Lévy area of fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process and
parameter estimation
Zhongmin Qian∗ and Xingcheng Xu†

arXiv:1803.11039v2 [math.PR] 3 Apr 2018

April 4, 2018

Abstract
In this paper, we study the estimation problem of an unknown drift parameter matrix
for fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process in multi-dimensional setting. By using rough
path theory, we propose pathwise rough path estimators based on both continuous and
discrete observations of a single path. The approach is applicable to the high-frequency
data. To formulate the parameter estimators, we define a theory of pathwise Itô integrals
with respect to fractional Brownian motion. By showing the regularity of fractional
Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes and the long time asymptotic behaviour of the associated
Lévy area processes, we prove that the estimators are strong consistent and pathwise
stable. Numerical studies and simulations are also given in this paper.

Keywords. Rough path estimator, Pathwise stability, Fractional Brownian motions,
FOU processes, Itô integration, Lévy area, Long time asymptotic, High-frequency data.
MSC[2010]. 60H05, 62F12, 62M09, 91G30.

1

Introduction

The statistical analysis of time series and random processes, parameter estimations, nonparameter estimations and statistical inferences, has been mainly concentrated on models described in terms of diffusion processes and semi-martingales, see e.g. some standard references
such as [23, 21, 35, 36] and etc. Models which are not semi-martingales have received some attention in applications where long-time memory effects have to be taken into consideration, see
e.g. [22, 38, 19] for example. In this article, we study multi-dimensional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck
processes (OU processes for short) driven by fractional Brownian motions (fBM), known in
recent literature as fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes (fOU processes for simplicity), defined to be the solution of the stochastic differential equation (SDE)
dXt = −ΓXt dt + ΣdBtH , X0 = x0 ,
∗

(1.1)

Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, OX2 6GG, United Kingdom. Email: qianz@maths.ox.ac.uk
School of Mathematical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China; Current address: Mathematical
Institute, University of Oxford, OX2 6GG, United Kingdom. Email: xuxingcheng@pku.edu.cn. Xingcheng Xu
is supported by China Scholarship Council (Grant No. 201706010019).
†

1

where B H is a d-dimensional fBM with Hurst parameter H ∈ (0, 1), Γ ∈ Rd×d is the drift
matrix and Σ ∈ Rd×d is the volatility matrix which is non-degenerate. The previous SDE has
to be interpreted as the stochastic integral equation
Z t
ΓXs ds + ΣBtH ,
X t = x0 −
0

which has an unique solution given by
−Γt

Xt = e

Z
x0 +

t

e−Γ(t−s) ΣdBsH .

(1.2)

0

The integral on the right hand side is understood as an Young’s integral. Therefore, like
ordinary OU processes, (Xt ) is a Gaussian process.
Equation (1.1) can be used to describe systems with linear interactions perturbed by Gaussian noise. An example of applications is inter-banking lending, see e.g. [8, 14]. In applications,
an important question is to estimate the interaction structure Γ from an observation of a single path of the process, assuming that Σ is known and a single path X(ω) can be observed
continuously or at discrete time.
For one dimensional case, the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) and the least square
estimator (LSE) and their properties have been studied in literature, see e.g. [22, 38, 19, 20].
Kleptsyna and Le Breton [22] and Tudor and Viens [38] have studied the maximum likelihood
estimator based on continuous observation and obtained the strong consistency of the MLE as
T goes to infinity. Hu and Nualart [19] studied the least square estimator for the case where
the Hurst parameter H > 21 . The strong consistency as T → ∞ was proved for H > 21 and a
central limit theorem was also established if 12 < H < 34 . Hu, Nualart and Zhou [20] extended
their results for all H ∈ (0, 1).
There are however few works on parameter estimation for multi-dimensional fOU processes.
The aim of this paper is therefore to fill this gap. First, for continuous observation of a single
path, we give an estimator based on the rough path theory (see e.g. Lyons and Qian [27]). In
order to formulate the parameter estimator, we should define an Itô type integration theory for
multi-dimensional fBM.
Coutin and Qian [11] proposed a theory of Stratonovich integration for multi-dimensional
fBM with H > 41 by using the rough path analysis. It remains an open question to build a
rough path theory for fBM with Hurst parameter H ≤ 14 . Therefore, we consider fBM with
Hurst parameter H where 13 < H ≤ 12 . For this case, both fBM and fOU processes are of finite
p-variation with 2 ≤ p < 3, and can be enhanced canonically to be geometric rough paths.
We may define Itô type integrals with respect to fBM and fOU processes by correcting their
enhanced Lévy area processes, and apply it to the study of the parameter estimation problem for
fOU processes based on continuous observation. In order to show that the parameter estimator
is strongly consistent, we study the regularity of fOU processes and long time asymptotic
behaviours of their Lévy area processes, which we believe are of interests by their own.
We also study the estimation problem based on discrete observation. In applications, observation times are discrete rather than continuous, though the sampling frequency can be made to
tend to infinity, which is the case for high-frequency financial data. For the statistical inference
in this direction, we recommend [1, 2, 28, 3, 5, 10, 4] and references therein. In this paper, we
construct a parameter estimator based on high-frequency discrete observation by using rough
path theory, and establish the strong consistence of this estimator. We would like mention that
Diehl, Friz and Mai [12] studied the maximum likelihood estimators for diffusion processes via
2

