5
$\begingroup$

The reflection principle of Brownian motion states that Brownian motion reflected at some stopping time $\tau$ is still a Brownian motion.

The proof found in Mörters & Peres (as well as in several other books), rests on the fact that the concatenation mapping, which takes a continuous path $\{g(t) : t \geq 0\}$ and glues it to the end point of a finite continuous path$\{f(t) : 0 \leq t \leq \tau\}$ to form a new continuous path, is measurable.

I don't see how to prove that the concatenation mapping is measurable.


Formally, the reflection principle states (I follow Schilling & Partzsch):

Let $(B(t), \mathcal{F}_t)_{t \geq 0}$ be a standard, $d$-dimensional Brownian motion and let $\tau$ be an a.s. finite stopping time. Consider the process $$ W(t,\omega) := \begin{cases} B(t,\omega), & 0 \leq t < \tau(\omega) \leq +\infty \\ 2B(\tau(\omega), \omega) - B(t,\omega), & \tau(\omega) \leq t < \infty \end{cases} $$ Then $(W(t))_{t \geq 0}$ is again a standard Brownian motion.

To prove this theorem we may assume, without loss of generality, that $\tau(\omega) < \infty$ for all $\omega \in \Omega$, and we define the mapping $\Phi : \mathbf{C}_{(0)}\times[0,\infty)\times\mathbf{C}_{(0)} \rightarrow \mathbf{C}_{(0)}$, where $\mathbf{C}_{(0)} := \{f \in \mathbf{C}[0,\infty) : f(0) = 0\}$, thus $$ \Phi(f,t,g) := \begin{cases} f(s), & 0 \leq s < t \\ f(t) + g(s - t), & t \leq s < \infty \end{cases} $$

It is claimed that $\Phi$ is $\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})\otimes\mathcal{B}[0,\infty)\otimes\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})/\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})$ measurable.

Schilling and Partzsch offer the following hint for proving this fact: equip $\mathbf{C}_{(0)}\times[0,\infty)\times\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ with the topology of locally uniform convergence (in $\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$) and pointwise convergence (in $[0,\infty)$).

I'd appreciate help in proving why $\Phi$ is measurable, either by following Schilling & Partzsch's cue, or by another method. Additionally, if it makes life easier, it can be assumed that $d = 1$.


Works cited

  • Mörters, Peter and Peres, Yuval. Brownian Motion. The version freely available from Peres's home page. Accessed 2014-02-18. (Theorem 2.19, pp. 44-45)
  • Schilling, René L. and Partzsch, Lothar. Brownian Motion - An introduction to stochastic processes. De Gruyter. 2012. (Theorem 6.12, pp. 71-72)
$\endgroup$
10
$\begingroup$

THE MAIN RESULT

Theorem Employing the notation and terminology introduced in the original post, we have: $\Phi$ is $\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})\otimes\mathcal{B}[0,\infty)\otimes\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})/\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})$ measurable.

Proof (For a listing of pertinent results, notations and definitions consult the next section, "Auxiliary facts and definitions". References cited below - e.g. [K], [M] - are listed in full at the bottom of this post in the section "Works cited".)

I will prove only the case $d = 1$.

As suggested in [S] p. 72, it suffices to show that $\Phi$ is continuous w.r.t. the product topology $\mathcal{T}$ on $\mathbf{C}_{(0)} \times [0,\infty) \times \mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ where $\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ is equipped with the $\mathcal{O}_\rho$ topology, and $[0,\infty)$ is equipped with the standard, Euclidean topology, since if $\Phi$ is $\mathcal{T}/\mathcal{O}_\rho$-continuous, then by lemma 16 ("continuity and measurability"), $\Phi$ is $\sigma(\mathcal{T})/\sigma(\mathcal{O}_\rho)$-measurable, but by lemma 15 ("product and Borel $\sigma$-fields) and in light of proposition 8 ("$\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ is a Polish space") we have $\sigma(\mathcal{T}) = \sigma(\mathcal{O}_\rho)\otimes\mathcal{B}[0,\infty)\otimes\sigma(\mathcal{O}_\rho)$ and by definition 7, $\sigma(\mathcal{O}_p) = \mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})$.

