1
$\begingroup$

Let $\{X_n\}$ be a sequence of independent random variables on some probability space.

Then, by definition(according to the book that I am reading), I know that $\{\sigma(X_1),\sigma(X_2),\dots, \}$ is independent.

Then, I am wondering whether $\sigma(X_{n+1})$ is independent of $\sigma(\sigma(X_1),\sigma(X_2),\dots,\sigma(X_n))$.

Or in general, is $\sigma(\sigma(X_{n_1}),\sigma(X_{n_2}),\dots,\sigma(X_{n_k}))$ is independent of $\sigma(\sigma(X_{j_1}),\sigma(X_{j_2}),\dots,\sigma(X_{j_l}))$, where $\{n_1,n_2,\dots,n_k\} \cap \{j_1,j_2,\dots,j_l\} = \emptyset$?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The answer is yes. Btw, it is better to write $\sigma(X_{n_1},\dots,X_{n_k})$ in stead of $\sigma(\sigma(X_{n_1}),\dots,\sigma(X_{n_k}))$; i.e. the smallest $\sigma$-algebra that makes, $X_{n_1},\dots,X_{n_k}$ measurable. $\endgroup$ – drhab Aug 19 '15 at 13:51
  • $\begingroup$ @drhab Isn't $\sigma(X_{n_1},X_{n_2},\dots,X_{n_k})$ the same as $\sigma(\sigma(X_{n_1}),\dots,\sigma(X_{n_k}))$? Can you also give me an idea as to how I can prove it? $\endgroup$ – mononono Aug 19 '15 at 13:55
  • $\begingroup$ The first notation is common (the second is not) and shorter. Most probably you mean the same. If the second is meant to be a $\sigma$-algebra generated by $\sigma$-algebras then there is no essential difference between both. $\endgroup$ – drhab Aug 19 '15 at 13:58
0
$\begingroup$

If $\{X_n:n\in\mathbb N\}$ is a sequence of independent random variables, then what we really mean is that the $\sigma$-algebras generated by those random variables, i.e. $\sigma(X_n) = \{X_n^{-1}(B) : B\in\mathcal B\}$ are independent. That is, for any finite subset $n_1, \ldots, n_k\subset\mathbb N$, $A_{n_i}\in\sigma(X_{n_i})$, $$\mathbb P\left(\bigcap_{i=1}^k A_{n_i}\right)=\prod_{i=1}^k\mathbb P(A_{n_i}),$$ and your question is just a special case of the above As for notation, $\sigma(\sigma(X_1), \ldots, \sigma(X_n))$ really denotes $$\sigma\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^n \sigma(X_i)\right). $$ But we write $\sigma(X_1, \ldots, X_n)$ for brevity - just as we say e.g. "$X$ and $Y$ are independent" instead of "$\sigma(X)$ and $\sigma(Y)$ are independent."

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ So, to prove that $\sigma(X_{n+1})$ is independent of $\sigma(X_1,X_2,\dots,X_n)$, I need to show that for any $A \in \sigma(X_{n+1})$ and $B \in \sigma\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^n \sigma(X_i)\right)$, $A$ and $B$ are independent. But how do you prove it though? Your answer just explains the notation $\endgroup$ – mononono Aug 19 '15 at 15:24
  • $\begingroup$ Take $n_1, \ldots, n_k$ as $1,2,\ldots,n+1$. $\endgroup$ – Math1000 Aug 19 '15 at 18:00
  • $\begingroup$ Taking $n_1,\dots,n_k$, as $1,2,\dots,n+1$ does not prove anything, though. $\endgroup$ – mononono Aug 19 '15 at 19:33

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.