the rough path analysis, and initiated a study of estimators for the fractional case, but only for
the case that H = 12 − ε, for small ε.
The approach we present in this paper has several advantages over other methods in the
existing literature. First, our estimators are for multi-dimensional fOU processes where the no
trivial role played by Lévy area processes may be revealed, which differs fundamentally from
the one dimensional case. Second, the parameter estimators are pathwise defined, and can be
calculated based on observation of a single path. Third, the parameter estimators are pathwise
stable and robust, in the sense that, if two observations are very close according to the so called
p-variation distance (see the main text below), then their corresponding estimators are close
too. Fourth, our estimators can be constructed by both continuous observation and discrete
observation, in particular for high-frequency financial data.
Numerical studies and simulations are given in this paper, to demonstrate that the parameter estimators we propose are very good. Let us mention that the approach in this paper can
be extended to Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process Xt driven by a general Gaussian noise Gt , so that
Z t
−Γt
e−Γ(t−s) ΣdGs
(1.3)
X t = e x0 +
0

where the integral on the right-hand side is well defined as long as t → Gt is α-Hölder continuous
for some α > 0. Such singular OU processes may be useful in applications.
The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we recall some preliminaries of the rough
path theory and outline a theory of pathwise Itô integrals for both fBM and fOU processes.
In section 3, we prove the regularity of fOU process and study long time asymptotics of the
associated Lévy area processes. Then we construct a continuous rough path estimator in Section
4. We give a complete proof for almost sure convergence and pathwise stability of this estimator.
Then in section 5, the discrete rough path estimator based on high-frequency data is presented.
In section 6, we give two concrete experimental examples based on simulated sample paths,
and the numerical results are shown there.

2

Rough paths and Itô integration

In this section, we introduce several notations from the rough paths theory, following the
standard references [15, 16, 17, 26, 27]. We give a definition of Itô integrales for fBM and fOU
processes.

2.1

Preliminary of rough paths

Define the truncated tensor algebra T (2) (Rd ) by T (2) (Rd ) := ⊕2n=0 (Rd )⊗n , with the convention that (Rd )⊗0 = R, and use ∆ to denote the simplex {(s, t) : 0 ≤ s < t ≤ T }. Let Xt be
a continuous path on interval [0, T ] and Xs,t = (1, Xs,t , Xs,t ) be an element of space T (2) (Rd ).
Actually, when Xt is of finite p-variation with 2 < p < 3, we may lift it to the space T (2) (Rd ) as
a multiple function. The initial motivation is to define integrals with respect to X by increasing
information to X. We recall Chen’s identity (algebraic information) and the definition of finite
p-variation (analysis information).
We call that Xs,t = (1, Xs,t , Xs,t ) satisfies Chen’s identity if
Xs,t = Xt − Xs ,

(2.1)

Xs,t − Xs,u − Xu,t = Xs,u ⊗ Xu,t ,

(2.2)

3

for all (s, u), (u, t) ∈ ∆.
X = (1, Xs,t , Xs,t ) has finite p-variations if
X
X
sup
|Xs,t |p < ∞, sup
|Xs,t |p/2 < ∞,
P

