hypotheses, the function $\sigma$ is everywhere strictly positive, then $X_t$ admits a (continuous, strictly positive) density function $p(t,x,y)$: $$ \mathbf{P}\{X_t\in A | X_0=x\} = \int_A p_t(x,y)\,dy $$ for each Borel subset $A$ (and all $x$). [See, for example, section 4.11 of the book of Ito and McKean.] This is more than enough to answer your question in the affirmative.

Suppose now that $\sigma(x)>0$ for a certain fixed $x$. Then there is an open interval $U(x)$ containing $x$ such that $\inf_{y\in U(x)}\sigma(y) >0$. The remarks of the preceding paragraph apply to the diffusion (call it $Y$) obtained by killing $X$ upon its first exit from $U(x)$. (This amounts to restricting $\sigma$ and $\mu$ to $U(x)$, employing Dirichlet boundary conditions at the endpoints of $U(x)$.) In particular, $Y_t$ admits a density function $q(t,y,z)$ (with $q(t,y,z)>0$ for all $t>0$ and all $y,z$ in $U(x)$) with respect to Lebesgue measure. We then have, for any fixed $y\in U(x)$, $$ \mathbf{P}\{X_t\in A | X_0=y\} \geq \mathbf{P}\{X_t\in A, T>t | X_0=y\}, $$ where $T$ is the first exit time of $X$ from $U(x)$. The right side of the above display is equal to $$ \mathbf{P}\{Y_t\in A | Y_0=y\} =\int_A q(t,y,z)\,dz. $$ As before, this implies a positive answer to your question in the general case.

share|improve this answer
    
sorry for the simple question - but why $Y_t = X_{t\wedge T}$ will be a diffusion process for which results are applicable from you 1st paragraph? I guess that $\sigma_Y(y) = 0$ for all $y\notin U(x)$ by the definition of $Y$. –  Ilya Jul 29 '11 at 7:44
    
The state space of $Y_t$ is the interval $U(x)$. After time $T$, Y retires to a special "cemetery" state. –  John Dawkins Jul 29 '11 at 16:05
    
So it means that the state space is $U(x)\cup \Delta$ where $\Delta$ is a cemetery state. Anyway, I cannot look into the book you cited but I guess that there was written about the diffusion processes on the real line rather then on intervals, isn't it? –  Ilya Jul 29 '11 at 16:38
    
The book I cited (Ito & McKean) deals with very general diffusions with state space allowed to be any subinterval of the real line. –  John Dawkins Jul 29 '11 at 17:27

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.