• C++ Programming for Financial Engineering
    Highly recommended by thousands of MFE students. Covers essential C++ topics with applications to financial engineering. Learn more Join!
    Python for Finance with Intro to Data Science
    Gain practical understanding of Python to read, understand, and write professional Python code for your first day on the job. Learn more Join!
    An Intuition-Based Options Primer for FE
    Ideal for entry level positions interviews and graduate studies, specializing in options trading arbitrage and options valuation models. Learn more Join!

Summary of some basic stochastic calculus results

Joined
11/5/14
Messages
294
Points
53
Hi guys,

I had taken down some quick summary notes when reviewing stochastic calculus recently, deriving things from first principles and then solving lots of exercise problems from standard sources. Might be helpful for a quick refresher on sell-side math. So, sharing it here.

Cheers.
 

Attachments

  • stochastic_calculus.pdf
    1.8 MB · Views: 81
p. 26 A good test: compute Lebesgue integral numerically + manually using N subdivisions of y axis

e.g. f(x) = x^2

N = 2,4,8 etc.

// figures not numbered.
 
That's a good sense check exercise. Here's my solution for [imath]\int_{0}^{1} f d\mu [/imath].

For [imath]N=2[/imath] subdivisions, we can approximate the [imath]f(x)[/imath] as the step function:

[math]0 \cdot 1_{0 \leq x \leq 1/\sqrt{2}} + (1/2) \cdot 1_{1/\sqrt{2} \leq x \leq 1}[/math]
So, I get:

[math]\int_0^1 f d\mu \approx (0.5)(0.29289) = 0.14644[/math]
For [imath]N=4[/imath] subdivisions, we can approximate the [imath]f(x)[/imath] as the step function:

[math]0 \cdot 1_{0 \leq x \leq 1/\sqrt{4}} + (1/4) \cdot 1_{1/\sqrt{4} \leq x \leq 1/\sqrt{2}} + (2/4) \cdot 1_{1/\sqrt{2} \leq x \leq \sqrt{3}/2} + (3/4) \cdot 1_{\sqrt{3}/2 \leq x \leq 1} [/math]
So, I get:

[math]\int_0^1 f d\mu \approx (0.25)(0.207106) + (0.50)(0.15891) + (0.75)(0.133974) = 0.231712[/math]
I think I should expect the numerical answer to be much closer to [imath]0.3333[/imath] for [imath]N=8[/imath]. Will code it up after work tonight! :)
 
Another way, from 1st principles from definition of upper and lower limits U and L, value always in (L,U), let N -> 2,4, ...
The way Archimedes wudda done it.
 

Attachments

  • Lebesgue.jpg
    Lebesgue.jpg
    100.3 KB · Views: 20
Another way, from 1st principles from definition of upper and lower limits U and L, value always in (L,U), let N -> 2,4, ...
The way Archimedes wudda done it.
Oh yeap, basically the only requirement is that the pre-images; [imath]E_j[/imath]'s should be nice sets, right, (and not some pathological set), which is what we mean by [imath]f[/imath] being measurable, or the random variable [imath]X[/imath] being (lebesgue) measurable in the first place.

Even the properties of expectation are easily gotten. 1) Prove something for a step random variable 2) Expectation of a non-negative random variable is simply [imath]\mathbb{E}[X] = \sup \{\mathbb{E}Z: \text{Z is step variable }, Z\leq X \}[/imath], so pass to the limit.

With little work, you get some very powerful properties.
 
Back
Top