Loading [MathJax]/jax/element/mml/optable/GeneralPunctuation.js
Research article

Least squares estimation for non-ergodic weighted fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process of general parameters

  • Received: 01 April 2021 Accepted: 02 September 2021 Published: 07 September 2021
  • MSC : 62F12, 60F05, 60G15, 60H05

  • Let Ba,b:={Ba,bt,t0} be a weighted fractional Brownian motion of parameters a>1, |b|<1, |b|<a+1. We consider a least square-type method to estimate the drift parameter θ>0 of the weighted fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process X:={Xt,t0} defined by X0=0; dXt=θXtdt+dBa,bt. In this work, we provide least squares-type estimators for θ based continuous-time and discrete-time observations of X. The strong consistency and the asymptotic behavior in distribution of the estimators are studied for all (a,b) such that a>1, |b|<1, |b|<a+1. Here we extend the results of [1,2] (resp. [3]), where the strong consistency and the asymptotic distribution of the estimators are proved for 12<a<0, a<b<a+1 (resp. 1<a<0, a<b<a+1). Simulations are performed to illustrate the theoretical results.

    Citation: Abdulaziz Alsenafi, Mishari Al-Foraih, Khalifa Es-Sebaiy. Least squares estimation for non-ergodic weighted fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process of general parameters[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 12780-12794. doi: 10.3934/math.2021738

    Related Papers:

    [1] Chunhao Cai, Min Zhang . A note on inference for the mixed fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process with drift. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 6439-6453. doi: 10.3934/math.2021378
    [2] Huantian Xie, Nenghui Kuang . Least squares type estimations for discretely observed nonergodic Gaussian Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes of the second kind. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(1): 1095-1114. doi: 10.3934/math.2022065
    [3] Yajun Song, Ruyue Hu, Yifan Wu, Xiaohui Ai . Analysis of a stochastic two-species Schoener's competitive model with Lévy jumps and Ornstein–Uhlenbeck process. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 12239-12258. doi: 10.3934/math.2024598
    [4] Rou Lin, Min Zhao, Jinlu Zhang . Random uniform exponential attractors for non-autonomous stochastic Schrödinger lattice systems in weighted space. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 2871-2890. doi: 10.3934/math.2023150
    [5] Jingwen Cui, Hao Liu, Xiaohui Ai . Analysis of a stochastic fear effect predator-prey system with Crowley-Martin functional response and the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 34981-35003. doi: 10.3934/math.20241665
    [6] Chunting Ji, Hui Liu, Jie Xin . Random attractors of the stochastic extended Brusselator system with a multiplicative noise. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 3584-3611. doi: 10.3934/math.2020233
    [7] Ruyue Hu, Chi Han, Yifan Wu, Xiaohui Ai . Analysis of a stochastic Leslie-Gower three-species food chain system with Holling-II functional response and Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 18910-18928. doi: 10.3934/math.2024920
    [8] Nelson T. Jamba, Gonçalo Jacinto, Patrícia A. Filipe, Carlos A. Braumann . Estimation for stochastic differential equation mixed models using approximation methods. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 7866-7894. doi: 10.3934/math.2024383
    [9] SidAhmed Benchiha, Amer Ibrahim Al-Omari, Naif Alotaibi, Mansour Shrahili . Weighted generalized Quasi Lindley distribution: Different methods of estimation, applications for Covid-19 and engineering data. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(11): 11850-11878. doi: 10.3934/math.2021688
    [10] Shaoling Zhou, Huixin Chai, Xiaosheng Wang . Barrier option pricing with floating interest rate based on uncertain exponential Ornstein–Uhlenbeck model. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 25809-25833. doi: 10.3934/math.20241261
  • Let Ba,b:={Ba,bt,t0} be a weighted fractional Brownian motion of parameters a>1, |b|<1, |b|<a+1. We consider a least square-type method to estimate the drift parameter θ>0 of the weighted fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process X:={Xt,t0} defined by X0=0; dXt=θXtdt+dBa,bt. In this work, we provide least squares-type estimators for θ based continuous-time and discrete-time observations of X. The strong consistency and the asymptotic behavior in distribution of the estimators are studied for all (a,b) such that a>1, |b|<1, |b|<a+1. Here we extend the results of [1,2] (resp. [3]), where the strong consistency and the asymptotic distribution of the estimators are proved for 12<a<0, a<b<a+1 (resp. 1<a<0, a<b<a+1). Simulations are performed to illustrate the theoretical results.



