A sequence{Fn}n∈N of sub-σ-fields of F is called a filtration if it satisfies the following:
∀n∈N,Fn⊂Fn+1
Given a filtration {Fn}n∈N, a sequence{Xn}n∈N of ordered pairs formed by sequences of Fn-measurable Lebesgue integrable random variables Xn is called a martingale if it satisfies the following:
∀n∈N,E(Xn+1∣Fn)=Xn
Fn being a sub-σ-field of F means that both are σ-fields of Ω, but Fn⊂F holds.
Xn being a Fn-measurable function means that for all Borel setsB∈B(R), Xn−1(B)∈Fn holds true.
Explanation
Submartingales and Supermartingales are referred to as follows, respectively. Remembering the inequality as sub if the right-hand side decreases, and super if it increases, may be less confusing.
∀n∈N,E(Xn+1∣Fn)≥Xn∀n∈N,E(Xn+1∣Fn)≤Xn
Of course, being both a submartingale and a supermartingale is equivalent to being a martingale. Therefore, if a theorem holds for either submartingales or supermartingales, it can also be directly applied to martingales.
Intuitively understanding martingales starts with thinking of the σ-field as a collection of events, “information”:
Filtration: ∀n∈N,Fn⊂Fn+1, meaning that having a larger σ-field implies having more information. In the definition of martingales, the process Xn being Fn-measurable means that as the actual data xn is observed, the σ-field Fn also expands and it is safe to assume that all information up to n has been acquired.
Martingales: ∀n∈N,E(Xn+1∣Fn)=Xn means assuming that knowing the information Fn up to n, the next scenario Xn+1 will also be similar to Xn. If the expected value of Xn+1 can be derived regardless of the previously gathered Fn, such a stochastic process is no different from white noise and fails to be a subject for statistical analysis. Hence, the intuitive definition of a martingale can be seen as a “stochastic process where we can obtain mathematically and statistically better outcomes with some advantageous information.”
Origin
In a French village called ‘Martigues,’ what’s colloquially known as the ‘double or nothing strategy’ was popular. This strategy involves making a higher bet to compensate for a loss in the previous round, safeguarding against the psychological factors aside, whether this is a wise strategy still needs contemplation. Mathematically, the essence of such a strategy is summarized in the formula
E(Xn+1∣X1,⋯,Xn)=Xn+1
pointing out the gambler’s fallacy with ‘I’ve been losing continuously, so I must win this time’, explaining why the Martingale betting is futile.
Examples
(1)
Let’s consider an autoregressive process AR(1)Xn+1=Xn+εn. If filtration is given, then since all information regarding Xn is known, according to the properties of conditional expectationE(Xn+1∣Fn)=====E(Xn+εn∣Fn)E(Xn∣Fn)+E(εn∣Fn)Xn+E(εn∣Fn)Xn+E(εn)Xn
, thus {(Xn,Fn)} becomes a martingale.
(2)
Assuming {Xn}n∈N are independent of each other, and E(Xn)=0 and Sn:=i=1∑nXi, then
E(Sn+1∣Fn)===Sn+E(Xn+1∣Fn)Sn+E(Xn+1)Sn+0
, thus {(Sn,Fn)} becomes a martingale.
Meanwhile, given a convex function ϕ and a martingale, one can create a submartingale as shown above.
Theorem
Given a martingale {(Xn,Fn)} and a convex function ϕ:R→R, (ϕ(Xn),Fn) is a submartingale.