On the submartingale / supermartingale property of diffusions in natural scale
A nonnegative martingale with initial value equal to one mea- sures evidence against a probabilistic hypothesis. The inverse of its value at some stopping time can be interpreted as a Bayes factor. If we exaggerate the evidence by considering the largest value attained so far by such a martingale, the exaggeration will be limited, and there are systematic ways to eliminate it. The inverse of the exaggerated value at some stopping time can be interpreted as a p-value. We give a simple characterization of all increasing functions that eliminate the exaggeration.
In 1994 and 1998 F. Delbaen and W. Schachermayer published two breakthrough papers in which they proved continuous-time versions of the Fundamental Theorem of Asset Pricing. This is one of the most remarkable achievements in modern Mathematical Finance which led to intensive investigations in many applications of the arbitrage theory on a mathematically rigorous basis of stochastic calculus.
This book provides the reader with a detailed understanding of all necessary attributes in stochastic calculus that are required for applications of the theory of stochastic integration in Mathematical Finance, in particular, in the arbitrage theory. The exposition follows the traditions of the Strasbourg school.
Statistical testing can be framed as a repetitive game between two players, Forecaster and Sceptic. On each round, Forecaster sets prices for various gambles, and Sceptic chooses which gambles to make. If Sceptic multiplies by a large factor the capital he puts at risk, he has evidence against Forecaster’s ability. His capital at the end of each round is a measure of his evidence against Forecaster so far. This can go up and then back down. If you report the maximum so far instead of the current value, you are exaggerating the evidence against Forecaster. In this article, we show how to remove the exaggeration. Removing it means systematically reducing the maximum in such a way that a rival to Sceptic can always play so as to obtain current evidence as good as Sceptic’s reduced maximum. We characterize the functions that can achieve such reductions. Because these functions may impose only modest reductions, we think of our result as a method of insuring against loss of evidence. In the context of an actual market, it is a method of insuring against the loss of what an investor has gained so far.