Now, to prove that $\Phi$ is $\mathcal{T}/\mathcal{O}_\rho$-continuous, let $(f^*, t^*, g^*) \in \mathbf{C}_{(0)} \times [0,\infty) \times \mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ and let $\varepsilon \in (0,\infty)$. We shall define some $\delta \in (0,\infty)$, such that for all $(f, t, g) \in \mathbf{C}_{(0)} \times [0,\infty) \times \mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ with $\rho(f, f^*), |t - t^*|, \rho(g, g^*) < \delta$, we will have $$ \rho(\Phi(f,t,g), \Phi(f^*, t^*, g^*)) < \varepsilon $$

Choose $k, n \in \mathbb{N}_1$ such that

a) $t^* + 1/8 \leq k$,

b) $(k + 1)2^{-k} \leq \varepsilon$

c) $k \leq n$

d) Whenever $s, s' \in [0, k]$ are such that $|s - s'| < 2^{- (n + 2)}$, $|g^*(s) - g^*(s')| < 2^{- (k + 2)}$

And define $\delta := 2^{- (n + 2)}$.

Let $(f, t, g) \in \mathbf{C}_{(0)} \times [0,\infty) \times \mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ be such that $\rho(f, f^*), |t - t^*|, \rho(g, g^*) < \delta$, and set $$ \begin{aligned} \phi & := \Phi(f,t,g) \\ \phi^* & := \Phi(f^*, t^*, g^*) \\ m & := \min(t, t^*) \\ M & := \max(t, t^*) \end{aligned} $$ Note that $M \leq k$.

We have $$ \sup_{0 \leq s \leq k}|\phi(s) - \phi^*(s)| = \\ \max(\sup_{0 \leq s \leq m}|\phi(s) - \phi^*(s)|, \sup_{m \leq s \leq M}|\phi(s) - \phi^*(s)|, \sup_{M \leq s \leq k)} |\phi(s) - \phi^*(s)|) $$

Now, by lemma 6a ("Equivalence of $\rho$ and $\sup$"), $$ \sup_{0 \leq s \leq m}|\phi(s) - \phi^*(s)| = \sup_{0 \leq s \leq m}|f(s) - f^*(s)| < 2^{- (n + 2)} < 2^{-k} $$

Secondly, we have (by lemma 6a and by the assumptions on $k$ and on $n$), $$ \sup_{m \leq s \leq M} |\phi(s) - \phi^*(s)| \leq \sup_{m \leq s \leq M} |f(s) - f^*(s)| + \sup_{0 \leq s \leq 2^{- (n + 2)}} |g^*(s)| + \sup_{0 \leq s \leq 2^{- (n + 2)}} |g(s) - g^*(s)| \\ < \frac{2^{-n}}{4} + \frac{2^{-k}}{4} + \frac{2^{-n}}{4} < 2^{-k} $$

Thirdly, we have (again, by lemma 6a and by the assumptions on $k$ and on $n$), $$ \sup_{M \leq s \leq k} |\phi(s) - \phi^*(s)| \leq \sup_{M \leq s \leq k} |f(s) - f^*(s)| + \sup_{0 \leq s \leq k - M} |g(s) - g^*(s)| \\ + \sup_{0 \leq s \leq k - m}|g^*(s + 2^{- (n + 2)}) - g^*(s)| < \frac{2^{-n}}{4} + \frac{2^{-n}}{4} + \frac{2^{-k}}{4} < 2^{-k} $$

In conclusion, $$ \sup_{0 \leq s \leq k} |\phi(s) - \phi^*(s)| < 2^{-k} $$

Hence, by lemma 6b, $\rho(\phi, \phi^*) < (k + 1)2^{-k} \leq \varepsilon$.

Q.E.D.


AUXILIARY FACTS AND DEFINITIONS

Definition 1 ($\pi_t$, the canonical projection onto the $t$th coordinate). ([S], section 4.1, p. 40) Setting $I := [0,\infty)$, denote by $\pi_t : (\mathbb{R}^d)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^d$, $\omega \mapsto \omega(t)$ the canonical projection onto the $t$th coordinate.