    Parameter estimation for non-ergodic type diffusion processes has been developed in several papers. For motivation and further references, we refer the reader to Basawa and Scott [4], Dietz and Kutoyants [5], Jacod [6] and Shimizu [7]. However, the statistical analysis for equations driven by fractional Brownian motion (fBm) is obviously more recent. The development of stochastic calculus with respect to the fBm allowed to study such models. In recent years, several researchers have been interested in studying statistical estimation problems for Gaussian Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes. Estimation of the drift parameters in fractional-noise-driven Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes is a problem that is both well-motivated by practical needs and theoretically challenging.

    In this paper, we consider the weighted fractional Brownian motion (wfBm) Ba,b:={Ba,bt,t0} with parameters (a,b) such that a>1, |b|<1 and |b|<a+1, defined as a centered Gaussian process starting from zero with covariance

    Ra,b(t,s)=E(Ba,btBa,bs)=st0ua[(tu)b+(su)b]du,s,t0. (1.1)

    For a=0, 1<b<1, the wfBm is a fBm. The process Ba,b was introduced by [8] as an extension of fBm. Moreover, it shares several properties with fBm, such as self-similarity, path continuity, behavior of increments, long-range dependence, non-semimartingale, and others. But, unlike fBm, the wfBm does not have stationary increments for a0. For more details about the subject, we refer the reader to [8].

    In this work we consider the non-ergodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process X:={Xt,t0} driven by a wfBm Ba,b, that is the unique solution of the following linear stochastic differential equation

    X0=0;dXt=θXtdt+dBa,bt, (1.2)

    where θ>0 is an unknown parameter.

    An example of interesting problem related to (1.2) is the statistical estimation of θ when one observes X. In recent years, several researchers have been interested in studying statistical estimation problems for Gaussian Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes. Let us mention some works in this direction in this case of Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process driven by a fractional Brownian motion B0,b, that is, the solution of (1.2), where a=0. Using the maximum likelihood approach (see [9]), the techniques used to construct maximum likelihood estimators for the drift parameter are based on Girsanov transforms for fractional Brownian motion and depend on the properties of the deterministic fractional operators (determined by the Hurst parameter) related to the fBm. In general, the MLE is not easily computable. On the other hand, using leat squares method, in the ergodic case corresponding to θ<0, the statistical estimation for the parameter θ has been studied by several papers, for instance [10,11,12,13,14] and the references therein. Further, in the non-ergodic case corresponding to θ>0, the estimation of θ has been considered by using least squares method, for example in [15,16,17,18] and the references therein.

    Here our aim is to estimate the the drift parameter θ based on continuous-time and discrete-time observations of X, by using least squares-type estimators (LSEs) for θ.

    First we will consider the following LSE

    ˜θt=X2t2t0X2sds,t0, (1.3)

    as statistic to estimate θ based on the continuous-time observations {Xs, s[0,t]} of (1.2), as t. We will prove the strong consistency and the asymptotic behavior in distribution of the estimator ˜θt for all parameters a>1, |b|<1 and |b|<a+1. Our results extend those proved in [1,2], where 12<a<0, a<b<a+1 only.

    Further, from a practical point of view, in parametric inference, it is more realistic and interesting to consider asymptotic estimation for (1.2) based on discrete observations. So, we will assume that the process X given in (1.2) is observed equidistantly in time with the step size Δn: ti=iΔn,i=0,,n, and Tn=nΔn denotes the length of the "observation window". Then we will consider the following estimators

    ˆθn=ni=1Xti1(XtiXti1)Δnni=1X2ti1 (1.4)

    and

    ˇθn=X2Tn2Δnni=1X2ti1 (1.5)

    as statistics to estimate θ based on the sampling data Xti,i=0,,n, as Δn0 and n. We will study the asymptotic behavior and the rate consistency of the estimators ˆθn and ˇθn for all parameters a>1, |b|<1 and |b|<a+1. In this case, our results extend those proved in [3], where 1<a<0, a<b<a+1 only.

    The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present auxiliary results that are used in the calculations of the paper. In Section 3, we prove the consistency and the asymptotic distribution of the estimator ˜θt given in (1.3), based on the continuous-time observations of X. In Section 3, we study the asymptotic behavior and the rate consistency of the estimators ˆθn and ˇθn defined in (1.4) and (1.5), respectively, based on the discrete-time observations of X. Our theoretical study is completed with simulations. We end the paper with a short review on some results from [15,17] needed for the proofs of our results.

    This section is devoted to prove some technical ingredients, which will be needed throughout this paper.

    In the following lemma we provide a useful decomposition of the covariance function Ra,b(t,s) of Ba,b.

