A functional limit theorem for coin tossing Markov chains
Stefan Ankirchner, Thomas Kruse, Mikhail Urusov

TL;DR
This paper establishes a functional limit theorem for a class of Markov chains that move up or down by state-dependent amounts, enabling approximation of complex continuous Markov processes, including those with irregular features.
Contribution
It introduces a new functional limit theorem for Markov chains with state-dependent jumps, extending approximation capabilities to irregular continuous Markov processes.
Findings
Approximate all one-dimensional regular continuous strong Markov processes in natural scale.
Applicable to processes not characterized by stochastic differential equations.
Illustrated with sticky Brownian motion and Cantor set slowed Brownian motion.
Abstract
We prove a functional limit theorem for Markov chains that, in each step, move up or down by a possibly state dependent constant with probability , respectively. The theorem entails that the law of every one-dimensional regular continuous strong Markov process in natural scale can be approximated with such Markov chains arbitrarily well. The functional limit theorem applies, in particular, to Markov processes that cannot be characterized as solutions to stochastic differential equations. Our results allow to practically approximate such processes with irregular behavior; we illustrate this with Markov processes exhibiting sticky features, e.g., sticky Brownian motion and a Brownian motion slowed down on the Cantor set.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
A functional limit theorem for
coin tossing Markov chains
Stefan Ankirchner Stefan Ankirchner, Institute of Mathematics, University of Jena, Ernst-Abbe-Platz 2, 07745 Jena, Germany. Email: [email protected], Phone: +49 (0)3641 946275.
Thomas Kruse Institute of Mathematics, University of Gießen, Arndtstr. 2, 35392 Gießen, Germany. Email: [email protected], Phone: +49 (0)641 9932102.
Mikhail Urusov Mikhail Urusov, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Str. 9, 45127 Essen, Germany. Email: [email protected], Phone: +49 (0)201 1837428.
Abstract
We prove a functional limit theorem for Markov chains that, in each step, move up or down by a possibly state dependent constant with probability , respectively. The theorem entails that the law of every one-dimensional regular continuous strong Markov process in natural scale can be approximated with such Markov chains arbitrarily well. The functional limit theorem applies, in particular, to Markov processes that cannot be characterized as solutions to stochastic differential equations. Our results allow to practically approximate such processes with irregular behavior; we illustrate this with Markov processes exhibiting sticky features, e.g., sticky Brownian motion and a Brownian motion slowed down on the Cantor set.
Keywords: one-dimensional Markov process; speed measure; Markov chain approximation; functional limit theorem; sticky Brownian motion; sticky reflection; slow reflection; Brownian motion slowed down on the Cantor set.
2010 MSC: Primary: 60F17; 60J25; 60J60. Secondary: 60H35; 60J22.
Introduction
Let be an iid sequence of random variables, on a probability space with a measure , satisfying . Given , and a function , we denote by the Markov chain defined by
[TABLE]
We choose as the Markov chain’s index set the set of non-negative multiples of because we interpret as the length of a time step. We extend to a continuous-time process by linear interpolation, i.e., we set
[TABLE]
Let and let be a family of real functions and the associated family of extended Markov chains defined as in (2). A fundamental problem of probability theory is to find conditions on such that the laws of the processes , , converge in some sense as . In this article we provide an asymptotic condition on the family guaranteeing that the laws of the processes , , converge as to the law of a one-dimensional regular continuous strong Markov process (in the sense of Section VII.3 in [39] or Section V.7 in [40]). In what follows we use the term general diffusions for the latter class of processes. Recall that a general diffusion has a state space that is an open, half-open or closed interval . We denote by the interior of , where . Moreover, the law of any general diffusion is uniquely characterized by its speed measure on , its scale function and its boundary behavior. Throughout the introduction we assume that is in natural scale and that every accessible boundary point is absorbing (see the beginning of Section 1 and Section 6 on how to incorporate diffusions in general scale and with reflecting boundary points). This setting covers, in particular, solutions of driftless SDEs with discontinuous and fast growing diffusion coefficient (see Section 2) and also diffusions with sticky features (see Section 7), which cannot be modeled by SDEs whenever a sticky point is located in the interior of the state space.
Our main result, Theorem 1.1, shows that if a family of functions satisfies for all , the equation
[TABLE]
with a precision of order uniformly in over compact subsets of (see Condition (A) below for a precise statement), then the associated family converges in distribution, as , to the general diffusion with speed measure . We show that for every general diffusion a family of functions satisfying (3) exists implying that every general diffusion can be approximated by a Markov chain of the form (1). Equation (3) dictates how to compute the functions and therefore paves the way to approximate the distribution of a general diffusion numerically (see, e.g., Section 8).
The central idea in the derivation of Equation (3) is to embed for every the Markov chain into with a sequence of stopping times. To explain this idea assume for the moment that the state space is . For every let and then recursively define as the first time exits the interval after . It follows that the discrete-time process has the same law as the Markov chain . Instead of controlling now directly the spatial errors , we first analyze the temporal errors , . We show that for every , the expected time it takes started in to leave the interval is equal to . In particular, if satisfies (3) for all , it follows that for all the time lag between two consecutive stopping times is in expectation equal to . In this case we refer to as Embeddable Markov Chain with Expected time Lag (we write shortly ).
