Can we always find a stochastic process whose autocorrelation function is a given positive semidefinite...











up vote
1
down vote

favorite












The auto-correlation function of a stochastic process is defined by $$R(t_1, t_2)=mathbb{E}[X(t_1)X(t_2)]$$



We say that a function is positive semidefinite if and only if



$$forall x,y: f(x,y)^2 leq f(x,x)f(y,y)$$



It is easy to see that if $X(t)$ is a stochastic process, then using the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we have



$$R(t_1, t_2)^2=mathbb{E}[X(t_1)X(t_2)]^2 leq mathbb{E}[X(t_1)^2]mathbb{E}[X(t_2)^2]=R(t_1, t_1)R(t_2, t_2)$$



So, I wonder if one is given a positive semidefinite function $f$, is it always possible to find a stochastic process whose auto-correlation function is $f$?



Note: I'm looking for answers that do not use measure theory.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • By Kolmogorov's consistency theorem, yes.
    – Calculon
    Nov 8 at 9:58










  • Yes, they are referring to the same theorem. The Wikipedia page is talking about continuous time processes. You should read it a bit more carefully. I can write more later if no one else responds.
    – Calculon
    Nov 8 at 10:09










  • @Calculon Oops, you're right. Is it possible to do this without measure theory? The question has been brought up as a bonus question in an undergrad course. And we're allowed to research it on the internet. But I think we're not allowed to use measure theory as it is out of the scope of the course.
    – stressed out
    Nov 8 at 10:11












  • How do you define a stochastic process without using measure theory?
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 13 at 20:47










  • @MikeHawk A family of random variables parametrized by time. It's not 100% rigorous, but it convinces engineers. Doesn't it?
    – stressed out
    Nov 13 at 21:38















up vote
1
down vote

favorite












The auto-correlation function of a stochastic process is defined by $$R(t_1, t_2)=mathbb{E}[X(t_1)X(t_2)]$$



We say that a function is positive semidefinite if and only if



$$forall x,y: f(x,y)^2 leq f(x,x)f(y,y)$$



It is easy to see that if $X(t)$ is a stochastic process, then using the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we have



$$R(t_1, t_2)^2=mathbb{E}[X(t_1)X(t_2)]^2 leq mathbb{E}[X(t_1)^2]mathbb{E}[X(t_2)^2]=R(t_1, t_1)R(t_2, t_2)$$



So, I wonder if one is given a positive semidefinite function $f$, is it always possible to find a stochastic process whose auto-correlation function is $f$?



Note: I'm looking for answers that do not use measure theory.










share|cite|improve this question
























  • By Kolmogorov's consistency theorem, yes.
    – Calculon
    Nov 8 at 9:58










  • Yes, they are referring to the same theorem. The Wikipedia page is talking about continuous time processes. You should read it a bit more carefully. I can write more later if no one else responds.
    – Calculon
    Nov 8 at 10:09










  • @Calculon Oops, you're right. Is it possible to do this without measure theory? The question has been brought up as a bonus question in an undergrad course. And we're allowed to research it on the internet. But I think we're not allowed to use measure theory as it is out of the scope of the course.
    – stressed out
    Nov 8 at 10:11












  • How do you define a stochastic process without using measure theory?
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 13 at 20:47










  • @MikeHawk A family of random variables parametrized by time. It's not 100% rigorous, but it convinces engineers. Doesn't it?
    – stressed out
    Nov 13 at 21:38













up vote
1
down vote

favorite









up vote
1
down vote

favorite











The auto-correlation function of a stochastic process is defined by $$R(t_1, t_2)=mathbb{E}[X(t_1)X(t_2)]$$



We say that a function is positive semidefinite if and only if



$$forall x,y: f(x,y)^2 leq f(x,x)f(y,y)$$



It is easy to see that if $X(t)$ is a stochastic process, then using the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we have



$$R(t_1, t_2)^2=mathbb{E}[X(t_1)X(t_2)]^2 leq mathbb{E}[X(t_1)^2]mathbb{E}[X(t_2)^2]=R(t_1, t_1)R(t_2, t_2)$$



So, I wonder if one is given a positive semidefinite function $f$, is it always possible to find a stochastic process whose auto-correlation function is $f$?