    Lemma 2.1. Suppose that a>1, |b|<1 and |b|<a+1. Then we can rewrite the covariance Ra,b(t,s) of Ba,b, given in (2.1) as

    Ra,b(t,s)=β(a+1,b+1)[ta+b+1+sa+b+1]m(t,s), (2.1)

    where β(c,d)=10xc1(1x)d1 denotes the usual beta function, and the function m(t,s) is defined by

    m(t,s):=ststua(tsu)bdu. (2.2)

    Proof. We have for every s,t0,

    Ra,b(t,s) (2.3)
    =E(Ba,btBa,bs)=st0ua[(tu)b+(su)b]du=st0ua[(tsu)b+(tsu)b]du=st0ua(tsu)bdu+st0ua(tsu)bdu=st0ua(tsu)bduststua(tsu)bdu+st0ua(tsu)bdu. (2.4)

    Further, making change of variables x=u/t, we have for every t0,

    t0ua(tu)bdu=tbt0ua(1ut)bdu=ta+b+110xa(1x)bdu=ta+b+1β(a+1,b+1). (2.5)

    Therefore, combining (2.4) and (2.5), we deduce that

    Ra,b(t,s)=β(a+1,b+1)[(ts)a+b+1+(ts)a+b+1]ststua(tsu)bdu=β(a+1,b+1)[ta+b+1+sa+b+1]ststua(tsu)bdu, (2.6)

    which proves (2.1).

    We will also need the following technical lemma.

    Lemma 2.2. We have as t,

    It:=taeθtt0eθsm(t,s)dsΓ(b+1)θb+2, (2.7)
    Jt:=tae2θtt0t0eθseθrm(s,r)drdsΓ(b+1)θb+3, (2.8)

    where Γ(.) is the standard gamma function, whereas the function m(t,s) is defined in (2.2).

    Proof. We first prove (2.7). We have,

    taeθtt0eθsm(t,s)ds=taeθtt0eθstsua(tu)bduds=taeθtt0duua(tu)bu0dseθs=taeθtt0duua(tu)b(eθu1)θ=taeθtθt0ua(tu)beθudutaeθtθt0ua(tu)bdu.

    On the other hand, by the change of variables x=tu, we get

    taeθtθt0ua(tu)beθudu=taθt0(tx)axbeθxdx=1θt0(1xt)axbeθxdx1θ0xbeθxdx=Γ(b+1)θb+2

    as t. Moreover, by the change of variables x=u/t,

    taeθtθt0ua(tu)bdu=eθtθtbt0(u/t)a(1ut)bdx=eθtθtb+1t0xa(1x)bdx=eθtθtb+1β(a+1,b+1)0

    as t. Thus the proof of the convergence (2.7) is done.

    For (2.8), using L'Hôpital's rule, we obtain

    limttae2θtt0t0eθseθrm(s,r)drds=limt2t0s0eθseθrm(s,r)drdstae2θt=limt2t0eθteθrm(t,r)drtae2θt(2θ+at)=limt2(2θ+at)taeθtt0eθrm(t,r)dr=Γ(b+1)θb+3,

    where the latter equality comes from (2.7). Therefore the convergence (2.8) is proved.

    In this section we will establish the consistency and the asymptotic distribution of the least square-type estimator ˜θt given in (1.3), based on the continuous-time observation {Xs, s[0,t]} given by (1.2), as t.

    Recall that if XN(m1,σ1) and YN(m2,σ2) are two independent random variables, then X/Y follows a Cauchy-type distribution. For a motivation and further references, we refer the reader to [19], as well as [20]. Notice also that if NN(0,1) is independent of Ba,b, then N is independent of Z, since Z:=0eθsBa,bsds is a functional of Ba,b.

    Theorem 3.1. Assume that a>1, |b|<1, |b|<a+1, and let ~θt be the estimator given in (1.3). Then, as t,

    ˜θtθalmostsurely.

    Moreover, as t,

    ta/2eθt(˜θtθ)law2σBa,bE(Z2)C(1),

    where σBa,b=Γ(b+1)θb+1, Z:=0eθsBa,bsds, whereas C(1) is the standard Cauchy distribution with the probability density function 1π(1+x2); xR.

    Proof. In order to prove this Theorem 3.1, using Theorem 6.1, it suffices to check that the assumptions (H1), (H2), (H3), (H4) hold.

    Using (2.1) and the change of variables x=(tu)/(ts), we get, for every 0<st,

    E(Ba,btBa,bs)2=2tsua(tu)bdu=2(ts)b+110[t(1x)+sx]axbdx=2ta(ts)b+110[(1x)+stx]axbdx=:Ia,b.

    Further, using the fact that x(1x)+(s/t)x is continuous and doesn't vanish on [0,1], there exists constant Ca depending only on a such that

    Ia,b2Cata(ts)b+110xbdx=2Cata(ts)b+11b+1.

    This implies

    E(Ba,btBa,bs)22Cab+1ta(ts)b+1.

    Furthermore, if 1<a<0, we have ta(ts)b+1(ts)a+b+1=|ts|(a+b+1)(b+1), and if a0, we have ta(ts)b+1Ta(ts)b+1=Ta|ts|(a+b+1)(b+1).

