4
$\begingroup$

Given measurable spaces $(\Omega_k,\mathcal {F_k })_{k=1 } ^n$, $P_1 $ a probability measure on $\Omega_1 $, $P_2 $ a transition kernel from $\mathcal {F_1}$ to $\mathcal {F_2 }$,$P_3$ a transition kernel from $\mathcal {F_1}\otimes \mathcal {F_2} $ to $\mathcal {F_3}$ ...$P_n $ a transition kernel from $\mathcal {F_1}\otimes \ldots\otimes \mathcal {F_{n-1 }} $ to $\mathcal {F_n } \ $. Here $ \ P_m $ is a transition kernel from $\mathcal {F_1}\otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal {F_{m-1 }} $ to $\mathcal F_m $ means that for every $B \in \mathcal {F_m } , \ P_m( \ , B) $ is a measurable function from $\Omega_1 \times \ldots \times \Omega_{m-1 } $ to $[0,1]$ and for every $(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_{m-1 } ) \in \Omega_1 \times \ldots \times \Omega_{m-1 } $ a probability measure on $\mathcal {F_m} $.

I would like to show that $$P(B)=\int P_1(d\omega_1) \int P_2(\omega_1,d \omega_2) \ldots \int 1_B(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_n)P_n(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_{n-1 } , d \omega_n)$$ defines a measure on $\Omega_1 \times \ldots\times \Omega_n $

This should be done by an argument using induction. That is one shows that $P$ is a countably additive set function on the set of measurable rectangles $B_0\times \ldots\times B_n$ (and then extend this set function by the usual arguments). To show countable additivity of $P $ on measurable rectangles we derive this for $n=1 $ and then extended the result to an arbitrary number $n$ with an argument using induction. And this inductive step is what I need help with.

For the base case $n=1 $ one do as follows:

First one shows that $\omega_1 \mapsto \int 1_B(\omega_1,\omega_2)P_2(\omega_1,d \omega _2)$ is $\mathcal F_1 $ measurable and this is done exactly as usually done in a first step in Fubini's theorem. Then noting that $$B \mapsto \int P_1(d \omega_1)\int 1_B(\omega_1,\omega_2)P_2(\omega_1,d \omega _2)$$ is nonnegative and monotone all we need to verify is the $\sigma $-additivity. This follows from the monotone convergence theorem:

\begin{align*}\int P_1(d \omega_1)\int 1_{\cup_{k=1}^{\infty }F_k} (\omega_1,\omega_2)P_2(\omega_1,d \omega _2) &=\int P_1(d \omega_1)\sum_{k=1 }^ {\infty } \int 1_{F_k} (\omega_1,\omega_2)P_2(\omega_1,d \omega _2) \\ &=\sum_{k=1 }^ {\infty }\int P_1(d \omega_1) \int 1_{F_k} (\omega_1,\omega_2)P_2(\omega_1,d \omega _2). \end{align*}

And the inductive step should be something like: assume that $$Q(B)=\int P_1(d\omega_1) \int P_2(\omega_1,d \omega_2)\ldots\int 1_B(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_{n-1 } )P_{n-2 } (\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_{n-2 } , d \omega_{n-1 } )$$ defines a measure on $\Omega_1 \times \ldots\times \Omega_{n-1 }$ then

\begin{align*} & \int P_1(d\omega_1) \int P_2(\omega_1,d \omega_2)\ldots\int 1_{B_0 \times \ldots \times B_n}(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_n)P_n(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_{n-1 } , d \omega_n) \\ &=\int 1_{B_0 \times \ldots \times B_{n-1}} \left(\int 1_{B_n } P_n(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_{n-1 } , d \omega_n) \right) Q(d \omega_1,\ldots,d \omega_{n-1 } ) \end{align*} And we would then be in a similar situation as in the base case.

My question is: If this is correct, how is the equality motivated? Or if not, how should the inductive step be?

Thanks in advance!

$\endgroup$
1
+50
$\begingroup$

Let's start with a technical lemma which we will use several times:

Lemma. Let $(\Omega_i,\mathcal{F}_i)$, $i=1,2$,be measurable spaces, and let $P$ a transition kernel from $\mathcal{F}_1$ to $\mathcal{F}_2$. If $$X:(\Omega_1 \times \Omega_2, \mathcal{F}_1 \otimes \mathcal{F}_2) \to (\mathbb{R},\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}))$$ is a bounded measurable mapping then $$(\Omega_1,\mathcal{F}_1) \ni \omega_1 \mapsto \int_{\Omega_2} X(\omega_1,\omega_2) \, P(\omega_1,d\omega_2) \in (\mathbb{R},\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}))$$ is measurable.

