Question
Let nonneg. random variables be independent and identically distributed. Define .
(1) What is the necessary and sufficient condition for to be a martingale? In that case, what can you conclude from the martingale convergence theorem?
Step-by-step solution
Let . Then , since is -measurable and is independent of .
For to be a martingale, we need a.s., i.e., a.s. Since , this is equivalent to .
If , then is a nonneg. martingale. By Doob's martingale convergence theorem, there exists such that a.s. with .
By Kakutani's theorem for product martingales: - If (equiv. ), then converges in with . - Otherwise a.s. with .
Since are i.i.d., by Jensen's inequality. If , then , so a.s. If , then , i.e., a.s., so .
Conclusion: is a martingale iff . In that case, is a nonneg. martingale converging a.s. to some , with: - If a.s., then ; - If , then a.s.
Final answer
is a martingale if and only if . Conclusion: is a nonneg. martingale converging a.s. to , with: - If a.s., then ; - If , then a.s.
Marking scheme
1. Checkpoints (max 7 pts total)
Part 1: Necessary and sufficient condition for martingale (3 pts)
- Conditional expectation derivation: Use independence to derive (or equivalent). [1 pt]
- Identify the condition: State is a martingale iff . [2 pts]
- If only the answer is given with no derivation, cap at 1 pt.
Part 2: Martingale convergence theorem conclusions (4 pts)
- Convergence existence: Cite Doob's theorem (using or boundedness) to conclude a.s. [1 pt]
- Limit value analysis (3 pts) (score one path only):
- *Path A (Kakutani / product martingale)*: Use Jensen's inequality or Kakutani's theorem to show in the non-degenerate case, hence a.s. [2 pts] Complete case analysis ( gives ; otherwise ). [1 pt]
- *Path B (Log + LLN)*: Take logarithms, use Jensen to show , hence . [2 pts] Complete case analysis. [1 pt]
- Merely asserting "limit is 0 or 1" without Jensen or any probabilistic argument: 0 pts for this part.
Total (max 7)
2. Zero-credit items
- Merely copying the definition of or listing "i.i.d." conditions.
- Writing the martingale definition without substituting the specific variables.
- Claiming converges to its expectation 1 (confusing r.v. limit with expectation limit).
3. Deductions
- Claiming converges in (only true when ; generally ): -2 pts.
- Confusing random variables with constants: -1 pt.
- Missing "almost surely" qualifier: -1 pt.
- Not excluding the trivial case when applying Jensen: -1 pt.