    Consequently, for any fixed T, there exists a constant Ca,b(T) depending only on a,b,T such that, for every 0<stT,

    E(Ba,btBa,bs)2Ca,b(T)|ts|(a+b+1)(b+1),

    Therefore, using the fact that Ba,b is Gaussian, and Kolmogorov's continuity criterion, we deduce that Ba,b has a version with ((a+b+1)(b+1)ε)-Hölder continuous paths for every ε(0,(a+b+1)(b+1)). Thus (H1) holds for any δ in (0,(a+b+1)(b+1)).

    On the other hand, according to (2.1) we have for every t0,

    E(Ba,bt)2=2β(1+a,1+b)ta+b+1,

    which proves that (H2) holds for γ=(a+b+1)/2.

    Now it remains to check that the assumptions (H3) and (H4) hold for ν=a/2 and σBa,b=Γ(b+1)θb+1. Let us first compute the limiting variance of ta/2eθtt0eθsdBa,bs as t. By (2.1) we obtain

    E[(ta/2eθtt0eθsdBa,bs)2]=E[(ta/2eθt(eθtBa,btθt0eθsBa,bsds))2]=ta(Ra,b(t,t)2θeθtt0eθsRa,b(t,s)ds+θ2e2θtt0t0eθseθrRa,b(s,r)dsdr)=taΔgBa,b(t)+2θItθ2Jt, (3.1)

    where It, Jt and ΔgBa,b(t) are defined in (2.7), (2.8) and Lemma 6.1, respectively, whereas gBa,b(s,r)=β(a+1,b+1)(sa+b+1+ra+b+1).

    On the other hand, since gBa,bs(s,0)=β(a+1,b+1)(a+b+1)sa+b, and 2gBa,bsr(s,r)=0, it follows from (6.2) that

    taΔgBa,b(t)=2β(a+1,b+1)(a+b+1)tae2θtt0sa+beθsds2β(a+1,b+1)eθtta+b+10ast. (3.2)

    Combining (3.1), (3.2), (2.7) and (2.8), we get

    E[(ta/2eθtt0eθsdBa,bs)2]Γ(b+1)θb+1ast,

    which implies that (H3) holds.

    Hence, to finish the proof it remains to check that (H4) holds, that is, for all fixed s0

    limtE(Ba,bsta/2eθtt0eθrdBa,br)=0.

    Let us consider s<t. According to (6.4), we can write

    E(Ba,bsta/2eθtt0eθrdBa,br)=ta/2(Ra,b(s,t)θeθtt0eθrRa,b(s,r)dr)=ta/2(Ra,b(s,t)θeθttseθrRa,b(s,r)drθeθts0eθrRa,b(s,r)dr)=ta/2(eθ(ts)Ra,b(s,s)+eθttseθrRa,br(s,r)drθeθts0eθrRa,b(s,r)dr).

    It is clear that ta/2(eθ(ts)Ra,b(s,s)θeθts0eθrRa,b(s,r)dr)0 as t. Let us now prove that

    ta/2eθttseθrRa,br(s,r)dr0

    as t. Using (1.1) we have for s<r

    Ra,br(s,r)=bs0ua(ru)b1du

    Applying L'Hôspital's rule we obtain

    limtta/2eθttseθrRa,br(s,r)dr=limtbta/2θ+a2ts0ua(tu)b1du=limtbtb1a2θ+a2ts0ua(1u/t)b1du0ast,

    due to b1a2<0. In fact, if 1<a<0, we use b<a+1, then b<a+1<a2+1. Otherwise, if a>0, we use b<1, then b1a2<b1<0. Therefore the proof of Theorem 3.1 is complete.

    In this section, our purpose is to study the asymptotic behavior and the rate consistency of the estimators ˆθn and ˇθn based on the sampling data Xti,i=0,,n of (1.2), where ti=iΔn,i=0,,n, and Tn=nΔn denotes the length of the "observation window".

    Definition 4.1. Let {Zn} be a sequence of random variables defined on a probability space (Ω,F,P). We say {Zn} is tight (or bounded in probability), if for every ε>0, there exists Mε>0 such that,

    P(|Zn|>Mε)<ε,foralln.

    Theorem 4.1. Assume that a>1, |b|<1, |b|<a+1. Let ˆθn and ˇθn be the estimators given in (1.4) and (1.5), respectively. Suppose that Δn0 and nΔ1+αn for some α>0. Then, as n,

    ˆθnθ,ˇθnθalmostsurely,

    and for any q0,

    ΔqneθTn(ˆθnθ)andΔqneθTn(ˇθnθ)arenottight.

