0

Let $\{X_t; t \in \mathbb{N}_0\}$ be a discrete Markov chain with finite state space $\Omega$ and transition matrix $P$. Let $\{\mathcal{F}_t; t \in \mathbb{N}_0\}$ be the corresponding filtration.

I saw in a paper (but without justification) that the Markov property can be expressed as

$$\mathbb{E}[f(X_{t+1})|\mathcal{F}_t] = P f(X_t).$$

My question is:

How do I come to this? From which definition of Markov property do I need to start from? And is $f$ any function, or does it need to be bounded and measurable?

Any help would be appreciated.

Babado
  • 1,306

1 Answers1

3

Presumably, $\ f:\Omega\rightarrow V\ $ where $\ V=\mathbb{R}^n\ $$\big($or maybe $\ \mathbb{C}^n\ \big)$ and $\ Pf:\Omega\rightarrow V\ $ is the function defined by $$ (Pf)(\omega)=\sum_{s\in\Omega}P_{\omega s}f(s)\ . $$ For a discrete finite-state Markov chain, the Markov property reduces to $$ \mathbb{P}\big(X_{t+1}\in A\,|\,\mathcal{F}_t\big)=\mathbb{P}\big(X_{t+1}\in A\,|\,X_t\big)\ , $$ or equivalently, $$ \mathbb{P}\big(X_{t+1}=s\,|\,\mathcal{F}_t\big)=\mathbb{P}\big(X_{t+1}=s\,|\,X_t\big) $$ for $\ s\in\Omega\ $. Also, by the definition of the transition matrix $\ \mathbb{P}\big(X_{t+1}=s\,|\,X_t\big)=P_{X_ts}\ $. So \begin{align} \mathbb{E}\big(f\big(X_{t+1}\big)\,\big|\,\mathcal{F}_t\big)&=\sum_{s\in\Omega}f(s)\,\mathbb{P}\big(X_{t+1}=s\,|\,\mathcal{F}_t\big)\\ &=\sum_{s\in\Omega}f(s)\,\mathbb{P}\big(X_{t+1}=s\,|\,X_t\big)\\ &=\sum_{s\in\Omega}P_{X_ts}f(s)\\ &=\big(Pf\big)\big(X_t\big)\ . \end{align} I can't see how the identity could be made sense of unless $\ f\ $ is a function on $\ \Omega\ $, in which case it's automatically measurable with respect to any $\ \sigma$-algebra on its codomain and the discrete $\ \sigma$-algebra on $\ \Omega\ $.

lonza leggiera
  • 28,646
  • 2
  • 12
  • 33
  • Where did you use the Markov property? How did you go from $\mathbb{E}\big(f\big(X_{t+1}\big),\big|,\mathcal{F}t\big)$ to $\sum{s\in\Omega}P_{X_ts}f(s)$? – Babado Aug 18 '21 at 11:45
  • 1
    I've now inserted more details of the derivation. However I've only shown that the Markov property implies the identity, not that the identity implies the Markov property. The reverse implication requires the identity to hold for a sufficient range of functions $\ f\ $. The set of indicator functions $\ I_{{s}}:\Omega\rightarrow$${0,1}\ $ for all $\ s\in\Omega\ $ should suffice. – lonza leggiera Aug 18 '21 at 13:59