For some diffusions one can construct EMCEL approximations explicitly (see, e.g., Section 7). For cases where (3) cannot be solved in closed form, we perform a perturbation analysis and show that it suffices to find for all , a number satisfying (3) with an error of order uniformly in belonging to compact subsets of . We prove that for the associated stopping times the temporal errors , , converge to [math] as in every -space, . This ultimately implies convergence of to in distribution as .
To illustrate the benefit of the perturbation analysis, we construct in Section 8 approximations for a Brownian motion slowed down on the Cantor set (see Figure 3). Moreover, we note that our main result, Theorem 1.1, is not only applicable to perturbations of the EMCEL approximation but can also be used to derive new convergence results for other approximation methods such as, e.g., weak Euler schemes (see Corollary 2.3).
The idea to use embeddings in order to prove a functional limit theorem goes back to Skorokhod. In the seminal book [42] scaled random walks are embedded into Brownian motion in order to prove Donsker’s invariance principle. In [5] we embed Markov chains into the solution process of an SDE and prove a functional limit theorem where the limiting law is that of the SDE. In [42] and [5] the approximating Markov chains have to be embeddable with a sequence of stopping times such that the expected distance between two consecutive stopping times is exactly equal to , the time discretization parameter. In contrast, in the present article we require that the expected distance between consecutive embedding stopping times is only approximately equal to . We show that for the convergence of the laws it is sufficient to require that the difference of the expected distance and is of the order . Moreover, compared to [5], we allow for a larger class of limiting distributions. Indeed, our setting includes processes that cannot be characterized as the solution of an SDE, e.g., diffusions with sticky points.
There are further articles in the literature using random time grids to approximate a Markov process, under the additional assumption that it solves a one-dimensional SDE. In [17] the authors first fix a finite grid in the state space of the diffusion. Then they construct a Bernoulli random walk on this grid that can be embedded into the diffusion. The authors determine the expected time for attaining one of the neighboring points by solving a PDE.
[37] describes a similar approximation method for the Cox-Ingersoll-Ross (CIR) process. Also here the authors first fix a grid on and then construct a random walk on the grid that can be embedded into the CIR process. In contrast to [17], the authors in [37] compute the distributions of the embedding stopping times (and not only their expected value) by solving a parabolic PDE. In the numerical implementation of the scheme the authors then draw the random time increments from these distributions and thereby obtain a scheme that is exact along a sequence of stopping times. Note that in contrast to [17] and [37], in our approach the space grid is not fixed a priori. Instead, we approximately fix the expected time lag between the consecutive embedding stopping times.
Yet a further scheme that uses a random time partition to approximate a diffusion with discontinuous coefficients is suggested in [36]. In contrast to our approach the distribution of the time increments is fixed there. More precisely, the authors of [36] use the fact that the distribution of sampled at an independent exponential random time is given by the resolvent of the process. Consequently, if it is possible to generate random variables distributed according to the resolvent kernel, one obtains an exact simulation of at an exponentially distributed time. Iterating this procedure and letting the parameter of the exponential distribution go to infinity provides an approximation of .
We remark that embeddings along random time grids have been recently employed in [20] and [21] in order to obtain convergence rates of (F)BSDE approximations driven by Bernoulli increments.
Recall that, while approximating solutions of SDEs on deterministic time grids usually employs Euler-type schemes (1) with Gaussian increments , we use Bernoulli increments in our paper. In this connection, we would like to mention that, from the numerical perspective, convergence results along equidistant time grids, including approximations by the weak Euler schemes with Bernoulli increments, can be found, e.g., in Section 14.1 of [32]. From the more theoretical perspective, we refer to Theorem 7.4.1 in [16] and Theorem IX.4.8 in [28], which are some general functional limit theorems of the Trotter-Kato type for approximating diffusions. A discussion of how to approximate controlled diffusions by Markov chains with Bernoulli increments can be found in [35]. Another perspective on schemes with Bernoulli increments is suggested in [11] and [22], where, on certain machines (like field programmable gate arrays), such schemes are shown to be more efficient for simulation algorithms.
While in our paper a continuous-time Markov process is approximated via (linearly-interpolated) discrete-time Markov chains, there is an alternative approach, pioneered in [43], where the approximating processes are themselves continuous-time Markov processes. For a recent account, see [10] and references therein. A generalization of the latter approach for variable-speed random walks on trees contained in [6] is worth mentioning as well.
The article is organized as follows. In Section 1 we rigorously formulate and discuss the functional limit theorem. In Section 2 we discuss some of its implications for diffusions that can be described as solution of SDEs. In Sections 3 and 4 we explain, for a given general diffusion, how to embed an approximating coin tossing Markov chain into the diffusion and prove some properties of the embedding stopping times. Section 5 provides the proof of the functional limit theorem, where we, in particular, need the material discussed in Sections 3 and 4. The functional limit theorem is shown under the additional assumption that if a boundary point is attainable, then it is absorbing. In Section 6 we explain how one can extend the functional limit theorem to general diffusions with reflecting boundary points. In the last two sections we illustrate our main result with diffusions exhibiting some stickiness. In Section 7 we construct coin tossing Markov chains approximating sticky Brownian motion, with and without reflection, respectively. In Section 8 we first describe a Brownian motion that is slowed down on the Cantor set, and secondly we explicitly construct coin tossing Markov chains that approximate this process arbitrarily well.