Note: I'm looking for answers that do not use measure theory.










share|cite|improve this question















The auto-correlation function of a stochastic process is defined by $$R(t_1, t_2)=mathbb{E}[X(t_1)X(t_2)]$$



We say that a function is positive semidefinite if and only if



$$forall x,y: f(x,y)^2 leq f(x,x)f(y,y)$$



It is easy to see that if $X(t)$ is a stochastic process, then using the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we have



$$R(t_1, t_2)^2=mathbb{E}[X(t_1)X(t_2)]^2 leq mathbb{E}[X(t_1)^2]mathbb{E}[X(t_2)^2]=R(t_1, t_1)R(t_2, t_2)$$



So, I wonder if one is given a positive semidefinite function $f$, is it always possible to find a stochastic process whose auto-correlation function is $f$?



Note: I'm looking for answers that do not use measure theory.







probability-theory proof-verification stochastic-processes signal-processing






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 8 at 10:16

























asked Nov 7 at 11:01









stressed out

3,7381532




3,7381532












  • By Kolmogorov's consistency theorem, yes.
    – Calculon
    Nov 8 at 9:58










  • Yes, they are referring to the same theorem. The Wikipedia page is talking about continuous time processes. You should read it a bit more carefully. I can write more later if no one else responds.
    – Calculon
    Nov 8 at 10:09










  • @Calculon Oops, you're right. Is it possible to do this without measure theory? The question has been brought up as a bonus question in an undergrad course. And we're allowed to research it on the internet. But I think we're not allowed to use measure theory as it is out of the scope of the course.
    – stressed out
    Nov 8 at 10:11












  • How do you define a stochastic process without using measure theory?
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 13 at 20:47










  • @MikeHawk A family of random variables parametrized by time. It's not 100% rigorous, but it convinces engineers. Doesn't it?
    – stressed out
    Nov 13 at 21:38


















  • By Kolmogorov's consistency theorem, yes.
    – Calculon
    Nov 8 at 9:58










  • Yes, they are referring to the same theorem. The Wikipedia page is talking about continuous time processes. You should read it a bit more carefully. I can write more later if no one else responds.
    – Calculon
    Nov 8 at 10:09










  • @Calculon Oops, you're right. Is it possible to do this without measure theory? The question has been brought up as a bonus question in an undergrad course. And we're allowed to research it on the internet. But I think we're not allowed to use measure theory as it is out of the scope of the course.
    – stressed out
    Nov 8 at 10:11












  • How do you define a stochastic process without using measure theory?
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 13 at 20:47










  • @MikeHawk A family of random variables parametrized by time. It's not 100% rigorous, but it convinces engineers. Doesn't it?
    – stressed out
    Nov 13 at 21:38
















By Kolmogorov's consistency theorem, yes.
– Calculon
Nov 8 at 9:58




By Kolmogorov's consistency theorem, yes.
– Calculon
Nov 8 at 9:58












Yes, they are referring to the same theorem. The Wikipedia page is talking about continuous time processes. You should read it a bit more carefully. I can write more later if no one else responds.
– Calculon
Nov 8 at 10:09




Yes, they are referring to the same theorem. The Wikipedia page is talking about continuous time processes. You should read it a bit more carefully. I can write more later if no one else responds.
– Calculon
Nov 8 at 10:09












@Calculon Oops, you're right. Is it possible to do this without measure theory? The question has been brought up as a bonus question in an undergrad course. And we're allowed to research it on the internet. But I think we're not allowed to use measure theory as it is out of the scope of the course.
– stressed out
Nov 8 at 10:11






@Calculon Oops, you're right. Is it possible to do this without measure theory? The question has been brought up as a bonus question in an undergrad course. And we're allowed to research it on the internet. But I think we're not allowed to use measure theory as it is out of the scope of the course.
– stressed out
Nov 8 at 10:11














How do you define a stochastic process without using measure theory?
– Mike Hawk
Nov 13 at 20:47




How do you define a stochastic process without using measure theory?
– Mike Hawk
Nov 13 at 20:47












@MikeHawk A family of random variables parametrized by time. It's not 100% rigorous, but it convinces engineers. Doesn't it?
– stressed out
Nov 13 at 21:38




@MikeHawk A family of random variables parametrized by time. It's not 100% rigorous, but it convinces engineers. Doesn't it?
– stressed out
Nov 13 at 21:38










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted
+50










Obviously not. Consider $R(x,y)=-1$. But I'll assume you also meant to require that $R(x,x)ge 0$. However, even this is not sufficient.



