3
$\begingroup$

If we have $X_k$ random variables with average $0$ and independent, why is the $\sum_{k=1}^n X_k$ a martingale for the sigma algebra $\mathcal F_n$ generated by $\{X_1,\ldots, X_n\}$?

I basically only have to prove that the expected value of $X_{n+1}$ knowing $\mathcal F_n$ is $0$, but somehow this isn't intuitive to me at all. Could anyone give me pointers on this?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ If the expected value of $X_{n+1}$ is $0$ but the expected value of $X_{n+1}$ knowing $\mathcal F_n$ is not $0$ then $X_{n+1}$ is not independent of $X_1,X_2,\ldots,X_n$ $\endgroup$ – Henry Jun 14 '12 at 22:01
3
$\begingroup$

Just check the definition. Let $S_n:=\sum_{k=1}^nX_k$.

  • We have that $S_n$ is integrable since so are $X_j$.
  • Let $n$ an integer. We have by linearity of conditional expectation that $$E[S_{n+1}\mid\mathcal F_n]=E[S_n+X_{n+1}\mid\mathcal F_n]=E[S_n\mid\mathcal F_n]+ E[X_{n+1}\mid\mathcal F_n].$$ Since $S_n$ is $\mathcal F_n$ measurable, we have $E[S_n\mid\mathcal F_n]=S_n$ and since $X_{n+1}$ is independent of $\mathcal F_n$, we have that $E[X_{n+1}\mid \mathcal F_n]=E[X_{n+1}]=0$.
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Alright thanks, now I have another question: if I change the definition of F(n) so that it's any sigma-algebra that can measure X1, ..., Xn, do I still have this result? It seems that now we don't have X(n+1) independent of F(n), since F(n) can't be defined with just X1, ..., Xn $\endgroup$ – lezebulon Jun 14 '12 at 22:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The result may be not true, for example if you take $X_n$ non-zero and $\mathcal F_n=\mathcal F$ which makes all $X_n$ measurable. $\endgroup$ – Davide Giraudo Jun 14 '12 at 22:14

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.