1 Approximating general diffusions with Markov chains
Let be a one-dimensional continuous strong Markov process in the sense of Section VII.3 in [39]. We refer to this class of processes as general diffusions in the sequel. We assume that the state space is an open, half-open or closed interval . We denote by the interior of , where , and we set . Recall that by the definition we have for all . We further assume that is regular. This means that for every and we have that , where . If there is no ambiguity, we simply write in place of . Moreover, for in we denote by the first exit time of from , i.e. . Without loss of generality we suppose that the diffusion is in natural scale. If is not in natural scale, then there exists a strictly increasing continuous function , the so-called scale function, such that , , is in natural scale. Let be the speed measure of the Markov process (see VII.3.7 and VII.3.10 in [39]).111There are different conventions concerning the normalization of the speed measure. We follow the convention of [39] and [8] and note that our speed measure is thus twice as large as the one for example found in [40]. Recall that for all in we have
[TABLE]
Finally, we also assume that if a boundary point is accessible, then it is absorbing. We drop this assumption in Section 6, where we extend our approximation method to Markov processes with reflecting boundaries. The extension works for both instantaneous and slow reflection.
Let and suppose that for every we are given a measurable function such that and for all we have . We refer to each function as a scale factor. We next construct a sequence of Markov chains associated to the family of scale factors . To this end we fix a starting point of . Let be an iid sequence of random variables, on a probability space with a measure , satisfying . We denote by the Markov chain defined by
[TABLE]
We extend to a continuous-time process by linear interpolation, i.e., for all , we set
[TABLE]
To highlight the dependence of on the starting point we also sometimes write .
To formulate our main result we need the following condition.
Condition (A) For all compact subsets of it holds that
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.1**.**
*Assume that Condition (A) is satisfied. Then, for any , the distributions of the processes under converge weakly to the distribution of under , as ; i.e., for every bounded and continuous functional222As usual, we equip with the topology of uniform convergence on compact intervals, which is generated, e.g., by the metric
where denotes the sup norm in . , it holds that*
[TABLE]
Remark 1.2**.**
To better explain Condition (A), for every in , we introduce the Green function of by the formula
[TABLE]
(recall that is in natural scale) and observe that, for all ,
[TABLE]
(see, e.g., Section VII.3 in [39]). It follows that, for any and such that , it holds
[TABLE]
Thus, Condition (A) is an analytic condition that is equivalent to requiring that the scale factors satisfy
[TABLE]
for any compact subset of .
Remark 1.3**.**
It is worth noting that Condition (A) is, in fact, nearly necessary for weak convergence (8) (see Example 2.1).
Remark 1.4**.**
For all , it holds that
[TABLE]
This yields an alternative representation of Condition (A) which is occasionally used below.
It is important to note that for every speed measure there exists a family of scale factors such that Condition (A) is satisfied and hence every general diffusion can be approximated by Markov chains of the form (5). Indeed, for all , let and
[TABLE]
and denote by the associated family of processes defined in (5) and (6). Then the proof of Corollary 1.5 below shows that for all compact subsets of there exists such that for all , it holds that
[TABLE]
In particular, the family satisfies Condition (A) and we show in Section 3 below that the Markov chain is embeddable into with a sequence of stopping times with expected time lag . We refer to , , as EMCEL approximations and write shortly .
Corollary 1.5**.**
For every the distributions of the EMCEL approximations under converge weakly to the distribution of under as .
Proof.
Let be a compact subset of . Without loss of generality assume that with . Let . It follows with dominated convergence that the function
[TABLE]
is continuous. In particular, it is bounded away from zero, i.e., there exists such that for all it holds that . Next observe that for all the function is continuous and strictly increasing. Hence for all , the supremum in (11) is a maximum and it holds that In particular, Condition (A) is satisfied and the statement of Corollary 1.5 follows from Theorem 1.1. ∎
2 Application to SDEs
A particular case of our setting is the case, where is a solution to the driftless SDE
[TABLE]
where is a Borel function satisfying the Engelbert-Schmidt conditions
[TABLE]
( denotes the set of Borel functions locally integrable on ). Under (13)–(14) SDE (12) has a unique in law weak solution (see [15] or Theorem 5.5.7 in [30]). This means that there exists a pair of processes on a filtered probability space , with satisfying the usual conditions, such that is an -Brownian motion and satisfies SDE (12). The process possibly reaches the endpoints or in finite time. By convention we force to stay in (resp., ) in this case. This can be enforced in (12) by extending to with . In this example is a regular continuous strong Markov process with the state space being the interval with the endpoints and (whether and belong to the state space is determined by the behavior of near the boundaries). Moreover, is in natural scale, and its speed measure on is given by the formula
[TABLE]
In this situation a change of variables shows that it holds for all , that
[TABLE]
Condition (A) hence becomes that for every compact subset of it holds that
[TABLE]
Example 2.1** (Brownian motion).**
In the special case where is a Brownian motion (i.e., , ), Condition (A) requires that for all compact sets it holds that as . In particular, Condition (A) is satisfied for the choice , , , and we recover from Theorem 1.1 Donsker’s functional limit theorem for the scaled simple random walk.