To see this, pick any 3 time points $t_1, t_2, t_3$ and consider the random variables $X_{t_1}, X_{t_2}, X_{t_3}$. Define the matrix $A_{ij}=E(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=R(t_i, t_j)$. I claim $A$ must be non-negative definite. Indeed, for any vector $v$, $(v,Av)=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jA_{ij}=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jE(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=Esum_{i,j}(v_iX_{t_i})(v_jX_{t_j})=E(sum_i v_iX_{t_i})^2ge 0$. By the same argument, it must be the case that $sum_{i,j=1}^Nv_iv_jR(t_i,t_j)ge 0$ for any $N$, $v_i$ and time points $t_i$. A function which satisfies this condition is called a Mercer kernel.



To see that your condition of positive-semidefiniteness does not imply being a Mercer kernel, it is sufficient to exhibit a symmetric matrix M such that:
1. the diagonal entries of M are positive
2. all 2x2 minors have non-negative determinant, and
3. M has a negative eigenvalue. I leave it as an exercise to construct such a matrix.



Interestingly, if R is a Mercer kernel, then the answer to your question is yes, and the process can be described somewhat explicitly. I'll assume that t is restricted to lie in the unit interval $[0,1]$. By Mercer's theorem, we can write $R(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^{infty} lambda_i f_i(x)f_i(y)$, where the functions satisfy $int_0^1 R(x,y)f_i(y)=lambda_if_i(x)$.



Now let $X_t=sum_{i=1}^{infty} sqrt{lambda_i}xi_if_i(t)$ where $xi_i$ are iid normal random variables with mean $0$ and standard deviation $1$. The series converges almost surely by Kolmogorov's Two SEries theorem.



We see that $EX_tX_s=sum_{i,j}sqrt{lambda_ilambda_j}f_i(t)f_j(s)E(xi_ixi_j)$. By independence, we have $E(xi_ixi_j)=Exi_iExi_j=delta_{ij}$. So $EX_tX_s=sum_ilambda_if_i(t)f_i(s)=R(t,s)$ as desired.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • because $E(X_{t}^2)=R(t,t)$ cannot be negative
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 14 at 14:27











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',
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
});


}
});














 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2988393%2fcan-we-always-find-a-stochastic-process-whose-autocorrelation-function-is-a-give%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
1
down vote



accepted
+50










Obviously not. Consider $R(x,y)=-1$. But I'll assume you also meant to require that $R(x,x)ge 0$. However, even this is not sufficient.



To see this, pick any 3 time points $t_1, t_2, t_3$ and consider the random variables $X_{t_1}, X_{t_2}, X_{t_3}$. Define the matrix $A_{ij}=E(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=R(t_i, t_j)$. I claim $A$ must be non-negative definite. Indeed, for any vector $v$, $(v,Av)=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jA_{ij}=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jE(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=Esum_{i,j}(v_iX_{t_i})(v_jX_{t_j})=E(sum_i v_iX_{t_i})^2ge 0$. By the same argument, it must be the case that $sum_{i,j=1}^Nv_iv_jR(t_i,t_j)ge 0$ for any $N$, $v_i$ and time points $t_i$. A function which satisfies this condition is called a Mercer kernel.



To see that your condition of positive-semidefiniteness does not imply being a Mercer kernel, it is sufficient to exhibit a symmetric matrix M such that:
1. the diagonal entries of M are positive
2. all 2x2 minors have non-negative determinant, and
3. M has a negative eigenvalue. I leave it as an exercise to construct such a matrix.



Interestingly, if R is a Mercer kernel, then the answer to your question is yes, and the process can be described somewhat explicitly. I'll assume that t is restricted to lie in the unit interval $[0,1]$. By Mercer's theorem, we can write $R(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^{infty} lambda_i f_i(x)f_i(y)$, where the functions satisfy $int_0^1 R(x,y)f_i(y)=lambda_if_i(x)$.



