Show that the assumption of right-continuity in the statement of the stopping theorem cannot be omitted

136 Views Asked by At

In our homework assignment, we were supposed to find an example showing that the assumption of right-continuity in the statement of the stopping theorem cannot be omitted in general (cf. http://www.math.ethz.ch/education/bachelor/lectures/fs2012/math/bmsc/bmsc_fs12_04.pdf exercise 4-2 c)).

In the hint it said: For a standard exponentially distributed random variable T, consider the process $ M = (M_t)_{t \geq 0} $ given by $ M_t = (T \wedge t ) + 1_{ \{ t \leq T \} } $ together with the $P$-augmentation of the filtration generated by the process $ (T \wedge t) $.

Moreover, we were told that we should try to prove that $ M_t = E[T | \widetilde{\mathcal{F}}_t] $, were $ \widetilde{\mathcal{F}}_t $ denotes the $P$-augmentation of the sigma algebra $ \mathcal{F}_t = \sigma (T \wedge s ; s \leq t) $.

Well, I know that once if proven $ M_t = E[T | \widetilde{\mathcal{F}}_t] $, it follows that $ M $ is a uniformly integrable $ \widetilde{\mathcal{F}}_t $-martingale. Also, I can show that $ T $ is a $ \widetilde{\mathcal{F}}_t $-stopping time. Therefore, if the assumption of right-continuity were not necessary, the stopped process $ M^T $ with $ M_t^T = (T \wedge t ) + 1_{ \{ T \wedge t \leq T \} } = (T \wedge t ) + 1 $ would also be a uniformly integrable martingale (by the stopping theorem). Then, the difference $ N_t := M_t^T - M_t = 1_{ \{ t > T \}} $ would also be a uniformly integrable martingale. But $ E[N_0] = 0 $ whereas $ E[N_{\infty}] = E[1] = 1 $, a contradiction.

Can anybody help me prove $ M_t = E[T | \widetilde{\mathcal{F}}_t] $? Or would anybody happen to know a different counterexample?

Thanks a lot!

Regards, Si