Moreover, in the case of a Brownian motion it is natural to restrict ourselves to space-homogeneous (i.e., constant) scale factors , , so that Condition (A) takes the form . It is straightforward to show that the latter condition is also necessary for the weak convergence of approximations (5)–(6) driven by space-homogeneous scale factors to the Brownian motion.
Example 2.2** (Geometric Brownian motion).**
Let and assume that satisfies for all that . Then the solution of (12) with positive initial value is a geometric Brownian motion. Its state space is and both boundary points are inaccessible. Note that for all , it holds that
[TABLE]
Hence, Condition (A) requires that for all compact sets it holds that
[TABLE]
To obtain the EMCEL approximation of we solve for all , the equation in and obtain . Note that also the usual choice , , , which corresponds to the weak Euler scheme for geometric Brownian motion, satisfies (17).
Convergence of the weak Euler scheme
Throughout this subsection we assume that . A common method to approximate solutions of SDEs is the Euler scheme. For equations of the form (12) with initial condition the Euler scheme with time step is given by
[TABLE]
Weak Euler schemes are variations of the Euler scheme, where the normal increments , , are replaced by an iid sequence of centered random variables with variance . Therefore, with the choice , , , the Markov chain defined in (5) represents a weak Euler scheme with Rademacher increments.
In this subsection we show how Theorem 1.1 can be used to derive new convergence results for weak Euler schemes. To this end let the setting of Section 2 be given and let , , . Then it follows from (16) that Condition (A) is equivalent to assuming that for every compact subset we have
[TABLE]
as .
Suppose that is continuous, let be compact and let . Then is bounded on and since every continuous function is uniformly continuous on compact sets, we obtain that there exists such that for all , , it holds that
[TABLE]
By (13) and the continuity of the function is strictly bounded away from [math] on every compact subset of and hence we obtain that there exists such that for all it holds that
[TABLE]
It follows with (18) that Condition (A) is satisfied. Therefore we obtain the following Corollary of Theorem 1.1.
Corollary 2.3**.**
Assume the setting of Section 2 with and that is continuous. Let satisfy for all , . Then for all the distributions of the processes under converge weakly to the distribution of under , as .
Remark 2.4**.**
Corollary 2.3 complements convergence results for the Euler scheme for example obtained in [45] and [25]. Theorem 2.2 in [45] shows weak convergence of the Euler scheme if has at most linear growth and is discontinuous on a set of Lebesgue measure zero. Theorem 2.3 in [25] establishes almost sure convergence of the Euler scheme if is locally Lipschitz continuous. Moreover, [25] allows for a multidimensional setting and a drift coefficient. In contrast, Corollary 2.3 above applies to the weak Euler scheme and does not require linear growth or local Lipschitz continuity of .
Remark 2.5**.**
As stated in Corollary 1.5, EMCEL approximations can be constructed for every general diffusion. In particular, they can be used in cases where is not continuous and where (weak) Euler schemes do not converge (see, e.g., Section 5.4 in [4]). In Sections 7 and 8 we consider further irregular examples.
3 Embedding the chains into the Markov process
In this section we construct the embedding stopping times. Throughout the section we assume the setting of Section 1.
We need to introduce an auxiliary subset of . To this end, if , we define, for all ,
[TABLE]
where we use the convention . If , we set . Similarly, if , then we define, for all ,
[TABLE]
If , we set . It is worth noting that is inaccessible if and only if for all ; and, similarly, is inaccessible if and only if for all . This is verified in Remark 4.2 below. The auxiliary subset is defined by
[TABLE]
Now we have everything at hand to start constructing a sequence of embedding stopping times. Suppose starts at a point and fix . Set . Let . Recall that we have
[TABLE]
(see Remark 1.2). We now define by distinguishing two cases.
Case 1: (i.e., or ). In this case we set .
Case 2: (i.e., and ( or )). In this case we deterministically extend so as to make it have expectation . Observe that by the definition of and we have in this case . Moreover, we can assume in this case that it must hold that (only in the case , and this probability is , but we exclude this case by considering a sufficiently small , so that ; notice that Condition (A) implies that, for any , ). We define by
[TABLE]
Observe that the definition implies and that the three random variables , and have all the same law.
We can proceed in a similar way to define the subsequent stopping times. Let . Suppose that we have already constructed . We first define . On the event we set . On the event we extend as follows. Note that takes only finitely many values. Let be a possible value of such that or . Consider the event . Observe that . We extend on the event by setting
[TABLE]
(notice that ). This implies that on the event . Moreover, the processes and have the same law. To sum up, we have the following.
