Ito Lemma and identifying martingale parts
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose that $X_t$ is a càdlàg semi-martingale with decomposition
$$
X_t= X_0+ B_t + M_t.
$$
I know that using the Ito lemma for any $C^2$-function $f$,
$$
f(X_t)= f(X_0)\
+ int_{0^+}^tf_x(X_{s-})dB_s + int_{0^+}^t frac{f_{xx}}{2}(X_{s-})[M]_t\
+int_{0^+}^tf_x(X_{s-})dM_s\
\
+ sum_{0<sleq t}left(f(X_{s-}) - f(X_s)right) +f_x(X_{s-})Delta B_s +frac1{2}f_x(X_{s-})(Delta M)^2_s
\
+ sum_{0<sleq t} f_x(X_{s-})Delta M_s
$$
My partial Solution
Suppose that $X_t = X_0 +int_0^t mu(t,X_t)dt + int_0^t sigma(t,X_t)dW_t$, then
$$
int_0^tleft(f_x(X_t)mu(t,X_t) + f_{xx}frac{sigma(t,X_t)}{2}right)dt
$$
is the drift part and
$$
int_0^tf_{x}sigma(t,X_t)dW_t,
$$
is the local martingale part of $f(X_t)$. However, I am having trouble identifying which part is which in the general setting. I know that from the continuous case that the second line of the Ito Lemma is finite-variation and that the third is a martingale, but I am not sure which portions are local martingale or fv in the last 3 lines...
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales stochastic-integrals stochastic-analysis
edited Nov 19 at 7:19
TheBridge
3,74611324
asked Nov 17 at 19:58
AIM_BLB
2,3502718
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose that $X_t$ is a càdlàg semi-martingale with decomposition
$$
X_t= X_0+ B_t + M_t.
$$
I know that using the Ito lemma for any $C^2$-function $f$,
$$
f(X_t)= f(X_0)\
+ int_{0^+}^tf_x(X_{s-})dB_s + int_{0^+}^t frac{f_{xx}}{2}(X_{s-})[M]_t\
+int_{0^+}^tf_x(X_{s-})dM_s\
\
+ sum_{0<sleq t}left(f(X_{s-}) - f(X_s)right) +f_x(X_{s-})Delta B_s +frac1{2}f_x(X_{s-})(Delta M)^2_s
\
+ sum_{0<sleq t} f_x(X_{s-})Delta M_s
$$
My partial Solution
Suppose that $X_t = X_0 +int_0^t mu(t,X_t)dt + int_0^t sigma(t,X_t)dW_t$, then
$$
int_0^tleft(f_x(X_t)mu(t,X_t) + f_{xx}frac{sigma(t,X_t)}{2}right)dt
$$
is the drift part and
$$
int_0^tf_{x}sigma(t,X_t)dW_t,
$$
is the local martingale part of $f(X_t)$. However, I am having trouble identifying which part is which in the general setting. I know that from the continuous case that the second line of the Ito Lemma is finite-variation and that the third is a martingale, but I am not sure which portions are local martingale or fv in the last 3 lines...
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales stochastic-integrals stochastic-analysis
edited Nov 19 at 7:19
TheBridge
3,74611324
asked Nov 17 at 19:58
AIM_BLB
2,3502718
1
You should be more clear and direct about the question you are asking, which as I get it is : is it possible, directly from Ito's lemma, to identify the (local?)-martingale part of the process $f(X_t)$ ? Regards
– TheBridge
Nov 19 at 7:24
Yes, is that possible?
– AIM_BLB
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose that $X_t$ is a càdlàg semi-martingale with decomposition
$$
X_t= X_0+ B_t + M_t.
$$
I know that using the Ito lemma for any $C^2$-function $f$,
$$
f(X_t)= f(X_0)\
+ int_{0^+}^tf_x(X_{s-})dB_s + int_{0^+}^t frac{f_{xx}}{2}(X_{s-})[M]_t\
+int_{0^+}^tf_x(X_{s-})dM_s\
\
+ sum_{0<sleq t}left(f(X_{s-}) - f(X_s)right) +f_x(X_{s-})Delta B_s +frac1{2}f_x(X_{s-})(Delta M)^2_s
\
+ sum_{0<sleq t} f_x(X_{s-})Delta M_s
$$
My partial Solution
Suppose that $X_t = X_0 +int_0^t mu(t,X_t)dt + int_0^t sigma(t,X_t)dW_t$, then
$$
int_0^tleft(f_x(X_t)mu(t,X_t) + f_{xx}frac{sigma(t,X_t)}{2}right)dt
$$
is the drift part and
$$
int_0^tf_{x}sigma(t,X_t)dW_t,
$$
is the local martingale part of $f(X_t)$. However, I am having trouble identifying which part is which in the general setting. I know that from the continuous case that the second line of the Ito Lemma is finite-variation and that the third is a martingale, but I am not sure which portions are local martingale or fv in the last 3 lines...
