2011
DOI: 10.1515/9781400840564
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Symmetric Markov Processes, Time Change, and Boundary Theory (LMS-35)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
237
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 120 publications
(239 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
237
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By [22], Theorem 1.6.3, this implies that A is recurrent. Since, by [10], Theorem 2.1.10, recurrence implies conservativeness, in conclusion we get (here the hypothesis m(X ) < ∞ is essential)…”
Section: 1 One Hasmentioning
confidence: 55%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…By [22], Theorem 1.6.3, this implies that A is recurrent. Since, by [10], Theorem 2.1.10, recurrence implies conservativeness, in conclusion we get (here the hypothesis m(X ) < ∞ is essential)…”
Section: 1 One Hasmentioning
confidence: 55%
“…Here we briefly recall the one-to-one correspondence between regular Dirichlet forms and Markov processes. We refer to [19], [20], [22] and [10] for more details and proofs. Let the Dirichlet form F A be regular on X and let e t A , t ≥ 0, be the semi-group on L 2 (X ) generated by the corresponding Markovian operator A.…”
Section: Dirichlet Forms and Hunt Processesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Then the following statements are equivalent due to Theorem 3.5.6 in [2] and a similar proof of Lemma 2.1:…”
Section: (B) and µ(A N ∩ B) ↑ µ(B) Hence There Exists Some N Such Thmentioning
confidence: 83%