Invariant Measure - Definition

Definition

Let (X, Σ) be a measurable space and let f be a measurable function from X to itself. A measure μ on (X, Σ) is said to be invariant under f if, for every measurable set A in Σ,

In terms of the push forward, this states that f∗(μ) = μ.

The collection of measures (usually probability measures) on X that are invariant under f is sometimes denoted Mf(X). The collection of ergodic measures, Ef(X), is a subset of Mf(X). Moreover, any convex combination of two invariant measures is also invariant, so Mf(X) is a convex set; Ef(X) consists precisely of the extreme points of Mf(X).

In the case of a dynamical system (X, T, φ), where (X, Σ) is a measurable space as before, T is a monoid and φ : T × X → X is the flow map, a measure μ on (X, Σ) is said to be an invariant measure if it is an invariant measure for each map φt : X → X. Explicitly, μ is invariant if and only if

Put another way, μ is an invariant measure for a sequence of random variables (Zt)t≥0 (perhaps a Markov chain or the solution to a stochastic differential equation) if, whenever the initial condition Z0 is distributed according to μ, so is Zt for any later time t.

Read more about this topic:  Invariant Measure

Famous quotes containing the word definition:

    “Perhaps the best definition of progress would be the continuing efforts of men and women to narrow the gap between the convenience of the powers that be and the unwritten charter.”
    —Nadine Gordimer (b. 1923)

    “The physicians say, they are not materialists; but they are:MSpirit is matter reduced to an extreme thinness: O so thin!—But the definition of spiritual should be, that which is its own evidence. What notions do they attach to love! what to religion! One would not willingly pronounce these words in their hearing, and give them the occasion to profane them.”
    —Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)

    “Beauty, like all other qualities presented to human experience, is relative; and the definition of it becomes unmeaning and useless in proportion to its abstractness. To define beauty not in the most abstract, but in the most concrete terms possible, not to find a universal formula for it, but the formula which expresses most adequately this or that special manifestation of it, is the aim of the true student of aesthetics.”
    —Walter Pater (1839–1894)