Proposition 3.1**.**
For all and the sequence of stopping times satisfies
** 2. 2.
For all we have
[TABLE]
4 Higher moment estimates for exit times
In this section we provide some moment estimates for the exit times of from intervals. We use the estimates in the next section to prove convergence in probability of to zero, where is the sequence of embedding stopping times from Section 3. This is a crucial ingredient in the proof of our main result, Theorem 1.1.
We introduce the function defined by
[TABLE]
where for we set . Notice that, for , the function is decreasing on and increasing on . For our analysis the key property of is that it makes the process , , a -local martingale (see Lemma 4.1 below). Moreover, plays a central role in Feller’s test for explosions: for any ,
[TABLE]
(see, e.g., Lemma 2.1 in [2] or Theorem 3.3 in [3]). Consequently, is finite on . Notice that for all and we have
[TABLE]
where .
The following lemma identifies a local martingale associated to .
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let . Then the process , , is a -local martingale.
Proof.
Let with . We first show that , , is a -martingale. It follows from (9) that
[TABLE]
where, in the third equality, we use the representation for (and the similar one for ) and apply Fubini’s theorem. Thus,
[TABLE]
Next, we observe that for all it holds
[TABLE]
On the event we have , where denotes the shift operator for (see Chapter III in [39]). The Markov property and (24) imply that on the event we have -a.s.
[TABLE]
Formula (23) yields for all
[TABLE]
Since for all , equation (4) implies that on the event we have -a.s.
[TABLE]
Together with (25) this yields for all
[TABLE]
which shows that , , is a -martingale.
The statement of the lemma follows via a localization argument. If , then choose a decreasing sequence with and . If , set for all . Similarly, if , then choose an increasing sequence with and , and if , then set for all . The sequence of stopping times , , is then a localizing sequence for the process , . ∎
Remark 4.2**.**
We still owe verifying that, for and introduced in Section 3, is inaccessible if and only if for all ; and is inaccessible if and only if for all . Let us prove this equivalence for the left boundary point. To this end, the following identity is helpful: for and such that , it holds
[TABLE]
Indeed, if , then (27) follows from (10) and (24). If we only have , then (27) follows by the monotone convergence argument.
Now, if , then the equivalence is clear. Let . Consider a small enough . For the integral in the definition of , we have due to (27)
[TABLE]
where , and hence the second term on the right-hand side is finite, i.e., the integral is infinite if and only if the first term on the right-hans side is infinite. We conclude by applying Feller’s test (21): is inaccessible if and only if the integral in (28) is infinite for all small , and the latter holds if and only if for all .
The next result provides conditions guaranteeing that moments of a stopping time can be bounded against an integral with respect to the distribution of .
Theorem 4.3**.**
Let and let . Let be a stopping time such that , -a.s. and the process is of class (D) under . Then , -a.s. and it holds that
[TABLE]
Proof.
If , then and (29) is satisfied. For the remainder of the proof we assume that . We first show by contradiction that -a.s. So assume that . Since on we necessarily have , we obtain
[TABLE]
For any let . Then we obtain that
[TABLE]
which contradicts the uniform integrability of . Thus, we proved that -a.s. and, in particular, that on the right-hand side of (29) is well-defined.
According to Lemma 4.1 the process , , is a -local martingale. The product formula yields for all
[TABLE]
Note that is a local martingale and let be a localizing sequence for it. Set for all . In particular, it holds for all . With inequality (30) and Hölder’s inequality we obtain for all that
[TABLE]
This implies for all
[TABLE]
By monotone convergence the left-hand side converges to as . Since the process is of class (D), it follows that the family is uniformly integrable. Vitali’s convergence theorem implies that as . Therefore we obtain
[TABLE]
which is precisely (32). ∎
Remark 4.4**.**
Under the assumption of Theorem 4.3 we have equality in (29) for , i.e., . Indeed, the inequality is provided by (29), while, for the reverse inequality , use that equality holds in (30) for , localize (30), compute expectations of the both sides and apply Fatou’s lemma.
From Theorem 4.3 we obtain the following moment estimate for first exit times.
Corollary 4.5**.**
Let , let and let be such that . Then it holds that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Clearly, , -a.s. Moreover, under , the process is bounded (see (21) and (22)) and hence of class (D). Inequality (32) then follows from Theorem 4.3. ∎
5 Proof of Theorem 1.1
In this section we prove Theorem 1.1 and show that under Condition (A) the processes converge in distribution to . We use the embedding stopping times constructed in Section 3 and control the temporal errors , , . To this end, for every we apply the Doob decomposition to the process and write , , for a martingale and a predictable process . Condition (A) guarantees that converges to [math] as (see Proposition 5.3 below). We show that also the martingale part can be nicely controlled (see Proposition 5.2 below).
For all let be the sequence of embedding stopping times defined in Section 3. Then we have the following result about the time lags , , , between consecutive embedding stopping times.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let , and . Then it holds that
[TABLE]
Proof.
