0
$\begingroup$

As far as I understood, by saying a random variable/vector $X$ belongs to a space $S$ (or takes values in $S$), one means that the measurable function $X$ is $S$-valued: \begin{equation} X:(\Omega,\mathcal{F})\rightarrow (S,\mathcal{A}), \end{equation} e.g. $(S,\mathcal{A})=(\mathbb{R}^k,\mathcal{B}^k)$ so that for any $\omega\in\Omega$, we have $X(\omega)\in S$.


In a book I was reading, there was a theorem saying "any random vector $X$ that takes values in $\ell_p$ satisfies (something*)". Suppose now I could show that a random vector $Z=(Z_1,Z_2,...)^{T}\in\ell_p$, "almost surely". i.e. \begin{equation} \sum_{j=0}^{\infty}|Z_j|^p \end{equation} converges with probability 1. My questions are

  1. Will I be able to apply the theorem on $Z$, and argue that $Z$ satisfy the property (something*)?
  2. What if "almost sure" convergence is replaced by say "mean-squared" convergence?
  3. With reference to the definition far above, let me define \begin{equation} \mathbb{R}^{(\infty)}:=\Big\{x=(x_j)_{j=1}^{\infty}\in\mathbb{R}^{\mathbb{N}}\big|~\exists~i~~\text{with} ~x_j=0,~~ \forall j>i\Big\}. \end{equation} Then if I say a random vector $Y$ takes values in $\mathbb{R}^{(\infty)}$, does that mean for some $\omega_1\neq\omega_2\in\Omega$ the "number of non-zeros" of $X(\omega_1)$ and $X(\omega_2)$ can be different, is this correct?

Any short comments/partial answers would be greatly appreciated. Thanks very much.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$
  1. You can at best say Z satisfies the property almost surely.
  2. What do you actually mean by "mean-squared" convergence? We can talk about this in the comment. So, here what almost sure convergence means is that under some distribution (or measure) $\mathbb{P}$ you imbue on some more generic sequence space $\mathcal{F}$ containing $\mathcal{l}_p$, the following holds: $\mathbb{P}\left(Z\in \mathcal{l}_p\right)=1$. In other words, $\mathbb{P}\left(Z\in \mathcal{F}\backslash\mathcal{l}_p\right)=0$. So what I want to say here is that you actually need to define explicitly in which measure space $\mathcal{l}_p$ is lying in.
  3. Yes, you're right! So $Y$ can have different number of non-zeros at different realisations.
$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you Seong! What I meant by mean squared convergence (to some limit say $S$) was simply $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}E|\sum_{j=0}^{n}|Z_j|^p-S|^2\rightarrow 0$. For example $p=1$ and $Z_j=\psi_jX_j$ where $\{X_j\}$ is any sequence of random variables, and $\psi_j$ is such that $\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}|\psi_j|<\infty$. Then we can easily show mean squared convergence provided $E|X_j|^2<\infty$ for all $j$. $\endgroup$
    – John
    Dec 11 '14 at 12:27
  • $\begingroup$ So here the normed space implicitly considered is $\mathcal{l}_1$, I guess, and $S$ is the $\mathcal{l}_1$ norm of $\bf{Z}$? Hmm, how about considering $S\in \mathcal{l}_2$? I think this would make more sense... i.e. in this case you say $\bf{Z}\rightarrow S$ in $\mathcal{l}_2$ if $E\left|\sum_{j=0}^n {\left(Z_j-S_j\right)^2} \right|\rightarrow 0$. Also, in using the expectation, I guess the expectation is with respect to the distribution of $\bf{Z}$? $\endgroup$ Dec 11 '14 at 12:35
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks once again. I think the choice of $p$ does not matter here because mean squared convergence should hold as long as $\sum_{j=0}^{\infty}|\psi_j|^{p}<\infty$ and $\sup_j E|X_j|^{2p}<\infty$. As you said, $S$ would be the $\ell_1$ norm of $Z$ in the example above. What did you mean by $S\in\ell_2$ (and $S_j$)? $\endgroup$
    – John
    Dec 11 '14 at 13:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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