Definition 2 (The product $\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{B}^I(\mathbb{R}^d)$). ([S], section 4.1, p. 40) The natural $\sigma$-algebra on the infinite product $(\mathbb{R}^d)^I$ is the product $\sigma$-algebra $$ \mathcal{B}^I(\mathbb{R}^d) := \sigma \{\pi_t^{-1}(B) : B \in \mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}^d), t \in I\} = \sigma \{\pi_t : t \in I\} $$

Definition & Proposition 3 (The trace $\sigma$-algebra). (a: [S2] Example 3.3 (vi), p. 16; b: [H] Theorem E, p. 25) Let $\Omega$ be some non-empty set, let $\mathcal{F}$ be a $\sigma$-algebra over $\Omega$ and let $S \subseteq \Omega$.

a) $S \cap \mathcal{F} := \{S \cap T : T \in \mathcal{F}\}$ (called the trace $\sigma$-algebra of $S$ w.r.t. $\mathcal{F}$) is a $\sigma$-algebra over $S$.

b) If $\mathcal{E} \subseteq \mathcal{F}$ is a generator of $\mathcal{F}$ (i.e. if $\mathcal{F} = \sigma(\mathcal{E})$), then $S \cap \mathcal{F} = \sigma(S \cap \mathcal{E})$.

Corollary 4 ($\mathbf{C}_{(0)} \cap \mathcal{B}^I(\mathbb{R}^d) = \sigma(\pi_t\mid_{\mathbb{C}_{(0)}} : t \in I)$). ([S] section 4.1, p. 41) $$ \mathbf{C}_{(0)} \cap \mathcal{B}^I(\mathbb{R}^d) = \sigma(\pi_t\mid_{\mathbb{C}_{(0)}} : t \in I) $$

Definition & Proposition 5 ($\rho$, the locally uniform convergence metric). (Based on, but not identical to, [S] section 4.1, p. 41) The function $\rho: \mathbf{C}_{(0)} \rightarrow [0,\infty)$, $$ \rho(w,v) := \sum_{n = 1}^\infty \left(2^{-n} \wedge \sup_{0 \leq t \leq n}|w(t) - v(t)|\right) $$ is a metric on $\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$.

Lemma 6 (Equivalence of $\rho$ and $\sup$). Let $n \in \mathbb{N}_1$ and let $w,v \in \mathbf{C}_{(0)}$.

a. If $\rho(w,v) < 2^{-n}$, $\sup_{0 \leq t \leq n}|w(t) - v(t)| < 2^{-n}$.

b. If $\sup_{0 \leq t \leq n}|w(t) - v(t)| < 2^{-n}$, $\rho(w,v) < (n + 1) 2^{-n}$.

Proof of lemma 6

a. Assume that $\rho(w,v) < 2^{-n}$. Suppose, by way of contradiction, that $\sup_{0 \leq t \leq n}|w(t) - v(t)| \geq 2^{-n}$. Then $$ \rho(w,v) \geq 2^{-n} \wedge \sup_{0 \leq t \leq n} |w(t) - v(t)| = 2^{-n} $$ contrary to the assumption.

b. Assume that $\sup_{0 \leq t \leq n}|w(t) - v(t)| < 2^{-n}$. Then $$ \rho(w, v) \leq \sum_{m = 1}^n 2^{-n} + \sum_{m = n+1}^\infty 2^{-m} = n2^{-n} + 2^{-n} $$

Q.E.D.

Definition 7 ($\mathcal{O}_\rho$, $\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})$). ([S] section 4.1, p. 41) Denote by $\mathcal{O}_\rho$ the topology induced by $\rho$ and consider the Borel $\sigma$-algebra $\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)}) := \sigma(\mathcal{O}_\rho)$ on $\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$.

Proposition 8 ($\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ is a Polish space). ([S] section 4.1, p. 41) Equipped with the metric $\rho$ defined above, $\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$ becomes a Polish space, i.e. a complete, separable metric space.