By construction of the sequence (in particular, recall (19)) it holds for all that
[TABLE]
This and the strong Markov property of imply for all that
[TABLE]
Notice that
[TABLE]
because the function , , is convex, increasing and starts in zero. It follows from the triangle inequality, Corollary 4.5 and (35) that for all it holds
[TABLE]
Combining this with (34) completes the proof. ∎
Below, for a random variable , it is convenient to use the notation
[TABLE]
for all , even though it is not a norm for . Notice that for by the Jensen inequality.
Proposition 5.2**.**
Let . Then there exists a constant such that, for all , and , it holds that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Without loss of generality we consider . Throughout the proof we fix , , and let . For all we define and . Notice that is a -martingale. The Burkholder-Davis-Gundy inequality ensures that there exists a constant (only depending on ) such that
[TABLE]
This, together with Jensen’s inequality, proves that
[TABLE]
Proposition 5.3**.**
Let . Then, for all , and , it holds that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Without loss of generality we consider . Throughout the proof we fix , , and let . For all we define . The triangle inequality ensures that
[TABLE]
By Proposition 3.1, on the event we have
[TABLE]
On the event we have . Therefore,
[TABLE]
This proves (38). ∎
By combining the two preceding theorems we obtain a result about uniform in convergence of the embedding stopping times in spaces , as . To this end, we impose a slightly stronger condition than Condition (A), namely,
[TABLE]
Corollary 5.4**.**
Assume (42). Let , and . Then it holds
[TABLE]
Proof.
The proof is an application of Propositions 5.2 and 5.3. The fact that the right-hand side of (38) converges to zero as is a direct consequence of (42) (also recall Remark 1.2). Similarly, (42) implies
[TABLE]
The remaining property
[TABLE]
(cf. (36)), follows from the fact that, by the definition of , we have
[TABLE]
This concludes the proof. ∎
Proof of Theorem 1.1.
For any , we define the continuous-time process by linear interpolation of . More precisely, we set
[TABLE]
Notice that , , and Proposition 3.1 easily extends to
[TABLE]
Therefore, in order to prove Theorem 1.1, it is sufficient to show that the processes converge to the process in probability uniformly on compact intervals, i.e., that, for all , it holds
[TABLE]
where denotes the sup norm in . In what follows, we use the notation
[TABLE]
for this mode of convergence.
1. In the first step, we prove (43) under assumption (42), which is stronger than Condition (A). To this end, fix and . Take an arbitrary , , and choose such that , where
[TABLE]
Corollary 5.4 implies
[TABLE]
hence, there exists such that whenever , where
[TABLE]
A somewhat tedious check shows that, if ,
[TABLE]
Thus, we get whenever . This completes the proof of the first step.
2. We now prove (43) under Condition (A). Consider strictly monotone sequences and with and . We define compact subintervals of by setting , , and modified scale factors by setting
[TABLE]
, , where the scale factors , , are the ones from the EMCEL algorithm (recall (11)). Let be the associated sequences of the embedding stopping times and the analogues of the process for the modified scale factors , , . Since the scale factors satisfy Condition (A), the modified scale factors satisfy (42) for each . By the first step of the proof,
[TABLE]
for any fixed .
Fix and . For any , we define the events
[TABLE]
Notice that the expression in the above formula for is well-defined and finite. Indeed, this is the position of at an accessible boundary (because ), while an infinite boundary cannot be accessible (because is in natural scale). As -a.s., as , and is continuous, we can choose a sufficiently big such that and . We also take an arbitrary . Corollary 5.4 applied to the modified scale factors , which satisfy (42), yields that there exists such that, for any , we have
[TABLE]
For , we define the event
[TABLE]
(the notation means the complement of an event ). Notice that whenever . Furthermore, on we have either
[TABLE]
or
[TABLE]
Together with (44), this proves as . As is arbitrary, we obtain (43). This concludes the proof. ∎
6 Reflecting boundaries
Throughout the preceding sections we assume that if a boundary point is accessible, then it is absorbing. In this section we explain how one can drop this assumption, i.e. how one can extend our functional limit theorem, Theorem 1.1, to Markov processes with reflecting boundaries.
The idea is to reduce the reflecting case to the inaccessible or absorbing case. Indeed, for every Markov process with reflecting boundaries one can find a Markov process on an extended state space and a Lipschitz function such that has inaccessible or absorbing boundaries and .
We illustrate the reduction for a Markov process in natural scale with state space , where is a reflecting boundary. We denote by the speed measure of . Since is non-absorbing, it must hold that . Notice that corresponds to instantaneous reflection, while to slow reflection.
To proceed with the construction, we first remark that it holds
[TABLE]
Indeed, in terms of the Feller boundary classification (see Table 15.6.2 in [31]), as the accessible boundary point is reflecting, it can only be regular, which implies (45).
Now let be a Markov process in natural scale with state space and speed measure satisfying
[TABLE]
which is a valid speed measure on (i.e., (4) holds) due to (45). Then has the same distribution as (see Proposition VII.3.10 in [39]).
Let satisfy the assumptions of Theorem 1.1. Then converges in distribution to as . This implies that the processes converge in distribution to as .
In a similar way, a Markov process on a bounded interval with endpoints and (), where is reflecting and is inaccessible (resp., absorbing), can be reduced to a Markov process with state space , which is the interval with endpoints and , where both these endpoints are inaccessible (resp., absorbing).
