2013
DOI: 10.1214/12-aap878
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A trajectorial interpretation of Doob’s martingale inequalities

Abstract: We present a unified approach to Doob's L p maximal inequalities for 1 ≤ p < ∞. The novelty of our method is that these martingale inequalities are obtained as consequences of elementary deterministic counterparts. The latter have a natural interpretation in terms of robust hedging. Moreover, our deterministic inequalities lead to new versions of Doob's maximal inequalities. These are best possible in the sense that equality is attained by properly chosen martingales.

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
83
0
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(86 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
83
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…We argue that for sufficiently large n the terms EQ|f i (S (n) )−f i (S (1) )|, i = 1, ..., N and EQ|G(S (n) ) − G(S (1) )| are small. Indeed, as before the factQ ∈ Mκ ,L implies that EQ[ S (1) ) ] ≤Ĉ (where, recall the constantĈ from Definition 4.1) and so lim n→∞ EQ[ S (1) χ {K≥n} ] = 0. From Assumption 2.1 we get lim sup…”
Section: Asymptotical Analysis Of the Boundsmentioning
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We argue that for sufficiently large n the terms EQ|f i (S (n) )−f i (S (1) )|, i = 1, ..., N and EQ|G(S (n) ) − G(S (1) )| are small. Indeed, as before the factQ ∈ Mκ ,L implies that EQ[ S (1) ) ] ≤Ĉ (where, recall the constantĈ from Definition 4.1) and so lim n→∞ EQ[ S (1) χ {K≥n} ] = 0. From Assumption 2.1 we get lim sup…”
Section: Asymptotical Analysis Of the Boundsmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…From Theorem 1 in Skorokhod (1976) and the fact that the random variables W ti+1 − W ti , i = 0, .., r − 1 are independent, it follows that we can find a sequence of measurable function g (1) i , g (2) i : R 2i−1 → R, i = 1, ..., r with the following property. The stochastic processes (adapted to the Brownian filtration) {Ṡ W ti } r i=0 and {M W ti } r i=0 which are given by the recursion relationṡ…”
Section: Thus the Inequality Eq[(q(smentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is easy to see that this is not true in general if X is a (strictly positive) submartingale: it is enough to put n = 1, X 0 = ε, where ε > 0 is small enough, and X 1 = 1. In other words, inequality (Doob-L 1 ) in the statement of Theorem 1.1 in [1] is valid for nonnegative martingales and is not valid for submartingales as is stated in this theorem. Nevertheless, the following improvement of Doob's maximal L log L-inequality is true: for any nonnegative submartingale X,…”
Section: Theoremmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Inequality (5) was obtained in [1]. It implies the following minor generalization of Doob's maximal L p -inequality: if X is a nonnegative submartingale and EX…”
Section: Theoremmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This leads us to a similar structure to that in [19] and in other papers [6,8,10,11,14,15,18,21,22,23,24,25,29] which consider modelindependent pricing. This approach is very closely related to path-wise proofs of well-known probabilistic inequalities [2,9]. Apart from the continuity of the price process no other model assumptions are placed on the dynamics of the price process.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%