Now let $X_t=sum_{i=1}^{infty} sqrt{lambda_i}xi_if_i(t)$ where $xi_i$ are iid normal random variables with mean $0$ and standard deviation $1$. The series converges almost surely by Kolmogorov's Two SEries theorem.



We see that $EX_tX_s=sum_{i,j}sqrt{lambda_ilambda_j}f_i(t)f_j(s)E(xi_ixi_j)$. By independence, we have $E(xi_ixi_j)=Exi_iExi_j=delta_{ij}$. So $EX_tX_s=sum_ilambda_if_i(t)f_i(s)=R(t,s)$ as desired.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • because $E(X_{t}^2)=R(t,t)$ cannot be negative
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 14 at 14:27















up vote
1
down vote



accepted
+50










Obviously not. Consider $R(x,y)=-1$. But I'll assume you also meant to require that $R(x,x)ge 0$. However, even this is not sufficient.



To see this, pick any 3 time points $t_1, t_2, t_3$ and consider the random variables $X_{t_1}, X_{t_2}, X_{t_3}$. Define the matrix $A_{ij}=E(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=R(t_i, t_j)$. I claim $A$ must be non-negative definite. Indeed, for any vector $v$, $(v,Av)=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jA_{ij}=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jE(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=Esum_{i,j}(v_iX_{t_i})(v_jX_{t_j})=E(sum_i v_iX_{t_i})^2ge 0$. By the same argument, it must be the case that $sum_{i,j=1}^Nv_iv_jR(t_i,t_j)ge 0$ for any $N$, $v_i$ and time points $t_i$. A function which satisfies this condition is called a Mercer kernel.



To see that your condition of positive-semidefiniteness does not imply being a Mercer kernel, it is sufficient to exhibit a symmetric matrix M such that:
1. the diagonal entries of M are positive
2. all 2x2 minors have non-negative determinant, and
3. M has a negative eigenvalue. I leave it as an exercise to construct such a matrix.



Interestingly, if R is a Mercer kernel, then the answer to your question is yes, and the process can be described somewhat explicitly. I'll assume that t is restricted to lie in the unit interval $[0,1]$. By Mercer's theorem, we can write $R(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^{infty} lambda_i f_i(x)f_i(y)$, where the functions satisfy $int_0^1 R(x,y)f_i(y)=lambda_if_i(x)$.



Now let $X_t=sum_{i=1}^{infty} sqrt{lambda_i}xi_if_i(t)$ where $xi_i$ are iid normal random variables with mean $0$ and standard deviation $1$. The series converges almost surely by Kolmogorov's Two SEries theorem.



We see that $EX_tX_s=sum_{i,j}sqrt{lambda_ilambda_j}f_i(t)f_j(s)E(xi_ixi_j)$. By independence, we have $E(xi_ixi_j)=Exi_iExi_j=delta_{ij}$. So $EX_tX_s=sum_ilambda_if_i(t)f_i(s)=R(t,s)$ as desired.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • because $E(X_{t}^2)=R(t,t)$ cannot be negative
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 14 at 14:27













up vote
1
down vote



accepted
+50







up vote
1
down vote



accepted
+50




+50




Obviously not. Consider $R(x,y)=-1$. But I'll assume you also meant to require that $R(x,x)ge 0$. However, even this is not sufficient.



To see this, pick any 3 time points $t_1, t_2, t_3$ and consider the random variables $X_{t_1}, X_{t_2}, X_{t_3}$. Define the matrix $A_{ij}=E(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=R(t_i, t_j)$. I claim $A$ must be non-negative definite. Indeed, for any vector $v$, $(v,Av)=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jA_{ij}=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jE(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=Esum_{i,j}(v_iX_{t_i})(v_jX_{t_j})=E(sum_i v_iX_{t_i})^2ge 0$. By the same argument, it must be the case that $sum_{i,j=1}^Nv_iv_jR(t_i,t_j)ge 0$ for any $N$, $v_i$ and time points $t_i$. A function which satisfies this condition is called a Mercer kernel.



