Show that the composition of a sub-invariant measure with a sub-Markov kernel is a contraction on $L^p$
$begingroup$
Let
$(Omega,mathcal A)$ be a measurable space
$mu$ be a finite measure on $(Omega,mathcal A)$
$kappa$ be a sub-Markov kernel on $(Omega,mathcal A)$
- $pge1$
I'll denote the composition of $mu$ and $kappa$ by $mukappa$. Moreover, $$kappa f:=intkappa(x,{rm d}y)f(y)$$ and $$mu f:=int f:{rm d}mu$$ whenever the integrals are well-defined. It's easy to see that if $f:Omegatooverline{mathbb R}$ is $mathcal A$-measurable and either nonnegative or bounded, then $kappa f$ is $mathcal A$-measurable.
Now, assume $$mukappalemutag1$$ and let $ginmathcal L^p(mu)$. I want to show that $kappa gin L^p(mu)$ and $$left|kappa gright|_{L^p(mu)}leleft|gright|_{L^p(mu)}tag2.$$
By the aforementioned property, $kappa|g|$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable. Moreover, by a Fubini like result $$mu(kappa f)=(mukappa)ftag3$$ for all $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegato[0,infty]$ and hence $$mu(kappa|g|)=(mukappa)|g|<infty.$$ Thus, $$kappa|g|<infty;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag4$$ and hence $kappa g$ is $mu$-almost everywhere well-defined. We can find a sequence $(g_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ of (elementary, simple, step - call it however you like) $mathcal A$-measurable functions with $$g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}gtag5$$ and $$left|g_nright|leleft|gright|;;;text{for all }ninmathbb Ntag6.$$ Thus, by dominated convergence, $$kappa g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag7.$$ So, there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegatomathbb R$ (e.g. $f:=limsup_{ntoinfty}kappa g_n$) with $$f=kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag8.$$ By Jensen's inequality $$left|kappa gright|^plekappa|g|^p$$ and hence $$left|fright|_{L^p(mu)}^plemu(kappa|g|^p)=(mukappa)|g|^p=left|gright|_{L^p(mu)}^ptag9.$$
Did I overcomplicate anything? Please let me know. In any case, my actual question is: Is it correct that we're not able to show that $kappa g$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable on all of $Omega$? As shown in my proof, I guess that it's only possible to show that there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $mu$-version of $kappa g$. Or am I missing something?
probability-theory measure-theory stochastic-processes markov-process stochastic-analysis
asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36
0xbadf00d0xbadf00d
1,87841533
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let
$(Omega,mathcal A)$ be a measurable space
$mu$ be a finite measure on $(Omega,mathcal A)$
$kappa$ be a sub-Markov kernel on $(Omega,mathcal A)$
- $pge1$
I'll denote the composition of $mu$ and $kappa$ by $mukappa$. Moreover, $$kappa f:=intkappa(x,{rm d}y)f(y)$$ and $$mu f:=int f:{rm d}mu$$ whenever the integrals are well-defined. It's easy to see that if $f:Omegatooverline{mathbb R}$ is $mathcal A$-measurable and either nonnegative or bounded, then $kappa f$ is $mathcal A$-measurable.
Now, assume $$mukappalemutag1$$ and let $ginmathcal L^p(mu)$. I want to show that $kappa gin L^p(mu)$ and $$left|kappa gright|_{L^p(mu)}leleft|gright|_{L^p(mu)}tag2.$$
By the aforementioned property, $kappa|g|$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable. Moreover, by a Fubini like result $$mu(kappa f)=(mukappa)ftag3$$ for all $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegato[0,infty]$ and hence $$mu(kappa|g|)=(mukappa)|g|<infty.$$ Thus, $$kappa|g|<infty;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag4$$ and hence $kappa g$ is $mu$-almost everywhere well-defined. We can find a sequence $(g_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ of (elementary, simple, step - call it however you like) $mathcal A$-measurable functions with $$g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}gtag5$$ and $$left|g_nright|leleft|gright|;;;text{for all }ninmathbb Ntag6.$$ Thus, by dominated convergence, $$kappa g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag7.$$ So, there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegatomathbb R$ (e.g. $f:=limsup_{ntoinfty}kappa g_n$) with $$f=kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag8.$$ By Jensen's inequality $$left|kappa gright|^plekappa|g|^p$$ and hence $$left|fright|_{L^p(mu)}^plemu(kappa|g|^p)=(mukappa)|g|^p=left|gright|_{L^p(mu)}^ptag9.$$
Did I overcomplicate anything? Please let me know. In any case, my actual question is: Is it correct that we're not able to show that $kappa g$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable on all of $Omega$? As shown in my proof, I guess that it's only possible to show that there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $mu$-version of $kappa g$. Or am I missing something?
probability-theory measure-theory stochastic-processes markov-process stochastic-analysis
asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36
0xbadf00d0xbadf00d
1,87841533
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let
$(Omega,mathcal A)$ be a measurable space
$mu$ be a finite measure on $(Omega,mathcal A)$
$kappa$ be a sub-Markov kernel on $(Omega,mathcal A)$
- $pge1$
I'll denote the composition of $mu$ and $kappa$ by $mukappa$. Moreover, $$kappa f:=intkappa(x,{rm d}y)f(y)$$ and $$mu f:=int f:{rm d}mu$$ whenever the integrals are well-defined. It's easy to see that if $f:Omegatooverline{mathbb R}$ is $mathcal A$-measurable and either nonnegative or bounded, then $kappa f$ is $mathcal A$-measurable.
