0

In Markov process, transition intensities from state i to j are defined as derivatives of transition probabilities at zero: $$q_{ij}=p_{ij}'(0)$$ However I can't somehow catch the interpretation of transition intensities. My first thought was that they stand for probability of immediate transition, but $q_{ii}$ can be negative, so it can't be true. Any tips/ideas would be appreciated.

1 Answers1

3

The formula you have written is correct. The meaning might be clearer if you restate the situation in "Taylor expansion form" as:

$$P(X_{t+h}=j \mid X_t=i)=\begin{cases} q_{ij}h+o(h) & i \neq j \\ \left ( 1-\sum_{j=1,j \neq i}^n q_{ij} h \right ) + o(h), & i=j \end{cases}$$

as $h \to 0^+$. In particular, the derivatives of the diagonal entries of the transition matrix are indeed negative initially, because the probability that you stay at $i$ gradually decreases as time advances.

If this doesn't make sense, it may help to consider an equivalent interpretation, which decomposes a continuous time Markov chain into a "jump chain" and "holding times". More specifically, the jump chain is a discrete time Markov chain which says where the continuous time chain goes when it eventually makes its transition from a given state. The holding times are exponentially distributed random variables that describe how long it takes for the continuous time process to escape a state.

Being explicit, the jump chain probabilities are $r_{ij}=-\frac{q_{ij}}{q_{ii}}$ (or zero, if $q_{ii}=0$), while the holding times at each state $i$ have mean $-\frac{1}{q_{ii}}$ (or $+\infty$, if $q_{ii}=0$). Thus $-q_{ii}$ describes the average rate of escape from $i$ while $q_{ij}$, in relation to $q_{ii}$, describes how often the eventual escape from $i$ leads to $j$.

One surprising fact about this is that one can compute the sequence of states visited by a realization of a continuous time homogeneous Markov chain without actually computing when they were visited. This is quite useful in simulations.

Ian
  • 101,645
  • Thanks a lot, I think I got it. One remark - shouldn't the sum be over $j\neq i$? And could you possibly explain why the holding times are exponentially distributed? – Paweł Orliński Sep 20 '15 at 09:40
  • 1
    @PawełOrliński That's right, I was lazy about that. Also, there are different ways to see that the holding times are exponentially distributed. The direct way (starting from the definition of the Markov chain and proving it) uses the fact that the only nonnegative variables satisfying the "memoryless property" $P(X>t+s|X>t)=P(X>s)$ for $t,s \geq 0$ are exponential. I think it should be clear from the Markov property why the holding times must have this property. – Ian Sep 20 '15 at 12:32
  • @PawełOrliński One can show that this implies the holding times are exponential. The way I did it was to first prove it for $t,s$ rational (basically by induction), then use the density of the rationals, the monotonicity of the CDF, and the squeeze theorem to draw the conclusion for general $t,s$. – Ian Sep 20 '15 at 12:32
  • Thanks Ian, now it's perfect clear. – Paweł Orliński Sep 20 '15 at 13:00
  • +1 I am interested in this topic but it is very far from my background. Please, could you suggest me any book that deals with this specific topic? – user1420303 May 06 '22 at 22:03