Skip to content
All library documents

Brownian Motion, Increment Scaling, and Fractional Brownian Dependence

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Basj

Summary

The document compares a discrete Gaussian random walk with increments whose standard deviation is proportional to the square root of the time step against one using a different power of the step. Independent mean-zero Gaussian increments with variance equal to the step produce the usual Brownian motion scaling. The question asks whether changing the exponent gives fractional Brownian motion with the corresponding Hurst exponent.

The answers explain that matching the marginal variance scaling is not enough to define fractional Brownian motion: its increments have a particular dependence structure, whereas the proposed construction uses independent increments. A partition argument shows that if increment variance scales as a power of the step, accumulated variance over a fixed interval changes with the number of subdivisions; it remains finite and nonzero only at the Brownian scaling exponent. The discussion is a concise conceptual explanation, not a general treatment of all Gaussian processes or alternative dependent-increment constructions. Its continuous-time existence claim is framed around this independent-increment setup.

Key ideas

  • Independent Gaussian increments with variance proportional to the time step yield Brownian motion scaling.
  • Changing the increment standard deviation exponent changes how total variance behaves as the time grid is refined.
  • An independent-increment construction with variance scaling more slowly than the step accumulates unbounded variance in the limit.
  • Fractional Brownian motion requires a specific dependence structure, not just a chosen marginal increment variance.
  • Discrete simulations at different resolutions can reveal whether a proposed scaling remains stable.

Tags

Full text
# What's the name of this nearly-brownian stochastic process?


# What's the name of this nearly-brownian stochastic process?












1) Does the following algorithm (my question is math, not programming-related):

```
n = 1000000
dt = 0.01
B = zeros(n)        # [0, 0, 0, ..., 0]
for i in range(1,n):
    B[i] = B[i-1] + random.normal(0, sqrt(dt))
```

simulate a standard brownian motion, since we have $B(t+dt) - B(t) \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \sqrt{dt}^2)$?

According to my tests, I would say yes, but I wanted to be sure.

2) What's the name of the process obtained by doing:

```
B[i] = B[i-1] + random.normal(0, dt ** 0.3)
```

i.e.

$$B(t+h) - B(t) \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \sigma^2)$$ with, for example, $\sigma = h^{0.3}$ instead of $\sigma = h^{0.5}$ for the standard brownian.

It seems it would be not far from a fractional brownian motion with Hurst exponent $H = 0.3$ (but the covariance formula - first formula of this page - would apply only for $t = s$ or am I wrong?)

What's the name of such a stochastic process, for which increments are gaussian with standard deviation $(dt)^{0.3}$ instead of $(dt)^{0.5}$?

## Answer by Kiwiakos (score 7)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/22908

The first process is a BM.

The second does not exist in continuous time. The variance goes down too slowly with dt and the process blows up at the limit. You can break the (0,1) interval into 1, 100, 1000, 1000000 steps and see that happening.

Variance of a martingale has to scale with dt: if it is too fast then the process dies, if it is too slow then the process blows up.

Edit: Suppose that you partition the $(0,1)$ interval into $N$ steps of length $1/N$, and define the process $X_n$ over these points. Now say that each step has variance that scales as $$var(X_{n+1}-X_n) \sim (1/N)^\alpha$$

If the process is a random walk, then the variance of the process at $t=1$ (that is to say $X_N$) would be $$var(X_n) \sim \sum_{n=1}^N (1/N)^\alpha = N^{1-\alpha}$$ You can see that as $N\rightarrow \infty$ this goes to zero ($\alpha>0$), blows up ($\alpha<1$) or just balances at one for $\alpha=1$ that corresponds to the standard BM.

## Answer by Richi Wa (score 3)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/22905

The first process $$ B_{t+dt} = B_t + Z $$ where $Z$ is independent of $(B_s)_{s \le t}$ and follows a Gaussian distribution with mean $0$ and varince $dt$ is a standard Brownian motion (thus the variance of $B_t$ is $t$).

For the second process let us recall the definition from your link: $$ E[B^H_t B^H_s] = \frac12 ( t^{2H} + s^{2H} - |t-s|^{2H}), $$ thus for $t=s$ this is $\frac12 ( t^{2H} + t^{2H} - |0|^{2H}) = t^{2H}$. Note that for $H=\frac12$ this equals $t$ as in the Brownian motion case above.

For such a process the increment after $t$ is not independent of the process at time $t$. Look at the case $s>t$: $$ E[B^H_t (B^H_s-B^H_t)] = E[B^H_t B^H_s] - E[B^H_t B^H_t], $$ and this is, using the formulae above $$ \frac12 ( t^{2H} + s^{2H} - (s-t)^{2H}) - t^{2H}. $$ The above expression equals 0 for $H = \frac12$: $$ \frac12 ( t + s - (s-t)) - t = \frac12 ( t + s - s + t) - t = 0. $$

Finally to answer you question: You got the variance term right, but sampling the increment you have to take the correlation/dependence of the increment to the process into account. So as you say the process is not fractional Brownian motion. Finally I wonder whether this process exists in continuous time.

Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)

This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.