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales stochastic-integrals stochastic-analysis
edited Nov 19 at 7:19
TheBridge
3,74611324
asked Nov 17 at 19:58
AIM_BLB
2,3502718
Suppose that $X_t$ is a càdlàg semi-martingale with decomposition
$$
X_t= X_0+ B_t + M_t.
$$
I know that using the Ito lemma for any $C^2$-function $f$,
$$
f(X_t)= f(X_0)\
+ int_{0^+}^tf_x(X_{s-})dB_s + int_{0^+}^t frac{f_{xx}}{2}(X_{s-})[M]_t\
+int_{0^+}^tf_x(X_{s-})dM_s\
\
+ sum_{0<sleq t}left(f(X_{s-}) - f(X_s)right) +f_x(X_{s-})Delta B_s +frac1{2}f_x(X_{s-})(Delta M)^2_s
\
+ sum_{0<sleq t} f_x(X_{s-})Delta M_s
$$
My partial Solution
Suppose that $X_t = X_0 +int_0^t mu(t,X_t)dt + int_0^t sigma(t,X_t)dW_t$, then
$$
int_0^tleft(f_x(X_t)mu(t,X_t) + f_{xx}frac{sigma(t,X_t)}{2}right)dt
$$
is the drift part and
$$
int_0^tf_{x}sigma(t,X_t)dW_t,
$$
is the local martingale part of $f(X_t)$. However, I am having trouble identifying which part is which in the general setting. I know that from the continuous case that the second line of the Ito Lemma is finite-variation and that the third is a martingale, but I am not sure which portions are local martingale or fv in the last 3 lines...
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales stochastic-integrals stochastic-analysis
stochastic-processes stochastic-calculus martingales stochastic-integrals stochastic-analysis
edited Nov 19 at 7:19
TheBridge
3,74611324
asked Nov 17 at 19:58
AIM_BLB
2,3502718
edited Nov 19 at 7:19
TheBridge
3,74611324
asked Nov 17 at 19:58
AIM_BLB
2,3502718
edited Nov 19 at 7:19
TheBridge
3,74611324
edited Nov 19 at 7:19
TheBridge
3,74611324
edited Nov 19 at 7:19
TheBridge
3,74611324
3,74611324
asked Nov 17 at 19:58
AIM_BLB
2,3502718
asked Nov 17 at 19:58
AIM_BLB
2,3502718
asked Nov 17 at 19:58
AIM_BLB
2,3502718
2,3502718
1
You should be more clear and direct about the question you are asking, which as I get it is : is it possible, directly from Ito's lemma, to identify the (local?)-martingale part of the process $f(X_t)$ ? Regards
– TheBridge
Nov 19 at 7:24
Yes, is that possible?
– AIM_BLB
yesterday
add a comment |
1
You should be more clear and direct about the question you are asking, which as I get it is : is it possible, directly from Ito's lemma, to identify the (local?)-martingale part of the process $f(X_t)$ ? Regards
– TheBridge
Nov 19 at 7:24
Yes, is that possible?
– AIM_BLB
yesterday
1
1
You should be more clear and direct about the question you are asking, which as I get it is : is it possible, directly from Ito's lemma, to identify the (local?)-martingale part of the process $f(X_t)$ ? Regards
– TheBridge
Nov 19 at 7:24
You should be more clear and direct about the question you are asking, which as I get it is : is it possible, directly from Ito's lemma, to identify the (local?)-martingale part of the process $f(X_t)$ ? Regards
– TheBridge
Nov 19 at 7:24
Yes, is that possible?
– AIM_BLB
yesterday
Yes, is that possible?
– AIM_BLB
yesterday
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3002746%2fito-lemma-and-identifying-martingale-parts%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
You should be more clear and direct about the question you are asking, which as I get it is : is it possible, directly from Ito's lemma, to identify the (local?)-martingale part of the process $f(X_t)$ ? Regards
– TheBridge
Nov 19 at 7:24
Yes, is that possible?
– AIM_BLB
yesterday