A Markov process with two reflecting boundaries can be reduced to a Markov process with state space . To explain this, suppose for simplicity that the state space of is . Define as the Markov process on with speed measure satisfying
[TABLE]
Let be the periodic function with period satisfying , . Then the process has the same distribution as (cf. Proposition VII.3.10 in [39]).
7 Examples with sticky points
In this section we apply Theorem 1.1 to sticky Brownian motions on and on , where the sticky point is zero. In the latter case one also speaks about slow (or sticky) reflection at [math]. Recent years have witnessed an increased interest in the sticky Brownian motion and related processes, see [29], [7], [14], [26], [12] and references therein. Newly, diffusions with slow reflection were applied in [13] to provide bounds (via sticky couplings) for the distance between two multidimensional diffusions with different drifts. Stickiness is a convenient concept for modeling repulsive interactions between particles, and, motivated by natural questions from physics, it is discussed in multi- and infinitedimensional situations in [18], [23], [24], [33], [34]. Diffusions with slow reflection also attracted interest in economic theory, where such processes characterize optimal continuation values in dynamic principal-agent problems (see, e.g., [46] and [38]).
On the contrary, the literature on approximations of diffusions with atoms in the speed measure is scarce. We remark that [1] provides a sequence of random walks that converges in distribution to the Brownian motion on sticky at zero. The random walks considered there are forced to stay in zero for some time whenever they visit zero. In contrast to our approach, the approximating processes are not Markov chains. [19] constructs Markov chains that converge in distribution to the Brownian motion on with slow reflection at [math]. The approximating Markov chains considered there exhibit sticky behavior in zero in the sense that once the Markov chains reach zero they stay there with positive probability also in the next time period. The recent work [9] proposes an approximation of the Brownian motion on with slow reflection at [math] by continuous-time pure jump Markov processes , , with uniform grids as state spaces. The jump times are exponentially distributed and the mean waiting time at the interior points is of order whereas it is of order at the origin [math].
7.1 Brownian motion on with sticky point [math]
Brownian motion on sticky at [math] is a Markov process in natural scale with state space and speed measure
[TABLE]
where and denotes the Lebesgue measure.333Since there exist different conventions concerning the normalization of the speed measure (cf. Footnote 1), our representation of in (46) may differ by a factor of from related representations found in the literature (cf., e.g., [7]). Such a process behaves like times a Brownian motion outside zero, but spends a positive amount of time at zero having no intervals of zeros. Notice that the bigger is, the less time spends at zero; corresponds to a standard Brownian motion (times ).
It is instructive to compute the function , , of (20)
[TABLE]
(, ) and to observe that, for any , the function has a kink at zero.
We now determine, for every , a function such that the associated Markov chain , defined in (5), belongs to EMCEL. Indeed, one can explicitly determine for all the real number satisfying
[TABLE]
We state the closed-form representations of in the next Lemma.
Lemma 7.1**.**
For all and let
[TABLE]
Then Equation (47) is satisfied for all and .
Proof.
Throughout the proof fix and . For every it holds that
[TABLE]
Assume first that . Then it holds that and hence (47) is satisfied. Next assume that . In this case it holds that . Moreover it holds that
[TABLE]
This proves (47) in the case . The proof is thus completed. ∎
Since satisfies Equation (47) exactly, it follows that Condition (A) is satisfied. Theorem 1.1 implies that the processes converge in distribution to as . Figure 1 depicts two realizations of a Brownian motion on sticky at [math] with and different values for as well as the empirical distribution function of with .
7.2 Brownian motion on with slow reflection at [math]
In this section we consider a Brownian motion on with slow reflection at [math]. We first define this process, as in Warren [44], as the solution of SDE (49) below. We subsequently show that its distribution is identical to the distribution of , where is the general diffusion analyzed in Section 7.1. From this perspective, the main difference between the processes studied in this section and those in Section 7.1 is the state space.
Let . According to Theorem IV.7.2 in [27] the stochastic differential equation
[TABLE]
possesses a weak solution that is unique in law. However, it is worth noting that neither existence of a strong solution nor pathwise uniqueness hold for (49) (see [14] and references therein). The next result shows that is a regular diffusion on and identifies the associated speed measure.
Lemma 7.2**.**
The solution of (49) is a regular continuous strong Markov process in natural scale with state space and with speed measure
[TABLE]
Proof.
Strong Markov property of is implied by the uniqueness in law for (49). Clearly, is regular with state space and in natural scale. By Itô’s formula, we have
[TABLE]
for functions . Therefore, the generator of takes the form
[TABLE]
for (this means that the function itself and its first and second derivative vanish at infinity) satisfying the boundary condition
[TABLE]
By Theorem VII.3.12 in [39], we have in the interior of the state space, i.e., for , while, by Proposition VII.3.13 in [39], it holds on the boundary. Together with (51), this implies (50) and concludes the proof. ∎
It follows from Section 6 that , where is a diffusion in natural scale with state space and speed measure , i.e., is the process studied in Section 7.1 (cf. (46)). In particular, can be approximated by , where each is the EMCEL constructed in Section 7.1.