Lemma 9 ($\mathbf{C}_{(0)}\cap\mathcal{B}^I(\mathbb{R}^d) = \mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})$). ([S] Lemma 4.1, p. 41) We have $$ \mathbf{C}_{(0)}\cap\mathcal{B}^I(\mathbb{R}^d) = \mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)}) $$

Proposition 10 (A Brownian motion $\omega \mapsto (t \mapsto B(\omega, t))$ is $\mathcal{F}/\mathbf{C}_{(0)}$-measurable). ([S] top paragraph on p. 42) A standard, $d$-dimensional Brownian motion $(B(t))_{t \geq 0}$ over the probability space $(\Omega, \mathcal{F}, P)$, when considered as a function $\in \Omega \mapsto \mathbf{C}_{(0)}$, is $\mathcal{F}/\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{C}_{(0)})$-measurable.

Definition 11 (Box topology). ([M] p. 114) Let $\{X_\alpha\_{\alpha \in J}$ be an indexed family of topological spaces. Let us take as a bases for a topology on the product space $\prod_{\alpha \in J}X_\alpha$ the collection of all sets of the form $\prod_{\alpha \in J}U_\alpha$ where $U_\alpha$ is open in $X_\alpha$, for each $\alpha \in J$. The topology generated by this basis is called the box topology.

Definition 12 (Product topology, product space). ([M] p. 114) Let $\mathcal{S}_\beta$ denote the collection $$ \mathcal{S}_\beta := \{\pi_\beta^{-1}(U_\beta) \mid U_\beta \textrm{ open in } X_\beta \} $$ and let $\mathcal{S}$ denote the union of these collections, $\mathcal{S} := \bigcup_{\beta \in J}\mathcal{S}_\beta$. The topology generated by the sub basis $\mathcal{S}$ is called the product topology. In this topology, $\prod_{\alpha \in J} X_\alpha$ is called a product space.

Theorem 13 (Comparison of the box and product topologies). ([M] Theorem 19.1, p. 115) The box topology on $\prod X_\alpha$ has as basis all sets of the form $\prod U_\alpha$, where $U_\alpha$ is open in $X_\alpha$ for each $\alpha$. The product topology on $\prod X_\alpha$ has as basis all sets of the form $\prod U_\alpha$, where $U_\alpha$ is open in $X_\alpha$ for each $\alpha$ and $U_\alpha$ equals $X_\alpha$ except for finitely many values of $\alpha$.

Corollary 14 (Equality of the box and product topologies for finite products). ([M] p. 115) For finite products $\prod_{\alpha = 1}^n X_\alpha$, the two topologies are precisely the same.

Lemma 15 (Product and Borel $\sigma$-fields). ([K] Lemma 1.2, p. 3) If $S_1, S_2, \dots$ are separable metric spaces with induced topologies $\mathcal{T}_1, \mathcal{T}_2, \dots$, respectively, and if $\mathcal{T}$ is the product topology on $S_1 \times S_2 \times \cdots$, then $$ \sigma(\mathcal{T}) = \sigma(\mathcal{T}_1) \otimes \sigma(\mathcal{T}_2) \otimes \cdots $$

Lemma 16 (Continuity and measurability). ([K] Lemma 1.5, p. 4) Let $f$ be a continuous mapping between two topological spaces $S$ and $T$ with Borel $\sigma$-fields $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$. Then $f$ is $\mathcal{S}/\mathcal{T}$-measurable.


WORKS CITED

[H] Halmos, Paul R. Measure Theory. Springer-Verlag, 1974

[K] Kallenberg, Olav. Foundations of Modern Probability. 2nd edition. Springer, 2002

[M] Munkres, James R. Topology. 2nd edition. Prentice Hall, 2000

[S] Schilling, René L. and Partzsch, Lothar. Brownian motion - an introduction to stochastic processes. De Gruyter, 2012

[S2] Schilling, René L. Measures, integrals and martingales. Cambridge University Press, 2011

$\endgroup$

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.