Show that the composition of a sub-invariant measure with a sub-Markov kernel is a contraction on $L^p$












2












$begingroup$


Let





  • $(Omega,mathcal A)$ be a measurable space


  • $mu$ be a finite measure on $(Omega,mathcal A)$


  • $kappa$ be a sub-Markov kernel on $(Omega,mathcal A)$

  • $pge1$


I'll denote the composition of $mu$ and $kappa$ by $mukappa$. Moreover, $$kappa f:=intkappa(x,{rm d}y)f(y)$$ and $$mu f:=int f:{rm d}mu$$ whenever the integrals are well-defined. It's easy to see that if $f:Omegatooverline{mathbb R}$ is $mathcal A$-measurable and either nonnegative or bounded, then $kappa f$ is $mathcal A$-measurable.



Now, assume $$mukappalemutag1$$ and let $ginmathcal L^p(mu)$. I want to show that $kappa gin L^p(mu)$ and $$left|kappa gright|_{L^p(mu)}leleft|gright|_{L^p(mu)}tag2.$$



By the aforementioned property, $kappa|g|$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable. Moreover, by a Fubini like result $$mu(kappa f)=(mukappa)ftag3$$ for all $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegato[0,infty]$ and hence $$mu(kappa|g|)=(mukappa)|g|<infty.$$ Thus, $$kappa|g|<infty;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag4$$ and hence $kappa g$ is $mu$-almost everywhere well-defined. We can find a sequence $(g_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ of (elementary, simple, step - call it however you like) $mathcal A$-measurable functions with $$g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}gtag5$$ and $$left|g_nright|leleft|gright|;;;text{for all }ninmathbb Ntag6.$$ Thus, by dominated convergence, $$kappa g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag7.$$ So, there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegatomathbb R$ (e.g. $f:=limsup_{ntoinfty}kappa g_n$) with $$f=kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag8.$$ By Jensen's inequality $$left|kappa gright|^plekappa|g|^p$$ and hence $$left|fright|_{L^p(mu)}^plemu(kappa|g|^p)=(mukappa)|g|^p=left|gright|_{L^p(mu)}^ptag9.$$




Did I overcomplicate anything? Please let me know. In any case, my actual question is: Is it correct that we're not able to show that $kappa g$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable on all of $Omega$? As shown in my proof, I guess that it's only possible to show that there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $mu$-version of $kappa g$. Or am I missing something?











share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    2












    $begingroup$


    Let





    • $(Omega,mathcal A)$ be a measurable space


    • $mu$ be a finite measure on $(Omega,mathcal A)$


    • $kappa$ be a sub-Markov kernel on $(Omega,mathcal A)$

    • $pge1$


    I'll denote the composition of $mu$ and $kappa$ by $mukappa$. Moreover, $$kappa f:=intkappa(x,{rm d}y)f(y)$$ and $$mu f:=int f:{rm d}mu$$ whenever the integrals are well-defined. It's easy to see that if $f:Omegatooverline{mathbb R}$ is $mathcal A$-measurable and either nonnegative or bounded, then $kappa f$ is $mathcal A$-measurable.



    Now, assume $$mukappalemutag1$$ and let $ginmathcal L^p(mu)$. I want to show that $kappa gin L^p(mu)$ and $$left|kappa gright|_{L^p(mu)}leleft|gright|_{L^p(mu)}tag2.$$



    By the aforementioned property, $kappa|g|$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable. Moreover, by a Fubini like result $$mu(kappa f)=(mukappa)ftag3$$ for all $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegato[0,infty]$ and hence $$mu(kappa|g|)=(mukappa)|g|<infty.$$ Thus, $$kappa|g|<infty;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag4$$ and hence $kappa g$ is $mu$-almost everywhere well-defined. We can find a sequence $(g_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ of (elementary, simple, step - call it however you like) $mathcal A$-measurable functions with $$g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}gtag5$$ and $$left|g_nright|leleft|gright|;;;text{for all }ninmathbb Ntag6.$$ Thus, by dominated convergence, $$kappa g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag7.$$ So, there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegatomathbb R$ (e.g. $f:=limsup_{ntoinfty}kappa g_n$) with $$f=kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag8.$$ By Jensen's inequality $$left|kappa gright|^plekappa|g|^p$$ and hence $$left|fright|_{L^p(mu)}^plemu(kappa|g|^p)=(mukappa)|g|^p=left|gright|_{L^p(mu)}^ptag9.$$




    Did I overcomplicate anything? Please let me know. In any case, my actual question is: Is it correct that we're not able to show that $kappa g$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable on all of $Omega$? As shown in my proof, I guess that it's only possible to show that there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $mu$-version of $kappa g$. Or am I missing something?











    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      2












      2








      2





      $begingroup$


      Let





      • $(Omega,mathcal A)$ be a measurable space


      • $mu$ be a finite measure on $(Omega,mathcal A)$


      • $kappa$ be a sub-Markov kernel on $(Omega,mathcal A)$

      • $pge1$


      I'll denote the composition of $mu$ and $kappa$ by $mukappa$. Moreover, $$kappa f:=intkappa(x,{rm d}y)f(y)$$ and $$mu f:=int f:{rm d}mu$$ whenever the integrals are well-defined. It's easy to see that if $f:Omegatooverline{mathbb R}$ is $mathcal A$-measurable and either nonnegative or bounded, then $kappa f$ is $mathcal A$-measurable.



