Press "Enter" to skip to content

Back to basics : local martingales

A martingale.

This post is inspired from the exam of my master course on stochastic calculus. The processes considered in this post are in continuous time, defined on a filtered probability space (Ω,F,(Ft)t0,P), adapted, and have almost surely continuous trajectories.

Local martingales. If (Mt)t0 is a martingale, the Doob stopping theorem states that if T is a stopping time, then the stopped process (MtT)t0 is again a martingale.

Stopping can be used in general to truncate the trajectories of a process with a cutoff, in order to gain more integrability or tightness, while keeping adaptation and continuity. Typically if (Xt)t0 is an adapted process, we could consider the sequence of stopping times (Tn)n0 defined by

Tn=inf{t0:|Xt|n},

which satisfies almost surely Tn↗+ as n and for which for all n the stopped process (XtTn)t0 is bounded by |X0|n. Since X is continuous, almost surely, for all t0, limnXtTn=Xt. We say that (Tn)n0 is a localizing sequence.

Now a local martingale is simply an adapted processes (Xt)t0 such that for all n0 the stopped process (XtTn)t0 is a (bounded) martingale.

Every martingale is a local martingale. However the converse is false, and strict local martingales do exist. We give below one of the most famous example. Local martingales also popup naturally in the construction of the Itô stochastic integral. We give below a simple example of a stochastic integral which is a strict local martingale.

Domination. If (Xt)t0 is a local martingale which is dominated by an integrable random variable, in the sense that Esupt0|Xt|<, then (Xt)t0 is a martingale, and in fact a uniformly integrable martingale. Namely, for all t0 and all s[0,t], by the martingale property for the stopped process and dominated convergence,

Xs=limnXsTn=limnE(XtTnFs)=E(limnXtTnFs)=E(XtFs).

Therefore strict local martingales are not dominated, their supremum is not integrable. However strict local martingales can be uniformly integrable, and even bounded in L2.

A strict local martingale bounded in L2. Let (Bt)t0 be a standard Brownian motion in R3 issued from xR3 with x0. Then the inverse Bessel process (|Bt|1)t0 is a well defined local martingale, bounded in L2, but is not a martingale.

Proof. Our first goal is to show that the process (|Bt|1)t0 is well defined, namely that B takes its values in D={xR3:x0}. For that we consider 0<r<|x|, and we define

Tr=inf{t0:|x+Bt|=r}.

The stopped process (Xt)t0=(BtTr)t0 takes its values in the open set D. Now, the function yDu(y)=|y|1 is harmonic, namely Δu=0 since

iu(y)=yi|y|3,and2i,iu(y)=32|y|33y2i|y||y|5.

Also, by the Itô formula, for all t0, using Xj,Xkt=Bj,BktTr=(tTr)1j=k,

u(Xt)=u(X0)+t0u(Xs)dXs+12tTr0Δu(Xs)ds.

The last integral vanishes because Δu=0 on D, hence

(u(Xt))t0=(|BtTr|1)t0

is a local martingale, bounded by the constant r1, thus it is a bounded martingale.

Let us compute now P(Tr<TR) for 0<r<|x|<R. Since a 1-dimensional Brownian motion almost surely escapes from every finite interval, the first component of our 3-dimensional Brownian motion started from x almost surely escapes from [R,R], and it follows that almost surely TR<. In particular almost surely either Tr<TR or Tr>TR and we cannot have Tr=TR. Next, we have first the immediate equation

1=P(Tr<TR)+P(Tr>TR).

On the other hand, by the Doob stopping theorem for the bounded martingale Y=(|BtTr|1)t0 and the finite stopping time TR, we get the new equation

1|x|=E(Y0)=E(YTR)=E(1|BTrTR|)=P(Tr<TR)r+P(Tr>TR)R.

Solving this couple of equations gives

P(Tr<TR)=R1|x|1R1r1.

Now Tr<TR if R>sups[0,BTr]|Bs|, hence {Tr<TR}↗R{Tr<}. It follows that

P(Tr<TR)↗R↗P(Tr<)

and thus, from the formula above,

P(Tr<)=limRP(Tr<TR)=|x|1r1=r|x|.

Now almost surely B is continuous and therefore {Tr<}↘r↘0+{T0<} and thus

P(T0<)=limr0+P(Tr<)=limr0+r|x|=0.

Therefore B takes its values in D, and the process (|Bt|1)t0 is well defined. This process is also adapted. It is a local martingale, localized by Tr with r{(|x|+n)1:n1}.