Idea of proof: For $X=1_A 1_B$ with $A \in \mathcal{F}_1$ and $B \in \mathcal{F}_2$ the assertion is immediate and then we can extend it using a classical monotone class argument.


For measurable spaces $(\Omega_i,\mathcal{F}_i)$, $i \in \{0,\ldots,n\}$, and transition kernels $P_i$ from $\mathcal{F}_0 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{i-1}$ to $\mathcal{F}_i$ set

$$Q_n(\omega_0,B) := \int P_1(\omega_0,d\omega_1) \int P_2(\omega_0,\omega_1,d\omega_2) \ldots \int 1_B(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_n) \, P_n(\omega_0,\ldots,\omega_{n-1},d\omega_n)$$

Claim: For each $n \in \mathbb{N}$ it holds for any choice of measurable spaces and transition kernels that $Q_n$ is a transition kernel from $\mathcal{F}_0$ to $\mathcal{F}_1 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_n$.

Base: Since $Q_1(\omega_0,B) = P_1(\omega_0,B)$, the assertion is obvious for $n=1$.

Inductive step: Assume that the assertion holds for some $n \in \mathbb{N}$. Let $(\Omega_k,\mathcal{F}_k)$, $k \leq n+1$, be measurable spaces, and $P_i$ transition kernels from $\mathcal{F}_0 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{i-1}$ to $\mathcal{F}_i$. For fixed $(\omega_0,\omega_1) \in \Omega_0 \times \Omega_1$ consider

\begin{align*} &U((\omega_0,\omega_1),A) \\ &:= \int P_2(\omega_0,\omega_1,d\omega_2) \int P_3(\omega_0,\omega_1,\omega_2,d\omega_3) \ldots \int 1_{A}(\omega_2,\ldots,\omega_{n+1}) \, P_{n+1}(\omega_0,\ldots,\omega_n,d\omega_{n+1}) \end{align*}

for $A \in \mathcal{F}_2 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{n+1}$. Since $P_i(\omega_0,\omega_1,\cdot)$, $i \in \{2,\ldots,n+1\}$ are transition kernels from $\mathcal{F}_2 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{i-1}$ to $\mathcal{F}_i$, it follows from our induction hypothesis that $U$ is a transition kernel from $\mathcal{F}_0 \otimes \mathcal{F}_1$ to $\mathcal{F}_2 \otimes \ldots \times \mathcal{F}_{n+1}$. By the above lemma, this implies that $$(\Omega_0 \times \Omega_1, \mathcal{F}_0 \otimes \mathcal{F}_1) \ni (\omega_0,\omega_1) \mapsto \int_{\Omega_2 \times \ldots \times \Omega_{n+1}} 1_A(\omega_0,\omega_1,\tilde{\omega}) \, U((\omega_0,\omega_1),d\tilde{\omega}) \tag{1}$$ is measurable for any $A \in \mathcal{F}_0 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{n+1}$. In particular, $Q_{n+1}(\omega_0,B)$ is well defined and

\begin{align*} Q_{n+1}(\omega_0,B) &= \int_{\Omega_1} \int_{\Omega_2 \times \ldots \times \Omega_{n+1}} 1_B(\omega_1,\tilde{\omega}) \, U((\omega_0,\omega_1),d\tilde{\omega}) \, P_1(\omega_0,d\omega_1) \tag{2} \end{align*}

for any $B \in \mathcal{F}_1 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{n+1}$ and $\omega_0 \in \Omega_0$.

Now let's show that $Q_{n+1}$ has all the desired properties. Let $(B_j)_{j \in \mathbb{N}} \subseteq \mathcal{F}_1 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{n+1}$ be pairwise disjoint sets and set $B:= \bigcup_{j \geq 1} B_j$. Since $$1_B = \sum_{j \geq 1} 1_{B_j}$$ it follows from the monotone convergence theorem that

$$\int_{\Omega_2 \times \ldots \times \Omega_n} 1_B(\omega_1,\tilde{\omega}) \, U((\omega_0,\omega_1),d\tilde{\omega}) = \sum_{j \geq 1} \int_{\Omega_2 \times \ldots \times \Omega_{n+1}} 1_{B_j}(\omega_1,\tilde{\omega}) \, U((\omega_0,\omega_1),d\tilde{\omega})$$

for any $(\omega_0,\omega_1) \in \Omega_0 \times \Omega_1$; note that we can apply the monotone convergence theorem because we have already shown that $U((\omega_0,\omega_1),\cdot)$ is a measure. Integrating both sides with respect to $P_1$ we find from $(2)$ that

$$Q_{n+1}(\omega_0,B) = \int_{\Omega_1} \sum_{j \geq 1} \left( \int_{\Omega_2 \times \ldots \times \Omega_{n+1}} 1_{B_j}(\omega_1,\tilde{\omega}) \, U((\omega_0,\omega_1),d\tilde{\omega}) \right) P(\omega_0,d\omega_1).$$

