To introduce this tool we need one more notion we say

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: j E [(Mn X Mk )Mj |Av ] E [(Mn Mk )|Av ] = 0 x proves the desired formula. The last result has the following useful corollary E (Mn M0 )2 = n X E (Mk Mk 2 1) (5.6) k=1 Proof. Expanding out the square of the sum E n X k=1 Mk Mk 1 ! 2 = n X k=1 +2 E (Mk X Mk E [(Mk 1j<kn and the second sum vanishes by Lemma 5.8. 2 1) Mk 1 )(Mj Mj 1 )] 165 5.3. GAMBLING STRATEGIES, STOPPING TIMES 5.3 Gambling Strategies, Stopping Times The first result should be intuitive if we think of supermartingale as betting on an unfavorable game: the expected value of our fortune will decline over time. Theorem 5.9. If Mm is a supermartingale and m n then EMm E Mn . Proof. It is enough to show that the expected value decreases with each time step, i.e., EMk E Mk+1 . To do this, we will again use the notation from (5.5) Av = {Xn = xn , Xn 1 = xn 1 , . . . , X0 = x0 , M0 = m} and note that linearity in the conditioning set (Lemma 5.3) and the definition of conditional expectation imply X E (Mk+1 Mk ) = E (Mk+1 Mk ; Av ) v = X P (Av )E (Mk+1 Mk |Av ) 0 v since supermartingales have E (Mk+1 Mk |...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/06/2014 for the course MATH 4740 at Cornell.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online