    In addition, if we assume that nΔ3n0 as n, the estimators ˆθn and ˇθn are Tnconsistent in the sense that the sequences

    Tn(ˆθnθ)andTn(ˇθnθ)aretight.

    Proof. In order to prove this Theorem 4.1, using Theorem 6.2, it suffices to check that the assumptions (H1), (H2), (H5) hold.

    From the proof of Theorem 3.1, the assumptions (H1), (H2) hold. Now it remains to check that (H5) holds. In this case, the process ζ is defined as

    ζt:=t0eθsdBa,bs,t0,

    whereas the integral is interpreted in the Young sense (see Appendix).

    Using the formula (6.4) and (6.3), we can write

    E[(ζtiζti1)2]=E[(titi1eθsdBa,bs)2]=E[(eθtiBa,btieθti1Ba,bti1+θtiti1eθsBa,bsds)2]=λgBa,b(ti,ti1)λm(ti,ti1)=titi1titi1eθ(r+u)2gBa,bru(r,u)drduλm(ti,ti1)=λm(ti,ti1),

    where λ.(ti,ti1) is defined in Lemma 6.2, gBa,b(s,r)=β(a+1,b+1)(sa+b+1+ra+b+1) and 2gBa,bsr(s,r)=0, whereas the term λm(ti,ti1) is equal to

    λm(ti,ti1)=2m(ti,ti1)e2θ(ti1+ti)+2θeθtititi1m(r,ti)eθrdr2θeθti1titi1m(r,ti1)eθrdr+θ2titi1titi1m(r,u)eθ(r+u)drdu.

    Combining this with the fact for every ti1urti, i2,

    |m(r,u)|=|ruxa(rx)bdx|{|raru(rx)bdx|if1<a<0|uaru(rx)bdx|ifa>0{Δa+b+1nb+1if1<a0(nΔn)aΔb+1nb+1ifa>0

    together with Δn0, we deduce that there is a positive constant C such that

    E[(ζtiζti1)2]C{Δa+b+1nb+1if1<a0(nΔn)aΔb+1nb+1ifa>0,

    which proves that the assumption (H5) holds. Therefore the desired result is obtained.

    For sample size n=2500, we simulate 100 sample paths of the process X, given by (1.2), using software R. The Tables 18 below report the mean average values, the median values and the standard deviation values of the proposed estimators ˆθn and ˇθn defined, respectively, by (1.4) and (1.5) of the true value of the parameter θ. The results of the tables below show that the drift estimators ˆθn and ˇθn perform well for different arbitrary values of a and b and they are strongly consistent, namely their values are close to the true values of the drift parameter θ.

    Table 1.  The means, median and deviation values for ˜θn, with a=0.5 and b=0.9.
    θ=0.5 θ=0.9 θ=2.5 θ=7 θ=10
    Mean 1.838178 2.039271 3.019508 7.027331 10.01776
    Median 1.744118 1.906163 3.07125 7.02379 10.02108
    Std. dev. 1.211776 1.007366 0.821718 0.1717033 0.0257764

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 2.  The means, median and deviation values for ˜θn, with a=0.1 and b=0.4.
    θ=0.5 θ=0.9 θ=2.5 θ=7 θ=10
    Mean 1.259471 1.481005 2.39942 7.01006 10.02068
    Median 1.170947 1.437582 2.552394 7.014911 10.01972
    Std. dev. 0.9584086 0.8501618 1.004956 0.08241352 0.01018074

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 3.  The means, median and deviation values for ˆθn, with a=0.5 and b=0.9.
    θ=0.5 θ=0.9 θ=2.5 θ=7 θ=10
    Mean 1.829429 2.03153 3.014143 7.01739 9.997761
    Median 1.74294 1.896568 3.069177 7.013946 10.00107
    Std. dev. 1.200806 1.008749 0.8246725 0.1711237 0.02569278

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 4.  The means, median and deviation values for ˆθn, with a=0.1 and b=0.4.
    θ=0.5 θ=0.9 θ=2.5 θ=7 θ=10
    Mean 1.098053 1.388654 2.326678 6.998938 10.00066
    Median 1.144919 1.402191 2.53695 7.005075 9.999712
    Std. dev. 0.9961072 0.8888663 1.077326 0.08785867 0.01012159

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 5.  The means, median and deviation values for ˜θn, with a=10 and b=0.7.
    θ=0.5 θ=0.9 θ=2.5 θ=7 θ=10
    Mean 6.284526 5.944562 7.676024 7.855939 9.586733
    Median 5.620266 5.235174 6.698286 8.074982 9.919933
    Std. dev. 4.851366 4.358735 6.545987 4.19334 2.664122

