Why the Binomial Tree Limit Uses a Triangular-Array CLT
Summary
The document asks which limit theorem justifies the normal approximation for the number of up moves in a binomial stock-price tree as the number of steps grows. Since the risk-neutral up probability depends on the step count, the Bernoulli variables form a triangular array: their distributions change with the row, including for variables already present in earlier rows. The author explains why that feature makes a standard identically distributed central limit theorem an unsuitable justification.
The proposed result is the Lindeberg–Feller central limit theorem for triangular arrays. The answer centers each Bernoulli variable by its row-specific probability and scales it by the square root of the row’s total variance, then points to a probability text for the theorem. The excerpt names the relevant theorem and normalization but does not include the theorem’s conditions or a full verification that they hold for this particular tree. It addresses the normal limit for the count of up moves, rather than giving a complete derivation of convergence of the stock-price process to geometric Brownian motion.
Key ideas
- The up-move count in an n-step tree is binomial with a probability that depends on n.
- Because the Bernoulli distributions change with the row, the variables form a triangular array.
- Convergence of an individual Bernoulli variable does not by itself establish a central limit theorem for the row sums.
- The Lindeberg–Feller theorem is identified as the appropriate CLT framework.
- A full application still requires checking the theorem’s conditions for the model.
Tags
Full text
# Explanation on the application of CLT in bionomial tree model
# Explanation on the application of CLT in bionomial tree model
We have a stock price binomial tree model of $n$ steps, with step length $\Delta t=T/n$, stock price volatility $\sigma$ s.t. $u_n=e^{\sigma\Delta t}$ and $d_n=1/u_n$, and the risk neutral probability for each "up" movement is $p_n=(e^{r\Delta t}-d_n)/(u_n-d_n)$. It is claimed that with increasing $n$, the stock price process will in some sense approach a geometric brownian motion. The most important bridge between this discrete time model and the continuous time stochastic process is the following claim:
> Let $U_n$ be the total number of "up"s throughout the whole period $[0,T]$, then clearly $U_n\sim B(n,p_n)$ (Bernoulli). By CLT we have that $$\frac{U_n-np_n}{\sqrt{np_n(1-p_n)}}\xrightarrow{\mathrm d} N(0,1).$$
Here's how the application of CLT works as I interpret it: let $X_{1,\cdots,n}^{(n)}\sim_{\text{i.i.d.}} B(1,p_n)$, then $\Bbb EX_i^{(n)}=p_n$ and $\DeclareMathOperator{\Var}{Var}\Var(X_i^{(n)})=p_n(1-p_n)$, then pretend CLT is applicable here we should anticipate something like $$\sqrt{\frac n{\Var(X_i^{(n)})}}\left(\frac{\sum_{i=1}^nX_i^{(n)}}{n}-\Bbb E(X_i^{n})\right)\xrightarrow{\mathrm d}N(0,1).$$ Acute readers may have noticed the weird superscript $(n)$ of my $X_i^{(n)}$ here - this is also exactly where I think things go wrong: I superscript $X_i$ by $n$ because they each depend on $n$, not on $i$. In other words, when $n$ increases, the distributions of all members of the list $X_{1,\cdots,n}^{(n)}$ change simultaneously - not just the new coming ones but even the already existsing ones like $X_1^{(n)}$. This doesn't satisfy the conditions of any common version of CLT, which all require the members of the independent process depends only on its own its index but not any unspecified $n$.
Admittedly, $X_1^{(n)}$ does converge to $B(1,\frac12)$ in probability hence in distribution, since it can be shown $p_n\to\frac12$. This however is insufficient to justify applying any CLT here. So could anybody please identify which theorem (perhaps a variant of CLT) is used in proving the convergence to standard normal?
## Answer by Vim (score 3, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/32908
Thanks to P.Windridge's comment, I can now answer my own question.
Indeed the convergence to standard normal in question can follow from a triangular array version of CLT called the Lindeberg-Feller CLT. Proof can be found on Durrett's Probability: Theory and Examples (freely available online).
I reference the statement of the theorem from Durrett:
To arrive at our desired result, simply let $X_{n,m}:=\dfrac{X_m^{( n )} - p_n}{\sqrt{n p_n (1-p_n)}}$.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.