Why a Correlated Combination of Independent Brownian Motions Is Brownian
Summary
The note establishes that combining two independent standard Brownian motions with constant weights whose squared values sum to one produces another standard Brownian motion. The example uses weights determined by a correlation parameter between negative one and one. The resulting process has continuous paths and starts at zero, and its increments are normally distributed with the variance expected for elapsed time.
The proof uses Lévy’s characterization: show that the process is a martingale and that its quadratic variation equals time. Independence makes the cross variation vanish, while the squared weights make the remaining variation add to one unit per unit of time. The note also sketches a Gaussian covariance argument. Its central lesson is that matching marginal distributions alone is insufficient to establish Brownian motion; the filtration, martingale behavior, and path properties matter. The argument assumes the two source motions are independent Brownian motions on a compatible probability space.
Key ideas
- A normalized linear combination of independent standard Brownian motions is itself standard Brownian motion.
- The weights must have squared values that sum to one for the resulting variance rate to remain one.
- Lévy’s characterization verifies Brownian motion through the martingale property and quadratic variation.
- Independence of the source processes ensures their cross variation is zero.
Tags
Full text
# Is this process of Brownian motion?
# Is this process of Brownian motion?
Background Information:
The process $W = (W_t:t\geq 0)$ is a $\mathbb{P}$-Brownian motion if and only if
i) $W_t$ is continuous, and $W_0 = 0$
ii) the value of $W_t$ is distributed, under $\mathbb{P}$, as a normal random variable $N(0,t)$,
iii) the increment $W_{s+t} - W_{s}$ is distributed as a normal $N(0,t)$, under $\mathbb{P}$, and is independent of $\mathcal{F}_s$, the history of what the process did up to time $s$.
Question:
If $W_t$ and $\tilde{W}_t$ are two independent Brownian motions and $\rho$ is a constant between $-1$ and $1$, then the process $X_t = \rho W_t - \sqrt{1-\rho^2}\tilde{W}_t$ is continuous and has marginal distributions $N(0,t)$. Is this $X$ a Brownian motion?
We have the first two conditions met. Now we must check if $X_{s+t} - X_s~N(0,t)$, and if $X_{s+t} - X_s$ is independent of $X_s$. One problem I having here is what is $X_{s+t}$, would it be $X_{s+t}= \rho W_{s+t} + \sqrt{1-\rho^2}\tilde{W}_{s+t}$, and if so is $W_{s+t}$ and $\tilde{W}_{s+t}$ two independent Brownian motions?
Updated- We have \begin{align*} X_{s+t} - X_{s} &= \rho W_{s+t} + \sqrt{1-\rho^2}\tilde{W}_{s+t} - \rho W_s + \sqrt{1-\rho^2}\tilde{W}_s\\ &= \rho(W_{s+t} - W_s) - \sqrt{1-\rho^2}(\tilde{W}_{s+t} - \tilde{W}_s)\\ &\sim N(0,t) \end{align*} Since $W_{s+t} - W{s}\sim N(0,t)$ and $\tilde{W}_{s+t}-\tilde{W}_s\sim N(0,t)$. Now we need to check if $X_{s+t} - X{s}$ is independent of $X_{s}$. To do so we can check if the expectation of the product is equal to the product of the expectations.
We can show $$E\left[(X_{s+t}-X_{s})X_{s}\right]=E[X_{s+t}X_s]-E[X_s^2]=\text{Cov}(X_{t+s},X_s)-\text{Var}(X_s)=s-s=0$$ Hence $X$ is a Brownian motion.
## Answer by user16651 (score 3, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/31129
> Lévy’s theorem: Let $X_t$ be a martingale with $X_0=0$. Then the following are equivalent. $X_t$ is a standard Brownian motion. $X_t$ has continuous sample paths and $X_t^2-t$ is a martingale. $X_t$ has quadratic variation $[X]_t=t$.