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 6.  The means, median and deviation values for ˜θn, with a=5 and b=0.9.
    θ=0.5 θ=0.9 θ=2.5 θ=7 θ=10
    Mean 4.363369 3.81052 4.457953 6.959573 9.817441
    Median 3.456968 3.650188 4.350376 7.172276 10.02188
    Std. dev. 3.492142 2.865577 2.699623 1.759205 1.191188

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 7.  The means, median and deviation values for ˆθn, with a=10 and b=0.7.
    θ=0.5 θ=0.9 θ=2.5 θ=7 θ=10
    Mean 5.882283 5.609962 7.379757 7.729786 9.526597
    Median 5.337299 5.041629 6.502311 8.05469 9.900039
    Std. dev. 4.882747 4.38566 6.319027 4.253017 2.698502

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Table 8.  The means, median and deviation values for ˆθn, with a=5 and b=0.9.
    θ=0.5 θ=0.9 θ=2.5 θ=7 θ=10
    Mean 4.328267 3.782118 4.440072 6.946132 9.797283
    Median 3.451499 3.590002 4.344927 7.161959 10.00186
    Std. dev. 3.46757 2.86794 2.688184 1.758228 1.190694

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    To conclude, in this paper we provide least squares-type estimators for the drift parameter θ of the weighted fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process X, given by (1.2), based continuous-time and discrete-time observations of X. The novelty of our approach is that it allows, comparing with the literature on statistical inference for X discussed in [1,2,3], to consider the general case a>1, |b|<1 and |b|<a+1. More precisely,

    ● We estimate the drift parameter θ of (1.2) based on the continuous-time observations {Xs, s[0,t]}, as t. We prove the strong consistency and the asymptotic behavior in distribution of the estimator ˜θt for all parameters a>1, |b|<1 and |b|<a+1. Our results extend those proved in [1,2], where 12<a<0, a<b<a+1 only.

    ● Suppose that the process X given in (1.2) is observed equidistantly in time with the step size Δn: ti=iΔn,i=0,,n. We estimate the drift parameter θ of (1.2) on the sampling data Xti,i=0,,n, as Δn0 and n. We study the asymptotic behavior and the rate consistency of the estimators ˆθn and ˇθn for all parameters a>1, |b|<1 and |b|<a+1. In this case, our results extend those proved in [3], where 1<a<0, a<b<a+1 only.

    The proofs of the asymptotic behavior of the estimators are based on a new decomposition of the covariance function Ra,b(t,s) of the wfBm Ba,b (see Lemma 2.1), and slight extensions of results [15] and [17] (see Theorem 6.1 and Theorem 6.2 in Appendix).

    Here we present some ingredients needed in the paper.

    Let G=(Gt,t0) be a continuous centered Gaussian process defined on some probability space (Ω,F,P) (Here, and throughout the text, we assume that F is the sigma-field generated by G). In this section we consider the non-ergodic case of Gaussian Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes X={Xt,t0} given by the following linear stochastic differential equation

    X0=0;dXt=θXtdt+dGt,t0, (6.1)

    where θ>0 is an unknown parameter. It is clear that the linear equation (6.1) has the following explicit solution

    Xt=eθtζt,t0,

    where

    ζt:=t0eθsdGs,t0,

    whereas this latter integral is interpreted in the Young sense.

    Let us introduce the following required assumptions.

    (H1) The process G has Hölder continuous paths of some order δ(0,1].

    (H2) For every t0, E(G2t)ct2γ for some positive constants c and γ.

    (H3) There is constant ν in R such that the limiting variance of tνeθtt0eθsdGs exists as t, that is, there exists a constant σG>0 such that

    limtE[(tνeθtt0eθsdGs)2]=σ2G.

    (H4) For ν given in (H3), we have all fixed s0

    limtE(Gstνeθtt0eθrdGr)=0.

    (H5)There exist positive constants ρ,C and a real constant μ such that

    E[(ζtiζti1)2]C(nΔn)μΔρne2θti foreveryi=1,,n,n1.

    The following theorem is a slight extension of the main result in [15], and it can be established following the same arguments as in [15].

    Theorem 6.1. Assume that (H1) and (H2) hold and let ~θt be the estimator of the form (1.3). Then, as t,

    ˜θtθalmostsurely.

    Moreover, if (H1)(H4) hold, then, as t,

    tνeθt(˜θtθ)law2σGE(Z2)C(1),

    where Z:=0eθsGsds, whereas C(1) is the standard Cauchy distribution with the probability density function 1π(1+x2); xR.

    The following theorem is also a slight extension of the main result in [17], and it can be proved following line by line the proofs given in [17].

