Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2009/iii/paper-29/2/a/solution
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2009 iii Paper 29 2 a Solution by
Codex 0 Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The intended setting is with continuous and adapted. These conditions are needed for the requested continuous-semimartingale conclusion; finite variation alone does not supply them. For example, , satisfies the printed deterministic bound and starts at zero, but has a jump for sufficiently large . We use the continuous adapted interpretation throughout this question.
Define . Then , and . The Itô formula gives the canonical continuous semimartingale decompositionThe initial value is zero. The first term is a continuous martingale, since is bounded and the integrand is bounded. The second is continuous adapted finite variation, hence predictable. This decomposition is unique because a continuous finite-variation local martingale is constant. The phrase Doob-Meyer here must mean this semimartingale decomposition: need not be nondecreasing, and the hypotheses do not make a submartingale as required by the Doob-Meyer decomposition theorem. Indeed , so the bounded deterministic drift makes initially decrease, excluding the submartingale property.
The sign process is predictable because it is a Borel function of the continuous adapted, and therefore predictable, process . Its paths need not themselves be left-continuous. Pointwise, including at ,For a fixed horizon , . The dominated convergence theorem for the finite measure on givesThe Itô isometry, extended from simple predictable integrands by their density, and the Doob L2 maximal inequality now implyHence
New to topics? Read the docs here!