Law of The Iterated Logarithm - Discussion

Discussion

The law of iterated logarithms operates “in between” the law of large numbers and the central limit theorem. There are two versions of the law of large numbers — the weak and the strong — and they both claim that the sums Sn, scaled by n−1, converge to zero, respectively in probability and almost surely:

\frac{S_n}{n} \ \xrightarrow{p}\ 0, \qquad \frac{S_n}{n} \ \xrightarrow{a.s.} 0, \qquad \text{as}\ \ n\to\infty.

On the other hand, the central limit theorem states that the sums Sn scaled by the factor n−½ converge in distribution to a standard normal distribution. Combined with Kolmogorov's zero-one law, this implies that these quantities converge neither in probability nor almost surely:

\frac{S_n}{\sqrt n} \ \stackrel{p}{\nrightarrow}\ \forall, \qquad \frac{S_n}{\sqrt n} \ \stackrel{a.s.}{\nrightarrow}\ \forall, \qquad \text{as}\ \ n\to\infty.

The law of the iterated logarithm provides the scaling factor where the two limits become different:

\frac{S_n}{\sqrt{n\log\log n}} \ \xrightarrow{p}\ 0, \qquad \frac{S_n}{\sqrt{n\log\log n}} \ \stackrel{a.s.}{\nrightarrow}\ 0, \qquad \text{as}\ \ n\to\infty.

Thus, although the quantity is less than any predefined ε > 0 with probability approaching one, that quantity will nevertheless be dropping out of that interval infinitely often, and in fact will be visiting the neighborhoods of any point in the interval (0,√2) almost surely.

Read more about this topic:  Law Of The Iterated Logarithm

Famous quotes containing the word discussion:

    “We should seek by all means in our power to avoid war, by analysing possible causes, by trying to remove them, by discussion in a spirit of collaboration and good will. I cannot believe that such a programme would be rejected by the people of this country, even if it does mean the establishment of personal contact with the dictators.”
    —Neville Chamberlain (1869–1940)

    “Opinions are formed in a process of open discussion and public debate, and where no opportunity for the forming of opinions exists, there may be moods—moods of the masses and moods of individuals, the latter no less fickle and unreliable than the former—but no opinion.”
    —Hannah Arendt (1906–1975)

    “My companion and I, having a minute’s discussion on some point of ancient history, were amused by the attitude which the Indian, who could not tell what we were talking about, assumed. He constituted himself umpire, and, judging by our air and gesture, he very seriously remarked from time to time, “you beat,” or “he beat.””
    —Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)