Now, assume $$mukappalemutag1$$ and let $ginmathcal L^p(mu)$. I want to show that $kappa gin L^p(mu)$ and $$left|kappa gright|_{L^p(mu)}leleft|gright|_{L^p(mu)}tag2.$$
By the aforementioned property, $kappa|g|$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable. Moreover, by a Fubini like result $$mu(kappa f)=(mukappa)ftag3$$ for all $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegato[0,infty]$ and hence $$mu(kappa|g|)=(mukappa)|g|<infty.$$ Thus, $$kappa|g|<infty;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag4$$ and hence $kappa g$ is $mu$-almost everywhere well-defined. We can find a sequence $(g_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ of (elementary, simple, step - call it however you like) $mathcal A$-measurable functions with $$g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}gtag5$$ and $$left|g_nright|leleft|gright|;;;text{for all }ninmathbb Ntag6.$$ Thus, by dominated convergence, $$kappa g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag7.$$ So, there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegatomathbb R$ (e.g. $f:=limsup_{ntoinfty}kappa g_n$) with $$f=kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag8.$$ By Jensen's inequality $$left|kappa gright|^plekappa|g|^p$$ and hence $$left|fright|_{L^p(mu)}^plemu(kappa|g|^p)=(mukappa)|g|^p=left|gright|_{L^p(mu)}^ptag9.$$
Did I overcomplicate anything? Please let me know. In any case, my actual question is: Is it correct that we're not able to show that $kappa g$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable on all of $Omega$? As shown in my proof, I guess that it's only possible to show that there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $mu$-version of $kappa g$. Or am I missing something?
probability-theory measure-theory stochastic-processes markov-process stochastic-analysis
asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36
0xbadf00d0xbadf00d
1,87841533
$endgroup$
Let
$(Omega,mathcal A)$ be a measurable space
$mu$ be a finite measure on $(Omega,mathcal A)$
$kappa$ be a sub-Markov kernel on $(Omega,mathcal A)$
- $pge1$
I'll denote the composition of $mu$ and $kappa$ by $mukappa$. Moreover, $$kappa f:=intkappa(x,{rm d}y)f(y)$$ and $$mu f:=int f:{rm d}mu$$ whenever the integrals are well-defined. It's easy to see that if $f:Omegatooverline{mathbb R}$ is $mathcal A$-measurable and either nonnegative or bounded, then $kappa f$ is $mathcal A$-measurable.
Now, assume $$mukappalemutag1$$ and let $ginmathcal L^p(mu)$. I want to show that $kappa gin L^p(mu)$ and $$left|kappa gright|_{L^p(mu)}leleft|gright|_{L^p(mu)}tag2.$$
By the aforementioned property, $kappa|g|$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable. Moreover, by a Fubini like result $$mu(kappa f)=(mukappa)ftag3$$ for all $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegato[0,infty]$ and hence $$mu(kappa|g|)=(mukappa)|g|<infty.$$ Thus, $$kappa|g|<infty;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag4$$ and hence $kappa g$ is $mu$-almost everywhere well-defined. We can find a sequence $(g_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ of (elementary, simple, step - call it however you like) $mathcal A$-measurable functions with $$g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}gtag5$$ and $$left|g_nright|leleft|gright|;;;text{for all }ninmathbb Ntag6.$$ Thus, by dominated convergence, $$kappa g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag7.$$ So, there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegatomathbb R$ (e.g. $f:=limsup_{ntoinfty}kappa g_n$) with $$f=kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag8.$$ By Jensen's inequality $$left|kappa gright|^plekappa|g|^p$$ and hence $$left|fright|_{L^p(mu)}^plemu(kappa|g|^p)=(mukappa)|g|^p=left|gright|_{L^p(mu)}^ptag9.$$
Did I overcomplicate anything? Please let me know. In any case, my actual question is: Is it correct that we're not able to show that $kappa g$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable on all of $Omega$? As shown in my proof, I guess that it's only possible to show that there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $mu$-version of $kappa g$. Or am I missing something?
probability-theory measure-theory stochastic-processes markov-process stochastic-analysis
probability-theory measure-theory stochastic-processes markov-process stochastic-analysis
asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36
0xbadf00d0xbadf00d
1,87841533
asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36
0xbadf00d0xbadf00d
1,87841533
asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36
0xbadf00d0xbadf00d
1,87841533
asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36
0xbadf00d0xbadf00d
1,87841533
asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36
0xbadf00d0xbadf00d
1,87841533
1,87841533
add a comment |
add a comment |
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3056406%2fshow-that-the-composition-of-a-sub-invariant-measure-with-a-sub-markov-kernel-is%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3056406%2fshow-that-the-composition-of-a-sub-invariant-measure-with-a-sub-markov-kernel-is%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