> Proposition: If $W^{(1)}_t$ and $W^{(2)}_t$ be two independent standard Brownian motions then $W_t:=\rho W^{(1)}_t-\sqrt{1-\rho^2} W^{(2)}_t$ is a Brownian motion.
Proof
Let $(\Omega, \mathcal{F},\mathbb{P},\{\mathcal{F_t}\})$ be a probability space . Clearly, $W_t$ has continuous sample paths and $W_0=0$. Note
$$\mathbb{E}[W_t|\mathcal{F_s}]=\rho\,\mathbb{E}[W^{(1)}_t|\mathcal{F_s}]-\sqrt{1-\rho^2}\,\mathbb{E}[W^{(2)}_t|\mathcal{F_s}]=\rho W^{(1)}_s-\sqrt{1-\rho^2} W^{(2)}_s=W_s$$ So $W_t$ is a martingale. Now we should show $W_t^2-t$ is a martingale.By application of Ito's lemma, we have $$dW_t^2=2W_tdW_t+d[W_t,W_t]$$ $$dW_t^2=2W_tdW_t+\rho^2 d[W_t^{(1)},W_t^{(1)}]+(1-\rho^2) d[W_t^{(2)},W_t^{(2)}]-2\rho\sqrt{1-\rho^2}d[W_t^{(1)},W^{(2)}_t]$$
Since $W^{(1)}_t$ and $W^{(2)}_t$ are two independent Brownian motions, thus $d[W_t^{(1)},W^{(2)}_t]=0$ , hence $$dW_t^2=2W_tdW_t+dt$$ consequently $$d(W_t^2-t)=2W_tdW_t+dt-dt=2W_tdW_t$$ so to speak $$d(W_t^2-t)=2W_tdW_t$$ Therefore $W_t^2-t$, is a martingale (because it's SDE has a null drift ) and $W_t$ is a standard Brownian motion.
Another way
$W_t^{(1)},W_t^{(2)}\stackrel{\mathrm{i.i.d.}}\sim \mathcal N(0,t)$, so $$\rho W_t^{(1)}\sim\mathcal N\left(0,\rho^2 t\right)$$ and $$\sqrt{1-\rho^2}W_t^{(2)}\sim\mathcal N\left(0,(1-\rho^2)t \right)$$ thus $$W_t \sim \mathcal N\left(0, t \right). $$ Therefore $\{W_t:t\in\mathbb R_+\}$ is a Gaussian process, and from independence of $W_t^{(1)}$ and $W_t^{(2)}$ we have $$\mathbb E\left[W_t^{(1)}W_t^{(2)}\right] =\mathbb E\left[W_t^{(1)}\right]\mathbb E\left[W_t^{(2)}\right]=0.$$ Let $0<s<t$ we have \begin{align} \text{Cov}(W_s,W_t) &= \mathbb E[W_sW_t] - \mathbb E[W_s]\mathbb E[W_t]\\ &= \mathbb E\left[\left(\rho W_s^{(1)}-\sqrt{1-\rho^2}W_s^{(2)}\right)\left(\rho W_t^{(1)}-\sqrt{1-\rho^2}W_t^{(2)}\right)\right] - 0\\ &= \rho^2\mathbb E\left[W_s^{(1)}W_t^{(1)} \right]+(1-\rho^2) \mathbb E\left[W_s^{(2)}W_t^{(2)} \right] - 2\rho\sqrt{1-\rho^2}\mathbb E\left[W_s^{(1)}W_t^{(2)} \right]\\ &= \rho^2 s + \left(1-\rho^2\right)s - \rho\sqrt{1-\rho^2}\times 0\\ &= s. \end{align} on the other hand $$\mathbb{E}[(W_t-W_s)W_s]=\mathbb{E}[W_t\,W_s]-\mathbb{E}[W_s^2]=\text{Cov}(W_t,W_s)-\text{Var}(W_s)=s-s=0$$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.