Applying once more the monotone convergence theorem we get

\begin{align*} Q_{n+1}(\omega_0,B) & = \sum_{j \geq 1} \int_{\Omega_1}\left( \int_{\Omega_2 \times \ldots \times \Omega_{n+1}} 1_{B_j}(\omega_1,\tilde{\omega}) \, U((\omega_0,\omega_1),d\tilde{\omega}) \right) P(\omega_0,d\omega_1) \\ &= \sum_{j \geq 1} Q_{n+1}(\omega_0,B_j). \end{align*}

This proves the $\sigma$-addivity of $Q_{n+1}(\omega_0,\cdot)$. Finally, we note that it follows from $(1)$, $(2)$ and the above lemma that $$(\Omega_0,\mathcal{F}_0) \ni \omega \mapsto Q_{n+1}(\omega_0,B)$$ is measurable for any $B \in \mathcal{F}_1 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{n+1}$. Consequently, $Q_{n+1}$ is a transition kernel from $\mathcal{F}_0$ to $\mathcal{F}_1 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_{n+1}$.


Choosing $\Omega_0$ as a trivial space (e.g. consisting of a single element), it follows immediately that

$$P_n(B) = \int P_1(d\omega_1) \int P_2(\omega_1,d\omega_2) \ldots \int 1_B(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_n) \, P_n(\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_{n-1},d\omega_n)$$

is a measure on $(\Omega_1 \times \ldots \times \Omega_n,\mathcal{F}_1 \otimes \ldots \otimes \mathcal{F}_n)$ for any probability measure $P_1$ on $(\Omega_1,\mathcal{F}_1)$ and any transition kernels $P_i$.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you! Clear and detailed as ever! I have a small question for the countable additivity, how do you get $Q_{n+1}(\omega_0,\cup _{k=1 } ^{\infty} B^{(k) } ) = \int \sum _{k=1 } ^{\infty } 1_{B^{(k)} _1}(\omega_1) U((\omega_0,\omega_1),B_2 ^{(k) } \times \ldots \times B_{n+1}^{(k)} ) \, P_1(\omega_0,d\omega_1).$? On which we then could apply the monotone convergence theorem. $\endgroup$ – MrFranzén May 17 '19 at 13:07
  • $\begingroup$ On the other hand when I think about it, could we instead apply the monotone convergence theorem $n+1 $ times to "pull" the limit out from the $n+1 $ integrals. Here using that for any $k $ and for $(\omega_1,...,\omega_k)$ the map $(\omega_{k+1 } ,...,\omega_{n+1 } )\mapsto \int P_{k+1 } ...\int \sum_{k=1 } ^m 1_{B_1^{(k)} \times ... \times B_{n+1 }^{(k)} } P_{n+1 } (\omega_0,...\omega_n, d \omega_{n+1 } ) $ is increasing with $m $. (Or maybe this last claim would need some motivation??) $\endgroup$ – MrFranzén May 17 '19 at 13:08
  • $\begingroup$ @MrFranzén See my edited answer, I hope it's fine now. Let me know if something seems out of place (... there are still some typos, I guess... sorry already in advance) $\endgroup$ – saz May 17 '19 at 15:35
  • $\begingroup$ Excellent! There is one minor thing. I believe that we get $(2) $ first for sets of the form $B_1\times C $ for sets $B_1 \in \mathcal {F_1 } $ and $C \in \mathcal {F_2} \times ... \times \mathcal {F_{n+1 } } $, since we have to use $1_{B_1 \times C } = 1_{B_1 } 1 _C $ and then we extend the class of sets for which the equation holds using a standard $\pi - \lambda $ argument. $\endgroup$ – MrFranzén May 18 '19 at 6:35
  • $\begingroup$ And lots of thanks again! $\endgroup$ – MrFranzén May 18 '19 at 6:37

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.