    Theorem 6.2. Assume that (H1), (H2) and (H5) hold. Let ˆθn and ˇθn be the estimators of the forms (1.4) and (1.5), respectively. Suppose that Δn0 and nΔ1+αn for some α>0. Then, as n,

    ˆθnθ,ˇθnθalmostsurely,

    and for any q0,

    ΔqneθTn(ˆθnθ)andΔqneθTn(ˇθnθ)arenottight.

    In addition, if we assume that nΔ3n0 as n, the estimators ˆθn and ˇθn are Tnconsistent in the sense that the sequences

    Tn(ˆθnθ)andTn(ˇθnθ)aretight.

    Lemma 6.1 ([15]). Let g:[0,)×[0,)R be a symmetric function such that gs(s,r) and 2gsr(s,r) integrable on (0,)×[0,). Then, for every t0,

    Δg(t):=g(t,t)2θeθtt0g(s,t)eθsds+θ2e2θtt0t0g(s,r)eθ(s+r)drds=2e2θtt0eθsgs(s,0)ds+2e2θtt0dseθss0dr2gsr(s,r)eθr. (6.2)

    Lemma 6.2 ([17]). Let g:[0,)×[0,)R be a symmetric function such that gs(s,r) and 2gsr(s,r) integrable on (0,)×[0,). Then, for every ts0,

    λg(t,s):=g(t,t)e2θt+g(s,s)e2θs2g(s,t)e2θ(s+t)+2θeθttsg(r,t)eθrdr2θeθstsg(r,s)eθrdr+θ2tstsg(r,u)eθ(r+u)drdu=tstseθ(r+u)2gru(r,u)drdu. (6.3)

    Let us now recall the Young integral introduced in [21]. For any α(0,1], we denote by Hα([0,T]) the set of α-Hölder continuous functions, that is, the set of functions f:[0,T]R such that

    |f|α:=sup0s<tT|f(t)f(s)|(ts)α<.

    We also set |f|=supt[0,T]|f(t)|, and we equip Hα([0,T]) with the norm

    Let f\in\mathcal{H}^\alpha([0, T]) , and consider the operator T_f:\mathcal{C}^1([0, T]) \to\mathcal{C}^0([0, T]) defined as

    T_f(g)(t) = \int_0^t f(u)g'(u)du, \quad t\in[0,T].

    It can be shown (see, e.g., [22]HY__HY, Section 3.1]) that, for any \beta\in(1-\alpha, 1) , there exists a constant C_{\alpha, \beta, T} > 0 depending only on \alpha , \beta and T such that, for any g\in\mathcal{H}^\beta([0, T]) ,

    \left\|\int_0^\cdot f(u)g'(u)du\right\|_\beta \leq C_{\alpha,\beta,T} \|f\|_\alpha \|g\|_\beta.

    We deduce that, for any \alpha\in (0, 1) , any f\in\mathcal{H}^\alpha([0, T]) and any \beta\in(1-\alpha, 1) , the linear operator T_f:\mathcal{C}^1([0, T])\subset\mathcal{H}^\beta([0, T])\to \mathcal{H}^\beta([0, T]) , defined as T_f(g) = \int_0^\cdot f(u)g'(u)du , is continuous with respect to the norm \|\cdot\|_\beta . By density, it extends (in an unique way) to an operator defined on \mathcal{H}^\beta . As consequence, if f\in\mathcal{H}^\alpha([0, T]) , if g\in\mathcal{H}^\beta([0, T]) and if \alpha+\beta > 1 , then the (so-called) Young integral \int_0^\cdot f(u)dg(u) is well-defined as being T_f(g) (see [21]).

    The Young integral obeys the following formula. Let f\in\mathcal{H}^\alpha([0, T]) with \alpha\in(0, 1) and g\in\mathcal{H}^\beta([0, T]) with \beta\in(0, 1) such that \alpha+\beta > 1 . Then \int_0^. g_udf_u and \int_0^. f_u dg_u are well-defined as the Young integrals. Moreover, for all t\in[0, T] ,

    \begin{eqnarray} f_tg_t = f_0g_0+\int_0^t g_udf_u+\int_0^t f_u dg_u. \end{eqnarray} (6.4)

    All authors declare that there is no conflict of interest in this paper.