To see that your condition of positive-semidefiniteness does not imply being a Mercer kernel, it is sufficient to exhibit a symmetric matrix M such that:
1. the diagonal entries of M are positive
2. all 2x2 minors have non-negative determinant, and
3. M has a negative eigenvalue. I leave it as an exercise to construct such a matrix.



Interestingly, if R is a Mercer kernel, then the answer to your question is yes, and the process can be described somewhat explicitly. I'll assume that t is restricted to lie in the unit interval $[0,1]$. By Mercer's theorem, we can write $R(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^{infty} lambda_i f_i(x)f_i(y)$, where the functions satisfy $int_0^1 R(x,y)f_i(y)=lambda_if_i(x)$.



Now let $X_t=sum_{i=1}^{infty} sqrt{lambda_i}xi_if_i(t)$ where $xi_i$ are iid normal random variables with mean $0$ and standard deviation $1$. The series converges almost surely by Kolmogorov's Two SEries theorem.



We see that $EX_tX_s=sum_{i,j}sqrt{lambda_ilambda_j}f_i(t)f_j(s)E(xi_ixi_j)$. By independence, we have $E(xi_ixi_j)=Exi_iExi_j=delta_{ij}$. So $EX_tX_s=sum_ilambda_if_i(t)f_i(s)=R(t,s)$ as desired.






share|cite|improve this answer












Obviously not. Consider $R(x,y)=-1$. But I'll assume you also meant to require that $R(x,x)ge 0$. However, even this is not sufficient.



To see this, pick any 3 time points $t_1, t_2, t_3$ and consider the random variables $X_{t_1}, X_{t_2}, X_{t_3}$. Define the matrix $A_{ij}=E(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=R(t_i, t_j)$. I claim $A$ must be non-negative definite. Indeed, for any vector $v$, $(v,Av)=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jA_{ij}=sum_{i,j}v_iv_jE(X_{t_i}X_{t_j})=Esum_{i,j}(v_iX_{t_i})(v_jX_{t_j})=E(sum_i v_iX_{t_i})^2ge 0$. By the same argument, it must be the case that $sum_{i,j=1}^Nv_iv_jR(t_i,t_j)ge 0$ for any $N$, $v_i$ and time points $t_i$. A function which satisfies this condition is called a Mercer kernel.



To see that your condition of positive-semidefiniteness does not imply being a Mercer kernel, it is sufficient to exhibit a symmetric matrix M such that:
1. the diagonal entries of M are positive
2. all 2x2 minors have non-negative determinant, and
3. M has a negative eigenvalue. I leave it as an exercise to construct such a matrix.



Interestingly, if R is a Mercer kernel, then the answer to your question is yes, and the process can be described somewhat explicitly. I'll assume that t is restricted to lie in the unit interval $[0,1]$. By Mercer's theorem, we can write $R(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^{infty} lambda_i f_i(x)f_i(y)$, where the functions satisfy $int_0^1 R(x,y)f_i(y)=lambda_if_i(x)$.



Now let $X_t=sum_{i=1}^{infty} sqrt{lambda_i}xi_if_i(t)$ where $xi_i$ are iid normal random variables with mean $0$ and standard deviation $1$. The series converges almost surely by Kolmogorov's Two SEries theorem.



We see that $EX_tX_s=sum_{i,j}sqrt{lambda_ilambda_j}f_i(t)f_j(s)E(xi_ixi_j)$. By independence, we have $E(xi_ixi_j)=Exi_iExi_j=delta_{ij}$. So $EX_tX_s=sum_ilambda_if_i(t)f_i(s)=R(t,s)$ as desired.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Nov 13 at 23:54









Mike Hawk

1,312110




1,312110












  • because $E(X_{t}^2)=R(t,t)$ cannot be negative
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 14 at 14:27


















  • because $E(X_{t}^2)=R(t,t)$ cannot be negative
    – Mike Hawk
    Nov 14 at 14:27
















because $E(X_{t}^2)=R(t,t)$ cannot be negative
– Mike Hawk
Nov 14 at 14:27




because $E(X_{t}^2)=R(t,t)$ cannot be negative
– Mike Hawk
Nov 14 at 14:27


















 

draft saved


draft discarded



















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2988393%2fcan-we-always-find-a-stochastic-process-whose-autocorrelation-function-is-a-give%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

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







Popular posts from this blog

How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?