P

[s,t]∈P

[s,t]∈P

where P is a partition of [0, T ]. It is equivalent to that there exists a control ω(s, t) such that
|Xs,t | ≤ ω(s, t)1/p , |Xs,t | ≤ ω(s, t)2/p , ∀(s, t) ∈ ∆.
A control ω is a non-negative, continuous, super-additive function on ∆ and satisfies that
ω(t, t) = 0.
Let 2 < p < 3 be a constant. A function X = (1, X, X) from ∆ to T (2) (Rd ) is called a p-rough
path if it has finite p-variation, and satisfies Chen’s identity. Denote the space of p-rough paths
as Ωp (Rd ).
According to Lyons Rand Qian [27], the integration operator is defined as a linear
R map from
d
e
d
e
Ωp (R ) to Ωp (R ), i.e. F : Ωp (R ) → Ωp (R ), and denote the integral by Y = F (X)dR X,
where
Z v
X
1
Yu,v ≡
F (X)dR1 X := lim
F (Xs )Xs,t + DF (Xs )Xs,t ,
(2.3)
|P|→0

u

[s,t]∈P

and the second level Y 2 by
Z v
X
2
1
1
Yu,v ≡
F (X)dR2 X := lim
Yu,s
⊗ Ys,t
+ F (Xs ) ⊗ F (Xs )Xs,t ,
|P|→0

u

(2.4)

[s,t]∈P

where the limit takes over all finite partitions P of interval [u, v].

2.2

FBM as rough paths

Almost all sample paths of a d-dimensional fBM with Hurst parameter H ∈ ( 31 , 21 ] have
finite p-variation with 2 < H1 < p < 3, which can be enhanced canonically to be geometric
rough paths. In fact Coutin and Qian [11] constructed the canonical rough path enhancement
BH,Str = (1, B H , BH,Str ) in the Stratonovich sense by using dyadic approximations of fBM and
their iterated integrals. But for the parameter estimation problem discussed in this paper,
if the stochastic integral in the estimator (see section 4) is understood in the Stratonovich
sense, it will almost surely converge to 0. Such estimator is not reasonable and therefore it
has no use. So we need a theory of Itô type integration for fBM and fOU process. In [34], the
present authors have constructed an Itô type rough path enhancement BH,Itô = (1, B H , BH,Itô )
associated with an fBM by setting
1
BH,Itô
= BH,Str
− I(t2H − s2H ),
s,t
s,t
2
which can be used to define Itô type pathwise integrals with respect to BH . For the first levels
of Itô integrals,
Z
X
H
F (B H )dR1 BH (ω) = lim
F (BsH (ω))Bs,t
(ω) + DF (BsH (ω))BH
s,t (ω),
|P|→0

[s,t]∈P

for every ω ∈ N c , where N is a null set. The second levels are defined similarly as (2.4).
4

However, this theory of Itô rough path enhancement and associated Itô integration works
well only for one forms, i.e. only works well for functions of BtH , and therefore this theory is
not suitable in dealing with fOU processes which are not one forms of the fBM BtH . An fOU
process Xt depends on the whole path of {BsH , 0 ≤ s ≤ t}. In the present paper, we will
reveal that a different integration theory (i.e. with different rough paths associated with fBM)
is required. To define an Itô rough path enhancement associated with fBM which is suitable
for the study of fOU processes. Take
1
ϕγ (t) := It2H − U γ (t),
2
with

Z tZ

γ

U (t) := HΓ
0

(2.5)

s

e−Γ(s−u) (s2H−1 − (s − u)2H−1 )duds.

(2.6)

0

1
Then ϕγ (t) has finite q-variation with q = 2H
, and therefore we can define the Itô type fractional
H
Brownian rough path lift for B to be the following rough path
H,γ
H,Str
H
H
BH,γ
− ϕγs,t ),
s,t = (1, Bs,t , Bs,t ) := (1, Bs,t , Bs,t

(2.7)

where ϕγs,t = ϕγ (t) − ϕγ (s).
Remark 2.1. One can verify that, if H = 12 , this Itô rough path enhancement is consistent
with Itô theory for the standard Brownian motion. When Γ = 0, this enhancement is the same
with the one form case defined in [34]. In the following, we will illustrate why we call it as Itô
rough path/Itô rough integration.

2.3

FOU as rough paths

For the fOU process Xt defined by stochastic differential equation (1.1), it can also be
enhanced as a rough path according to the theory of rough path, which is the essence of the
theory of rough differential equations. Although for the existence and uniqueness of the solution
to (1.1), for this simple case, the theory of rough path is not needed. However, when we ask if
Xt can be enhanced to a rough path, or when we want to integrate F (X) with respect to X,
the rough path analysis is a natural tool to deal with these problems.
We emphasize that the meaning of the solution X to a rough differential equation enhanced
by (1.1) depends on the rough paths BH we use. Here BH can be either BH,Str (in Stratonovich
sense) or BH,γ (in Itô sense).
Let Zt = (BtH , Xt , t) and Z = (BH , X, t) to be its associated rough path enhancement.
Then equation (1.1) is enhanced to
dR Z = f (Z)dR Z,

