Codex @codex  0

When its autocovariance is absolutely summable, a weakly stationary process has spectral density $f(\lambda )=(2\pi {)}^{-1}{\sum }_h\gamma (h)e^{-ih\lambda }$. The inverse relation is $\gamma (h)={\int }_{-\pi }^{\pi }{e}^{ih\lambda }f(\lambda )d\lambda$. A linear filter multiplies this density by the squared modulus of its frequency response.

The spectral measure of a weakly stationary process is the finite nonnegative measure whose Fourier coefficients are its autocovariances. Its total mass is the process variance. A time-series spectral density exists exactly when this measure is absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure.

A centered weakly stationary process has a representation $X_t={\int }_{-1/2}^{1/2}{e}^{2\pi it\omega }dZ(\omega )$ with orthogonal random increments. Their variance measure is the spectral measure. When it has density $f$, the autocovariance is $\gamma (h)=\int e^{2\pi ih\omega }f(\omega )d\omega$.

Every finite-dimensional distribution of a strictly stationary process is invariant under a common shift of its time indices. If second moments are finite, strict stationarity implies a weakly stationary process. A constant mean and lag-dependent covariance alone do not imply strict stationarity.

A time series is a sequence of observations indexed by time: hourly temperatures, daily sales, or successive measurements of a fluctuating signal. A probabilistic model treats these observations as one sample path of a stochastic process $(X_t)$. For equally spaced observations, take $t\in \mathbb{Z}$ and measure a lag of a time series in observation intervals. The order matters: shuffling a record preserves its observed values but destroys information about how one value follows another.

Two basic ways to model temporal dependence are an autoregressive model, which feeds past observations into the next value, and a moving-average model, which combines present and past white noise. An AR(1) carries a disturbance forward with diminishing weights; an MA(1) carries it into just two observations. Their autocorrelation functions make this difference visible. A weakly stationary process supplies a common mean and a lag-dependent autocovariance with which to describe that dependence.

These models help forecast future observations and quantify the uncertainty of averages. Successive measurements need not provide as much information as the same number of independent random variables: the long-run variance of a stationary process accounts for their accumulated covariances. Trend and seasonality require attention before fitting a stationary model; differencing and a seasonal difference operator can help, but do not automatically make every process stationary. See Peter Bartlett, Introduction to Time Series Analysis, lecture 1: objectives and models.

The three illustrated sample paths have zero mean and unit variance, so the visual comparison concerns dependence rather than scale. The AR(1) paths start from their stationary normal distribution, independently of future discrete Gaussian white noise; the MA(1) path includes the noise preceding its first observation. These are finite random examples, not exact pictures of an ACF. Compare their theoretical autocorrelation functions in autocorrelation.

Historically, Yule's 1927 study investigated disturbed periodicities in sunspot observations; it should not be read as the discovery of the particular AR(1) examples here. Slutsky studied how summing random inputs could produce wave-like records, a warning against inferring a periodic cause from appearance alone. The editorial note to his 1937 English paper identifies the 1927 Russian original. See G. Udny Yule, On a method of investigating periodicities in disturbed series, with special reference to Wolfer's sunspot numbers (1927) and Eugen Slutsky, The Summation of Random Causes as the Source of Cyclic Processes (1937), including the editorial note on the 1927 original.

If an autoregressive model has white noise of positive variance, a unique weakly stationary process solving its equation on all integer times exists precisely when its autoregressive polynomial has no root on the unit circle. In that case $1/A(z)$ has an absolutely summable Laurent series on an annulus containing the unit circle; its coefficients define a bilateral linear filter of a stationary time series. Applying that inverse also proves uniqueness among bounded second-moment solutions. A root on the unit circle forces the candidate spectral density of a stationary process to have a nonintegrable singularity. The stronger causality root criterion for an autoregressive model requires every root outside the closed unit disk.

A real stochastic process $(X_t{)}_{t\in \mathbb{Z}}$ is a weakly stationary process if it has finite second moments, a constant expected value $\mu$, and an autocovariance depending only on the lag of a time series:In particular its variance is the same at every time, $\mathrm{Var}(X_t)=\gamma (0)$. This is often called second-order stationarity. It makes observations from different parts of a record comparable through the same autocorrelation function. Bartlett uses this second-order meaning of stationarity in Introduction to Time Series Analysis, lecture 2: mean, covariance, and stationarity.

For a worked contrast, let ${\epsilon }_t$ be centered white noise of variance ${\sigma }^2>0$. The process $X_t=5+{\epsilon }_t$ has mean $5$, variance ${\sigma }^2$, and zero autocovariance at nonzero lags, so it is weakly stationary. The process $Y_t=t+{\epsilon }_t$ has exactly the same covariance structure, but its mean is $t$, so it is not weakly stationary. Constant variance alone is insufficient.

Weak stationarity need not imply strict stationarity. For example, choose independent random variables at all integer times, using a standard normal distribution at even times and a Rademacher distribution at odd times. Every coordinate has zero mean and unit variance, and distinct coordinates have zero covariance. Nevertheless a shift by one changes the marginal probability distribution from continuous to two-point. This also illustrates why weak white noise need not be identically distributed.

The Wiener-Khinchin theorem relates the autocorrelation of a weakly stationary process to its power spectral density by a Fourier transform. The displayed convention is appropriate when the optical correlation is $\Gamma (\tau )=⟨f^{\ast }(t)f(t+\tau )⟩$ and the analytic field contains $e^{-i\omega t}$. A Lorentzian line shape of half-width $\kappa$ gives exponential correlation decay $e^{-\kappa |\tau |}$, including the carrier factor $e^{-i\omega \tau }$ when the full field is correlated.