      Now, assume $$mukappalemutag1$$ and let $ginmathcal L^p(mu)$. I want to show that $kappa gin L^p(mu)$ and $$left|kappa gright|_{L^p(mu)}leleft|gright|_{L^p(mu)}tag2.$$



      By the aforementioned property, $kappa|g|$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable. Moreover, by a Fubini like result $$mu(kappa f)=(mukappa)ftag3$$ for all $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegato[0,infty]$ and hence $$mu(kappa|g|)=(mukappa)|g|<infty.$$ Thus, $$kappa|g|<infty;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag4$$ and hence $kappa g$ is $mu$-almost everywhere well-defined. We can find a sequence $(g_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ of (elementary, simple, step - call it however you like) $mathcal A$-measurable functions with $$g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}gtag5$$ and $$left|g_nright|leleft|gright|;;;text{for all }ninmathbb Ntag6.$$ Thus, by dominated convergence, $$kappa g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag7.$$ So, there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegatomathbb R$ (e.g. $f:=limsup_{ntoinfty}kappa g_n$) with $$f=kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag8.$$ By Jensen's inequality $$left|kappa gright|^plekappa|g|^p$$ and hence $$left|fright|_{L^p(mu)}^plemu(kappa|g|^p)=(mukappa)|g|^p=left|gright|_{L^p(mu)}^ptag9.$$




      Did I overcomplicate anything? Please let me know. In any case, my actual question is: Is it correct that we're not able to show that $kappa g$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable on all of $Omega$? As shown in my proof, I guess that it's only possible to show that there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $mu$-version of $kappa g$. Or am I missing something?











      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      Let





      • $(Omega,mathcal A)$ be a measurable space


      • $mu$ be a finite measure on $(Omega,mathcal A)$


      • $kappa$ be a sub-Markov kernel on $(Omega,mathcal A)$

      • $pge1$


      I'll denote the composition of $mu$ and $kappa$ by $mukappa$. Moreover, $$kappa f:=intkappa(x,{rm d}y)f(y)$$ and $$mu f:=int f:{rm d}mu$$ whenever the integrals are well-defined. It's easy to see that if $f:Omegatooverline{mathbb R}$ is $mathcal A$-measurable and either nonnegative or bounded, then $kappa f$ is $mathcal A$-measurable.



      Now, assume $$mukappalemutag1$$ and let $ginmathcal L^p(mu)$. I want to show that $kappa gin L^p(mu)$ and $$left|kappa gright|_{L^p(mu)}leleft|gright|_{L^p(mu)}tag2.$$



      By the aforementioned property, $kappa|g|$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable. Moreover, by a Fubini like result $$mu(kappa f)=(mukappa)ftag3$$ for all $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegato[0,infty]$ and hence $$mu(kappa|g|)=(mukappa)|g|<infty.$$ Thus, $$kappa|g|<infty;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag4$$ and hence $kappa g$ is $mu$-almost everywhere well-defined. We can find a sequence $(g_n)_{ninmathbb N}$ of (elementary, simple, step - call it however you like) $mathcal A$-measurable functions with $$g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}gtag5$$ and $$left|g_nright|leleft|gright|;;;text{for all }ninmathbb Ntag6.$$ Thus, by dominated convergence, $$kappa g_nxrightarrow{ntoinfty}kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag7.$$ So, there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $f:Omegatomathbb R$ (e.g. $f:=limsup_{ntoinfty}kappa g_n$) with $$f=kappa g;;;mutext{-almost everywhere}tag8.$$ By Jensen's inequality $$left|kappa gright|^plekappa|g|^p$$ and hence $$left|fright|_{L^p(mu)}^plemu(kappa|g|^p)=(mukappa)|g|^p=left|gright|_{L^p(mu)}^ptag9.$$




      Did I overcomplicate anything? Please let me know. In any case, my actual question is: Is it correct that we're not able to show that $kappa g$ is well-defined and $mathcal A$-measurable on all of $Omega$? As shown in my proof, I guess that it's only possible to show that there is a $mathcal A$-measurable $mu$-version of $kappa g$. Or am I missing something?








      probability-theory measure-theory stochastic-processes markov-process stochastic-analysis






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 30 '18 at 0:36









      0xbadf00d0xbadf00d

      1,68041534




      1,68041534






















          0






          active

          oldest

          votes












          Your Answer








          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',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          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%2f3056406%2fshow-that-the-composition-of-a-sub-invariant-measure-with-a-sub-markov-kernel-is%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          0






          active

          oldest

          votes








          0






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes
















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3056406%2fshow-that-the-composition-of-a-sub-invariant-measure-with-a-sub-markov-kernel-is%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

          Biblatex bibliography style without URLs when DOI exists (in Overleaf with Zotero bibliography)

          ComboBox Display Member on multiple fields

          Is it possible to collect Nectar points via Trainline?