Let us show that limt|Bt|=+ almost surely. This is typical to dimension d3, related to transcience of Brownian motion. Indeed, since (|Bt|1)t0 is a non-negative local martingale, it is a super-martingale. This is easily seen by using a localization sequence and the Fatou lemma. It follows that almost surely it converges as t to an integrable random variable, hence, almost surely limt|Bt| exists in [0,+], and the convergence holds also in law and the limiting law can only be δ.

Let us show now that (|Bt|1)t0 is bounded in L2. By rotational invariance and scaling of Brownian motion, we can assume without loss of generality that x=(1,0,0). Since BtN(x,tI3), using spherical coordinates

y1=rcos(θ)sin(φ),y2=rsin(θ)sin(φ),y3=rcos(φ)

with r[0,), θ[0,2π), φ[0,π), we have dy=r2sin(φ)drdθdφ, and for all t>0,

E(|Bt|2)=(2πt)3/2R3|y|2ey21+y22+(y31)22tdy=(2πt)3/202π0π0r2er2sin(φ)2+(rcos(φ)1)22tr2sin(φ)drdθdφ=(2π)1/2t3/20π0er2sin(φ)2+(rcos(φ)1)22tsin(φ)drdφ=(2π)1/2t3/20π0er22rcos(φ)+12tsin(φ)drdφ=(2π)1/2t3/2e12t0er22t(11erutdu)dr=(2π)1/2t3/2e12t0er22t[trerut]u=1u=1dr=2(2π)1/2t3/2e12t0er22tsinh(rt)rtdr=2(2π)1/2t3/2e12tn=01(2n+1)!0(rt)2ner22tdr=t1e12tn=0t2n(2n+1)!(2πt)1/2r2ner22tdr=t1e12tn=0t2n(2n+1)!tn(2n1)!2n1(n1)!=t1e12tn=0(2t)n(2n+1)n!=2e12tn=0(2t)(n+1)(2n+1)n!2e12tn=0(2t)(n+1)(n+1)!=2e12t(e12t1)2.

Let us show that (Zt)t0=(|Bt|1)t0 is not a martingale by contradiction. Assume that it is a martingale. Since it is bounded in L2, limtZt=Z almost surely and in L1, with Z0 and ZL1. Moreover E(Z)=E(Z0)=|x|1>0. But almost surely limt|Bt|=+, hence almost surely Z=0, thus E(Z)=0, a contradiction.

Alternatively, we could use Doob stopping for u.i. martingales with the u.i. martingale Z and the finite stopping time TR, which gives |x|1=E(Z0)=E(ZTR)=R1, a contradiction.

Alternatively, we could conduct explicit computations to show that E(Zt)↘0 as t, which is thus yet another way to show that (Zt)t0 is not a martingale!

Stochastic differential equation. Actually (Zt)t0=(|Bt|1)t solves

Zt=1|x|t0Z2sdWs.

Itô stochastic integrals. Let us give an example of an Itô stochastic integral which is a local martingale but not a martingale. Of course we could consider the trivial example t0dZs=ZtZ0 where (Zt)t0=(|Bt|1)t0 is the strict local martingale considered previously, but a deeper understanding is expected here!

A more interesting idea relies on the stochastic integral

IB(φ)=0φsdBs

where φ is the single step function φ=U1(0,1] with U F0-measurable. A property of the Itô stochastic integral for semi-martingale integrators (here B) gives

IB(φ)=UB1UB0=UB1.

Now if we take U independent of B, then, in [0,+],

E(|IB(φ)1|)=E(|U|)E(|B1|).

Thus, if U is not integrable then IB(φ)1 is not integrable, and IB(φ) is not a martingale.

4 Comments

  1. Nico Graf 2024-01-20

    Hi, many thanks for this post!

    It helped a lot in my understanding of local martingales. I think the third equality in the subsection **domination** where you show that dominated local martingales are martingales is false. Although the result seems to be true.

    I would like to point out that this was the exact section I was interested in so again many thanks!

    Best Nico

  2. Djalil Chafaï 2024-01-20

    Thank you very much for your feedback. This is fixed now.

  3. Shuailong 2024-11-06

    Dear Author,

    Thank you for sharing this nice post!

    There is a slight issue in your post that might be improved a little bit, in the "local martingale part", when you define the local martingale, you mentioned "the bounded issue" to make it more "rigorous". (Usually, some textbooks will neglect this part, like Shreve's book)

    However, considering you already mentioned this, maybe this boundedness can be explained a bit more. The "bounded" means |X_t| is bounded in L1 for every t. For example, we can see Theorem 3.21 in Le Gall's book.

    Many thanks again for sharing this!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Syntax · Style · .