Proving a Brownian Polynomial Martingale with Independent Increments
Summary
The document proves that the process formed by subtracting a time-dependent linear term from the cube of Brownian motion has the conditional-expectation property of a martingale. It expands the later Brownian value around the value at the conditioning time, then uses the increment’s independence, zero mean, zero third moment, and variance to evaluate each term. The conditional expectation reduces to the same polynomial evaluated at the earlier time.
An alternative answer checks the corresponding backward heat equation and invokes Itô’s formula, while another outlines a repeated difference-completion approach. The explicit expansion provides the clearest direct verification. The discussion concerns standard Wiener process assumptions and the natural filtration; it establishes this specific identity rather than broader conditions for arbitrary processes or filtrations.
Key ideas
- Brownian increments after the conditioning time are independent of the past filtration.
- The increment has zero mean and zero third moment, while its variance equals the elapsed time.
- Expanding the cubic around the earlier Brownian value yields the martingale conditional expectation.
- The backward heat equation and Itô’s formula offer a separate verification route.
- The argument relies on standard Brownian motion and its natural filtration.
Tags
Full text
# Show that $E[B_t|\mathscr{F}_s] = B_s$ for $B_t = W_t^3 - 3 t W_t$
# Show that $E[B_t|\mathscr{F}_s] = B_s$ for $B_t = W_t^3 - 3 t W_t$
Given prob space $(\Omega, \mathscr{F}, P)$ and a Wiener process $(W_t)_{t \geq 0}$, define filtration $\mathscr{F}_t = \sigma(W_u : u \leq t)$
Let $(B_t)_{t \geq 0}$ where $B_t = W_t^3 - 3tW_t$. Show that $E[B_t|\mathscr{F}_s] = B_s$ whenever $s < t$.
I think this all comes down to manipulation since there are martingales somewhere
My attempt:
Splitting up into $E[W_t^3|\mathscr{F}_s] - 3E[tW_t|\mathscr{F}_s]$ doesn't do anything since those guys aren't martingales? So, I tried splitting it up into:
$E[W_t(W_t^2 - 3t)|\mathscr{F}_s]$
$= E[W_t(W_t^2 - t -2 t)|\mathscr{F}_s]$
$= E[W_t(W_t^2 - t) -2 tW_t)|\mathscr{F}_s]$
$= E[W_t(W_t^2 - t)|\mathscr{F}_s] -2E[ tW_t|\mathscr{F}_s]$
$W_t$ is not $\mathscr{F}_s$-measurable, so we can't take that out...
$tW_{1/t}$ is Brownian and thus a martingale, but I don't know about $tW_t$...
$cW_{t/c^2}$ is Brownian and thus a martingale, but I don't think we can set c = t...
Help please?
## Answer by Gordon (score 3, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/14989
\begin{align*} E\Big(W_t^3-3tW_t \mid \mathcal{F}_s\Big) &= E\Big((W_t-W_s+W_s)^3-3t(W_t-W_s+W_s) \mid \mathcal{F}_s\Big) \\ &=E\Big((W_t-W_s)^3+W_s^3+3(W_t-W_s)^2W_s + 3 (W_t-W_s)W_s^2\\ &\qquad \qquad -3t(W_t-W_s)-3tW_s \mid \mathcal{F}_s\Big) \\ &=E\Big((W_t-W_s)^3\Big) + W_s^3+3W_sE\Big((W_t-W_s)^2\Big)\\ &\qquad \qquad + 3W_s^2 E(W_t-W_s)-3tE(W_t-W_s)-3tW_s\\ &=W_s^3+3W_s (t-s)-3tW_s\\ &=W_s^3 -3sW_s, \end{align*} by noting that \begin{align*} E\Big((W_t-W_s)^3\Big) = E(W_t-W_s) =0, \end{align*} and \begin{align*} E\Big((W_t-W_s)^2\Big) = t-s. \end{align*}
## Answer by Olaf (score 7)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/14969
The trick is to start with the highest power, rewrite it as something you know (a third order moment) and then work backwards on the remaining terms. By that I mean you can complete the cube as follows:
$$E[W_t^3 - 3tW_t|\mathcal{F}_s] = E[(W_t-W_s)^3 - C -3tW_t|\mathcal{F}_s]$$
where you'll need to find $C$ such that the equality holds (i.e. $C=W_s^3 + 3W_s^2 W_t + ...$). Next, you can use that
$$ (W_t-W_s)$$
is normal w.r.t. $\mathcal{F}_s$ with mean zero ($E[(W_t-W_s) |\mathcal{F}_s] = 0$) and variance $E[(W_t-W_s)^2 |\mathcal{F}_s] = (t-s)$, so the third order moment is zero, i.e. $E[(W_t-W_s)^3|\mathcal{F}_s] = 0$. What we accomplished here is that we got rid of the highest order of $W_t$ in the expectation value (the cube term, $W_t^3$). The remaining terms are either independent, linear or quadratic in $W_t$. So we can apply the same trick to these terms, that is, "completing the difference". I.e. if you encounter a term like:
$$E[W_s W_t^2|\mathcal{F_s}]$$
then you again complete the square of $W_t$ such that you end up with an expression that involves the difference $W_t - W_s$. So find a $C'$ such that
$$E[W_s W_t^2|\mathcal{F_s}] = E[W_s (W_t - W_s)^2 - C'|\mathcal{F_s}]$$
holds. You then recognise the variance of $W_t - W_s$ in the first term, and $C'$ will contain terms at most linear in $W_t$. You keep doing that for all the terms, and you should end up with the identity that you set out to prove.
I've been intentionally a bit vague, because its a good exercise to complete. But if things are not clear, then let me know.
## Answer by emcor (score 1)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/14957
You can use that $f(t,W_t)\in C^2$ is Martingale iff:$$\partial_t f+\frac{1}{2}\partial_{WW}f= 0$$
We get:$$\partial_t f=-3W_t$$$$\partial_{WW}f=6W_t$$
Finally:
$$-3W_t+3W_t= 0$$
q.e.d.
The proof of theorem follows by writing out $f(t,W_t)$ via Ito formula. Proof of theorem: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.