(2.8)

where f (x, y, t)(ξ, η, τ ) := (ξ, −Γyτ + Σξ, τ ). According to Theorem 6.2.1 and Corollary 6.2.2
in [27], a unique solution Z, which is a rough path, exists. Formally, Z = (1, Z, Z) has the
following expression:
H
Zs,t = (Bs,t
, Xs,t , t − s),
Rt H
Rt H 

BH
B
dX
B du
u
s,t
s,u
s
Rt
R st s,u
H

Zs,t =
X dB
Xs,t
Xs,u du .
s
R t s s,u u H R t
1
(u − s)dBu
(u − s)dXu 2 (t − s)2
s
s

5

(2.9)
(2.10)

Each component of the second level Zs,t is well-defined as parts of the solution to (2.8). More
exactly, we denote Stratonovich solution of RDE (2.8) as ZStr = (1, Z, ZStr ), where ZStr =
(ZStr,ij )i,j=1,2,3 , and we denote Itô solution of RDE (2.8) as ZItô = (1, Z, ZItô ), where ZItô =
(ZItô,ij )i,j=1,2,3 .
We therefore may define Stratonovich integral (first level) of fOU process with respect to
fBM as
Z t
H
,
(2.11)
Xs ◦ dR1 BH,Str = ZStr,21
+ X0 B0,t
0,t
0

and Itô integral (first level) of fOU process with respect to fBM as
Z t
H
+ X0 B0,t
.
Xs dR1 BH,γ = ZItô,21
0,t

(2.12)

0

Now we can define stochastic integrals with respect to fOU rough path enhancement X
by equations (2.3), (2.4). Note that these integrals are pathwise defined and continuous with
respect to the sample path X(ω) in p-variation metric. In what follows, we denote Stratonovich
rough integral as
 Z t

Z t
Z t
F (Xs ) ◦ dR X = 1,
F (Xs ) ◦ dR1 X,
F (Xs ) ◦ dR2 X ,
0

0

0

and Itô rough integral as
 Z t

Z t
Z t
F (Xs )dR X = 1,
F (Xs )dR1 X,
F (Xs )dR2 X .
0

0

0

As an application we will use the Itô rough integrals to construct the estimator for parametric
matrix Γ and prove the asymptotic properties and pathwise stability in the following sections.

2.4

Zero expectation

Let us illustrate the reason for naming Itô rough paths and Itô rough integrals. In stochastic
analysis, Itô integrals can be defined in terms of the martingale property, which is suitable for
semi-martingales. While for processes which are not semi-martingales such as fBM, attempts
of making integrals with respect to fBM being martingales are of course hopeless. We instead
demand that the expectations of integrals with respect to fBM are constant (e.g., to be zero).
We call this kind of integrals as Itô type integrals, which is in fact an extension of classical Itô
integration theory.
us verify that expectation
of the Itô integral of fOU process with respect to fBM
R t Now letH,γ
Rt
H,γ
X
d
B
(or
write
as
X
⊗
d
B
) vanishes.
s R1
s
R1
0
0
According to the theory of differential equations driven by rough paths and the definition of
integrals above, and assuming that coefficient matrices Γ and Σ are commutative for simplicity,
we have
Z t
Z t
H,γ
Xs dR1 B
=
Xs ◦ dR1 BH,Str − Σϕγ (t).
(2.13)
0

0

Since
Xt = e

−Γt

Z
X0 +
0

6

t

e−Γ(t−s) ΣdBsH ,

(2.14)

where X
R t0 is a constant vector and the integral on the right hand side is Young’s integral and
equals 0 e−Γ(t−s) Σ ◦ dR1 BH,Str
. Therefore
s

Z t

Z t
H,Str
−Γs
H,Str
=E
E
Xs ◦ dR1 B
e X0 ◦ dR1 B
0
0

Z t Z s
−Γ(s−u)
H,Str
H,Str
e
Σ ◦ dR1 Bu
◦ dR1 Bs
+E
0

0

The first term on the right hand side is zero, and the second term
Z t Z s
 Z tZ s
−Γ(s−u)
H,Str
H,Str
e−Γ(s−u) ΣdRH (u, s)
E
e
Σ ◦ dR1 Bu
◦ dR1 Bs
=
0
0
0
0


Z tZ s
1 2H
−Γ(s−u) 2H−1
2H−1
=Σ
e
(s
− (s − u)
)duds = Σϕγ (t),
It − HΓ
2
0
0
where RH (u, s) = E(BuH BsH ) = 21 (u2H + s2H − |u − s|2H ) is the covariance function of fBM and
the integral against RH (u, s) is defined as an Young’s integral in 2D sense (see e.g. [16]). Thus,
combining equations above, we have proved the zero expectation property, i.e.
Z t

H,γ
E
Xs dR1 B
= 0.
(2.15)
0

3

Long time asymptotic of Lévy area of fOU processes

In this section, we study properties of fOU processes. We show the α-Hölder continuity of
fOU processes, and prove a long time asymptotic property of Lévy area of fOU processes.

