Question
Constants satisfy , , and for all , , , . Let the discrete-time Markov chain have state space with transition probabilities:
Let , and denote , . Prove that:
(2) is recurrent if and only if .
(20 points)
Step-by-step solution
Step 1. Establish the difference equation. Denote as the probability of reaching state before starting from state . For , by the law of total probability applied to the one-step transition: Since , we have . Substituting and simplifying: That is:
Step 2. Solve for the general term. Let . By the recurrence relation: Denote (with ), then . For any , the telescoping sum gives: By the definition of in the problem, can be expressed as (note: the index correspondence matches the structure of the final result). For notational simplicity, write , so . The function in the problem serves as the scale function.
Step 3. Substitute the boundary conditions. The boundary conditions are: 1. (starting at , state is reached immediately, so holds) 2. (starting at , state is already reached, so does not hold)
Using the form (the constant absorbs and index adjustments, since the solution space of the difference equation is one-dimensional linear): When : Solving: . Substituting into the expression for : This proves:
Step 4. Prove the recurrence condition. The random walk is recurrent if and only if the probability of eventually reaching state 0 from state 1 equals 1 (i.e., 0 is recurrent, hence all states are recurrent). Denote as the probability of eventually reaching 0 from 1. Since as : Using the result from part (1) with : Examine the limit : - If , then , so . The probability is 1, and the process is recurrent. - If , then . Since is strictly increasing, , so . The probability is less than 1, and the process is transient. In conclusion, the necessary and sufficient condition for recurrence is .
Final answer
(1) QED. (2) QED.
Marking scheme
The following rubric is designed for this problem:
1. Checkpoints (max 7 pts total)
Score exactly one chain; take the maximum subtotal among chains; do not add points across chains.
Chain A: Difference Equation Method
- Establish the difference relation (1 pt): Using the total probability formula, write the recurrence for (e.g., ), and use to simplify to the first-order difference form .
- Solve for the general solution structure (2 pts): Use iterated multiplication to derive , and identify the general solution form (or equivalent telescoping sum form).
- Substitute boundary conditions (1 pt): Correctly apply boundary conditions to solve for the constants and obtain the target fraction.
Chain B: Martingales and Optional Stopping Theorem
- Verify the martingale property (2 pts): Verify that is a martingale (or local martingale) for this Markov chain, i.e., prove or equivalent.
- Apply the Optional Stopping Theorem (1 pt): Apply the Optional Stopping Theorem to the stopping time , establishing .
- Solve for the probability (1 pt): Algebraically solve for and simplify to the target form.
(2) Prove the recurrence criterion (max 3 pts)
- Establish the criterion [additive] (1 pt): Clearly state that recurrence is equivalent to the probability of returning to from some state (e.g., or ) before reaching infinity being 1, i.e., .
- Limit analysis [additive] (2 pts): Examine the limiting behavior of the formula from (1) as . If the argument shows that when the limit is 1, AND when the limit is less than 1, award full marks. Note: If only the sufficiency or necessity half is discussed, award 1 pt.
Total (max 7)
2. Zero-credit items
- Only copying the relations or the definition of given in the problem, without any derivation.
- In part (2), only writing the general theorem statement about recurrence of birth-death processes (e.g., ) without connecting it to the conclusion from part (1).
- Attempting to prove recurrence by finding a stationary distribution , but failing to show or leaving the logic incomplete.
3. Deductions
- Boundary condition error: Setting boundary conditions backwards (e.g., ) when solving the equation, causing sign or meaning errors in the final result. (-1 pt)
- Logic gap: In part (2), not performing case analysis on the limiting behavior of (tending to infinity vs. finite constant), directly asserting the limit equals 1. (-1 pt)
- Concept confusion: In part (2), incorrectly believing that convergence of corresponds to recurrence (reversed conclusion), or confusing recurrence with positive recurrence (the problem only asks about recurrence). (-1 pt)