    [1] G. Shen, X. Yin, L. Yan, Least squares estimation for Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes driven by the weighted fractional brownian motion, Acta Math. Sci., 36B (2016), 394–408.
    [2] G. Shen, X. Yin, L. Yan, Erratum to: least squares estimation for Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes driven by the weighted fractional brownian motion (Acta Mathematica Scientia 2016, 36B(2): 394-408), Acta Math. Sci., 37 (2017), 1173–1176. doi: 10.1016/S0252-9602(17)30065-6
    [3] P. Cheng, G. Shen, Q. Chen, Parameter estimation for nonergodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process driven by the weighted fractional Brownian motion, Adv. Differ. Equ., 366 (2017). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-017-1420-y.
    [4] I. V. Basawa, D. J. Scott, Asymptotic Optimal Inference for Non-Ergodic Models, New York: Springer 1983.
    [5] H. M. Dietz, Y. A. Kutoyants, Parameter estimation for some non-recurrent solutions of SDE, Stat. Decisions, 21 (2003), 29–46. doi: 10.1524/stnd.21.1.29.20321
    [6] J. Jacod, Parametric inference for discretely observed non-ergodic diffusions, Bernoulli, 12 (2006), 383–401.
    [7] Y. Shimizu, Notes on drift estimation for certain non-recurrent diffusion from sampled data, Stat. Probab. Lett., 79 (2009), 2200–2207. doi: 10.1016/j.spl.2009.07.015
    [8] T. Bojdecki, L. Gorostiza, A. Talarczyk, Some extensions of fractional Brownian motion and sub-fractional Brownian motion related to particle systems, Electron. Commun. Probab., 12 (2007), 161–172.
    [9] M. Kleptsyna, A. Le Breton, Statistical analysis of the fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck type process, Stat. Inference Stoch. Process., 5 (2002), 229–241. doi: 10.1023/A:1021220818545
    [10] Y. Hu, D. Nualart, Parameter estimation for fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes, Statist. Probab. Lett., 80 (2010), 1030–1038. doi: 10.1016/j.spl.2010.02.018
    [11] B. El Onsy, K. Es-Sebaiy, F. Viens, Parameter Estimation for a partially observed Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process with long-memory noise, Stochastics, 89 (2017), 431–468. doi: 10.1080/17442508.2016.1248967
    [12] Y. Hu, D. Nualart, H. Zhou, Parameter estimation for fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes of general Hurst parameter, Stat. Inference Stoch. Process., 22 (2019), 111–142. doi: 10.1007/s11203-017-9168-2
    [13] K. Es-Sebaiy, F. Viens, Optimal rates for parameter estimation of stationary Gaussian processes, Stoch. Process. Appl., 129 (2019), 3018–3054. doi: 10.1016/j.spa.2018.08.010
    [14] S. Douissi, K. Es-Sebaiy, F. Viens, Berry-Esséen bounds for parameter estimation of general Gaussian processes, ALEA-Lat. Am. J. Probab. Math. Stat., 16 (2019), 633–664. doi: 10.30757/ALEA.v16-23
    [15] M. El Machkouri, K. Es-Sebaiy, Y. Ouknine, Least squares estimator for non-ergodic Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes driven by Gaussian processes, J. Korean Stat. Soc., 45 (2016), 329–341. doi: 10.1016/j.jkss.2015.12.001
    [16] R. Belfadli, K. Es-Sebaiy, Y. Ouknine, Parameter Estimation for Fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck Processes: Non-Ergodic Case, Front. Sci. Eng., 1 (2011), 1–16.
    [17] K. Es-Sebaiy, F. Alazemi, M. Al-Foraih, Least squares type estimation for discretely observed non-ergodic Gaussian Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes, Acta Math. Sci., 39 (2019), 989–1002. doi: 10.1007/s10473-019-0406-0
    [18] K. Es-Sebaiy, I. Nourdin, Parameter Estimation for \alpha-Fractional Bridges. In: F. Viens, J. Feng, Y. Hu, E. Nualart, Eds, Malliavin Calculus and Stochastic Analysis, Springer Proc. Math. Stat., 34 (2013), 385–412.
    [19] T. Pham-Gia, N. Turkkan, E. Marchand, Anosov flows with stable and unstable differentiable distributions, Commun. Stat. Theory Methods, 35 (2006), 1569–1591. doi: 10.1080/03610920600683689
    [20] G. Marsaglia, Ratios of normal variables and ratios of sums of uniform variables, J. Amer. Statist. Asso., 60 (1965), 193–204. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1965.10480783
    [21] L. C. Young, An inequality of the Hölder type connected with Stieltjes integration, Acta Math., 67 (1936), 251–282. doi: 10.1007/BF02401743
    [22] I. Nourdin, Selected aspects of fractional Brownian motion, Springer Series 4, Milan: Bocconi University Press, 2012.
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Anas D. Khalaf, Anwar Zeb, Tareq Saeed, Mahmoud Abouagwa, Salih Djilali, Hashim M. Alshehri, A Special Study of the Mixed Weighted Fractional Brownian Motion, 2021, 5, 2504-3110, 192, 10.3390/fractalfract5040192
    2. Litan Yan, Rui Guo, Wenyi Pei, The linear self-attracting diffusion driven by the weighted-fractional Brownian motion II: The parameter estimation, 2025, 1674-7283, 10.1007/s11425-023-2261-5
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2380) PDF downloads(78) Cited by(2)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog