• $(\Omega,\mathcal A,\operatorname P)$ be a probability space
  • $\mathcal F$ be a $\sigma$-algebra on $\Omega$ with $\mathcal F\subseteq\mathcal A$
  • $X_n,X$ be non-negative random variables on $(\Omega,\mathcal A,\operatorname P)$

The monotone convergence theorem for the conditional expectation states, that if $X_n\uparrow X$ almost surely, then $$\operatorname E\left[X_n\mid\mathcal F\right]\stackrel{n\to\infty}\to\operatorname E\left[X\mid\mathcal F\right]\;.$$

Clearly, by the monotonicity of the conditional expectation, $$Z:=\lim_{n\to\infty}\operatorname E\left[X_n\mid\mathcal F\right]$$ exists. Since each $\operatorname E\left[X_n\mid\mathcal F\right]$ is $\mathcal F$-measurable by definition, $Z$ is $\mathcal F$-measurable, too.

Why is it not that clear, that $$\operatorname E\left[X_n\mid\mathcal F\right]\uparrow Z\;?\tag{1}$$ All proofs I've read so far only state, that there is a modification (version) of $Z$ with $(1)$.

Clearly, the conditional expectation is only almost everywhere uniquely determined. So, the monotonicity only yields $$\operatorname E\left[X_n\mid\mathcal F\right]\le \operatorname E\left[X_{n+1}\mid\mathcal F\right]$$ on $\Omega\setminus N_n$ for some $\operatorname P$-null set $N_n\subseteq\Omega$. However, since $$N:=\bigcup_nN_n$$ is a $\operatorname P$-null set, too, we should be able to immediately conclude, that $(1)$ holds on $\Omega\setminus N$, i.e. almost everywhere.

So, what am I missing?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It remains to show that $Z=E[X|{\mathcal F}]$. $\endgroup$ – John Dawkins Sep 29 '15 at 15:25

As pointed out by John Dawkins, we have to prove that $Z=\mathbb E\left[X\mid\mathcal F\right]$, which is not clear a priori. This relies on $$\mathbb E\left[Z\mathbf 1_{F}\right]= \lim_{n\to +\infty}\mathbb E\left[\mathbb E\left[X_n\mid\mathcal F\right]\mathbf 1_{F}\right]=\lim_{n\to +\infty}\mathbb E\left[X_n\mathbf 1_{F}\right]=\mathbb E\left[X\mathbf 1_{F}\right]$$ for $F\in\mathcal F$. The first and third equal sign are due to the monotone convergence, the second by definition of conditional expectation.

| cite | improve this answer | |

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.