0

I'm trying to figure out is event in moment n dependent only on moment k even in cases where we consider multiple possible values for moment k? In formula I want to know if $P(X_n = x| X_k \in A, X_{k_1} = a_1, \dots) = P(X_n = x| X_k \in A)$ where ($X_n,n \in \mathbb{Z}_+$) is Markov chain, A is subset of X, $n > k > k_1 > \dots > 0$ natural numbers, $\{x, a_1, a_2, \dots\} \subseteq X$.

I was trying to prove it in this post but still didn't manage to do this. Is this statement even true?

  • Welcome to MSE. A question should be written in such a way that it can be understood even by someone who did not read the title. – José Carlos Santos Oct 04 '22 at 12:15
  • If its a Markov chain would the events in the conditioning only be relevant if they happened at time $n-1$? So if all of the $k, k_1, ...$ were less than or equal to $n-2$ it would just be $\mathbb P(X_n = x)$ – ilaK Oct 04 '22 at 12:23
  • @ilaK is it true? I thought that in Markov chain we consider some moment k as starting point and $P(X_n = x| X_k = a)$ not necessary equivalent to $ P(X_n = x)$ for any $k < n - 1$. – mokrota21 Oct 04 '22 at 12:28
  • No sorry that was wrong, however it would only depend on the $X_k$ with the largest value of $k$ – ilaK Oct 04 '22 at 12:33
  • Well I wanted to know how to prove this. As I understand we have statement $P(X_n=x|X_k = y, X_{k_1}=a_1, \dots)=P(X_n= x | X_k = y)$, but can't see if this implies $P(X_n=x|X_k \in A, X_{k_1}=a_1, \dots)=P(X_n= x | X_k \in A)$ where $|A| \geq 2$ – mokrota21 Oct 04 '22 at 12:38
  • You can write $\mathbb P(X_n = x | X_k \in A, X_{k_1} = a_1, ...)$ as $\frac{\mathbb P(X_n =x)}{\sum_{y\in A} \mathbb P(X_k = y, X_{k_1} = a_1, ...)}$ source: https://math.stackexchange.com/q/2967108/507703 – ilaK Oct 04 '22 at 13:06
  • @ilaK https://math.stackexchange.com/q/2967108/507703 implies that $P(E| E\cup F)$ can be writen like this, but $X_n = x$ is only in one side, isn't it? – mokrota21 Oct 04 '22 at 13:21

1 Answers1

0

Try and solve it in a more simply case first.

Suppose that $X$ takes values in a countable space and consider something like $$ \mathbb P(X_n = x | X_{n-2} = x_{n-2}, X_{n-3} = x_{n-3}, ...). $$ In your case the $X_{n-2}$ is replaced by the more general $X_k$. So right now we want to prove that only $X_{n-2}$ is relevant, we can do that by using the fact that $\mathbb P(A_2 | A_1) = \mathbb P(A_2 | X, A_1)\mathbb P(X | A_1) + \mathbb P(A_2 | X^c, A_1)\mathbb P(X^c | A_1)$ together with the Law of Total Probability as follows:

$$ \begin{align} \mathbb P(X_n = x | X_{n-2} = x_{n-2}, ...)=&\sum_{\alpha\in\Omega} \mathbb P(X_n = x | X_{n-1} = \alpha, X_{n-2} = x_{n-2}, ...) \mathbb P(X_{n-1}=\alpha|X_{n-2}=\alpha, ...) + \mathbb P(X_n = x | X_{n-1} \neq \alpha, X_{n-2} = x_{n-2},...)\mathbb P(X_{n-1}\neq\alpha|X_{n-2}=x_{n-2},...)\\ =& \sum_{\alpha\in\Omega} \mathbb P(X_n = x | X_{n-1} = \alpha, X_{n-2} = x_{n-2}) \mathbb P(X_{n-1}=\alpha|X_{n-2}=\alpha) + \mathbb P(X_n = x | X_{n-1} \neq \alpha, X_{n-2} = x_{n-2})\mathbb P(X_{n-1}\neq\alpha|X_{n-2}=x_{n-2})\\ =&\mathbb P(X_n=x|X_{n-2}=x_{n-2}) \end{align} $$

Do you see how you can generalise this?

ilaK
  • 372
  • I can't understand why $P(X_n = x| X_{n - 2} = x_{n - 2}, \dots) = \sum_{\alpha \in \Omega}P(X_n = x| X_{n - 1} = \alpha, X_{n - 2} = x_{n - 2}, \dots)P(X_{n - 1} = \alpha| X_{n -2 } = x_{n - 2}, \dots) + P(X_n = x| X_{n - 1} \not= \alpha, X_{n - 2} = x_{n - 2}, \dots)P(X_{n - 1} \not= \alpha| X_{n -2 } = x_{n - 2}, \dots)$

    and not just

    $P(X_n = x| X_{n - 2} = x_{n - 2}, \dots) = \sum_{\alpha \in \Omega}P(X_n = x| X_{n - 1} = \alpha, X_{n - 2} = x_{n - 2}, \dots)P(X_{n - 1} = \alpha| X_{n -2 } = x_{n - 2}, \dots)$

    – mokrota21 Oct 04 '22 at 13:07
  • The equality $\mathbb P(A_2 | A_1) = \mathbb P(A_2 | X, A_1)\mathbb P(X | A_1) + \mathbb P(A_2 | X^c, A_1)\mathbb P(X^c | A_1)$ is proved here: https://math.stackexchange.com/a/2378482/507703 – ilaK Oct 04 '22 at 13:10
  • Ok now I see, but I think you answered why probability depends only on largest k where we give only 1 possible value for k or why $P(X_n = x| X_{k} = x_k, \dots) = P(X_n = x| X_{k} = x_k)$. – mokrota21 Oct 04 '22 at 13:26