Warren [44] determines for all the conditional law of given the driving Brownian motion . As a consequence, we obtain for all closed form representations of the cumulative distribution function and the expected value of . The precise formulas are provided in Lemma 7.3 below, where we, without loss of generality, consider . The notations for the probability measure and for the corresponding expectation operator emphasize that the formulas are given for the case . We use these formulas to analyze the empirical rate of convergence of EMCEL approximations. The results are presented in Figure 2.
Lemma 7.3**.**
Let be a solution of (49) with . For every the cumulative distribution function of satisfies
[TABLE]
where is the cumulative distribution function of the standard normal distribution. Moreover, it holds that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Fix throughout the proof. Lévy’s distributional theorem implies (see Theorem VI.2.3 in [39]). Then it follows from Theorem 1 in [44] that for all it holds
[TABLE]
This proves (52). Moreover, this implies that the density function of starting in [math] satisfies
[TABLE]
for all . Observe that for all it holds
[TABLE]
This implies for all that
[TABLE]
This and Fubini’s theorem prove that
[TABLE]
This completes the proof. ∎
Remark 7.4**.**
Another possibility to get (52) and (53) is as follows. An explicit formula for the transition density of a sticky Brownian motion is provided in Part I, Appendix 1, Section 8 of [8]. This yields formula (56) for the density of (notice that the factor , which is not present in [8], is due to the facts that the mentioned formula in [8] is given for a sticky Brownian motion on and the transition density in [8] is given with respect to the speed measure, i.e., twice the Lebesgue measure outside zero). Now (53) follows by the same calculation as above, while the distribution function (52) can be recovered by integrating the density and taking into account the atom at zero.
8 Brownian motion slowed down on the Cantor set
In this section we apply our results to construct a family of Markov chains that converge in distribution to the general diffusion on with speed measure , where is the Cantor distribution. Such a process can be understood as a Brownian motion slowed down on the Cantor set.
For later reference we briefly recall a way to construct the Cantor distribution. To this end let be the collection of all subsets of and let be the map given by
[TABLE]
Next, we define recursively a sequence of subsets of . Let and for let
[TABLE]
The Cantor set is defined as .
We define for all the probability measure on by . Note that is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure . It follows from the proof of Theorem 3.1 in [41] that the sequence converges in distribution to a probability measure on and that for all it holds
[TABLE]
Moreover, it holds that (in particular, is concentrated on ), and, for all , , i.e., is a singular-continuous measure.
Proposition 8.1**.**
Let be the measure on given by and let be the associated diffusion. Let be a function satisfying . Then there exists for all , a unique solution of the equation
[TABLE]
Let be the family of Markov chains defined in (5) and (6) (with scale factors , , given by the solution of (61)). Then for all the distributions of , , under converge weakly to the distribution of under , as .
Proof.
First observe that for all the mapping
[TABLE]
is continuous and strictly increasing. This ensures existence of a unique solution of (61). It follows from
[TABLE]
that for all , . Moreover, it follows that for all and it holds
[TABLE]
Next, observe that formula (27), definition (20) of and the fact that and do not possess atoms ensure that it holds for all and that
[TABLE]
This, (60) and the fact that show that, for all and , we have
[TABLE]
Combining (64) and (66) and using the assumption shows that
[TABLE]
Hence, Condition (A) is satisfied and weak convergence of to follows from Theorem 1.1. ∎
Proposition 8.1 provides the way to simulate approximations of the Brownian trajectories slowed down on the Cantor set (see Figure 3).
Acknowledgement
We thank the anonymous referee for comments that helped improve the exposition. Thomas Kruse and Mikhail Urusov acknowledge the support from the German Research Foundation through the project 415705084.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] M. Amir. Sticky Brownian motion as the strong limit of a sequence of random walks. Stochastic Process. Appl. , 39(2):221–237, 1991.
- 2[2] S. Ankirchner, N. Kazi-Tani, M. Klein, and T. Kruse. Stopping with expectation constraints: 3 points suffice. Electron. J. Probab. , 24:Paper No. 66, 16 pp., 2019.
- 3[3] S. Ankirchner, M. Klein, T. Kruse, and M. Urusov. On a certain local martingale in a general diffusion setting. Preprint, hal-01700656 , 2018.
- 4[4] S. Ankirchner, T. Kruse, and M. Urusov. Numerical approximation of irregular SD Es via Skorokhod embeddings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 440(2):692–715, 2016.
- 5[5] S. Ankirchner, T. Kruse, and M. Urusov. A functional limit theorem for irregular SD Es. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré Probab. Stat. , 53(3):1438–1457, 2017.
- 6[6] S. Athreya, W. Löhr, and A. Winter. Invariance principle for variable speed random walks on trees. The Annals of Probability , 45(2):625–667, 2017.
- 7[7] R. F. Bass. A stochastic differential equation with a sticky point. Electron. J. Probab. , 19:no. 32, 22, 2014.
- 8[8] A. N. Borodin and P. Salminen. Handbook of Brownian motion—Facts and Formulae . Probability and its Applications. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, second edition, 2002.