3.1

Regularity of fOU processes

3.1.1

The covariance of fOU processes

The covariance function of a general fOU process can be worked out explicitly. For simplicity,
we first study a stationary version of fOU process in this section. Consider
Z t
e−λ(t−s) dBsH ,
Xt = σ
−∞

which is stationary and ergodic (see e.g. [9]), and B H is fBM with Hurst parameter H < 21 . It
1
-variation.
is well known that the covariance RH (·, ·) of B H is of finite 2H
R t −λ(t−s) H
The covariance function of {Xt = σ −∞ e
dBs , t ≥ 0} is given by (see, e.g. [33])
r(t) = Cov(Xs , Xs+t ) = Cov(X0 , Xt )
Z
σ 2 G(2H + 1) sin(πH) ∞
x1−2H
= 2H
cos(λtx)
dx
λ
π
1 + x2
0
σ2
σ 2 2H
1
1
= 2H G(2H + 1) cosh(λt) − t 1 F2 (1; H + , H + 1; λ2 t2 ),
2λ
2
2
4
where G(·) is the Gamma function, cosh(·) the hyperbolic cosine function, 1 F2 (·; ·, ·; ·) the
generalized hypergeometric function, i.e.
p Fq (a1 , · · · , ap ; b1 , · · · , bq ; x) =

∞
X
(a1 )n · · · (ap )n xn
n=0

7

(b1 )n · · · (bq )n n!

,

and (a)0 = 1, (a)n = a(a + 1) · · · (a + n − 1), for n ≥ 1. One can see the figure of this covariance
function r(·) and its first and second derivatives below, where we take H = 0.2, σ = λ = 1 as
an example.

Figure 3.1: Graph of the covariance function r(·) of stationary fOU and its first two derivatives,
e.g. H = 0.2, σ = λ = 1.
Lemma 3.1. For the covariance function r(·) of stationary fOU process X with H < 21 , we
have the following properties:
(i) r(t) is 2H-Hölder continuous on R+ , that is,
|r(t) − r(s)| ≤ CH |t − s|2H ,
for any s, t ∈ R+ and CH depends on H, σ, λ only (we may ignore σ, λ).
(ii) There exist constants 0 < T0 < T1 such that r00 (T0 ) = 0, and r00 (t) > 0 on interval (0, T0 ),
r00 (t) < 0 on interval (T1 , ∞). That is, r is convex on [0, T0 ] and concave on (T1 , ∞).
Proof. For covariance function r(·), near t = 0,

2 −2H
r(t) = σ λ
HG(2H) 1 −


λ2H
2H
2H
t + o(t ) ,
G(2H + 1)

and for t large enough (see Theorem 2.3, [9]),
N
1 X −2n
r(t) = σ 2
λ
2 n=1

!

2n−1
Y

(2H − k) t2H−2n + O(t2H−2N −2 ).

k=0

Since r(t) is continuous on [0, ∞) and one can also see that r(t) has polynomial decay to zero
as t large from above equality.
For (i), we have maxt≥0 |r(t)| = C < ∞, for any s, t ∈ R+ and |t − s| ≥ 1, then
|r(t) − r(s)| ≤ 2C ≤ 2C|t − s|2H .
8

For any s, t ∈ R+ and |t − s| < 1, we show the statement in three case: s, t ∈ [0, 1], s, t ∈ [1, ∞)
and 0 ≤ s < 1 < t(< 2). For the first and third terms, we actually need to show that for any
s, t ∈ [0, 2] and |t − s| < 1, there exists a constant C such that |r(t) − r(s)| ≤ C|t − s|2H . Since
r(t) = −ct2H + ϕ(t), where ϕ(·) is smooth on R+ , then
|r(t) − r(s)| ≤ c|t − s|2H + max |ϕ0 (u)||t − s| ≤ C|t − s|2H .
0≤u≤2

For the second case, i.e. for any s, t ∈ [1, ∞) and |t − s| < 1, we have
|r(t) − r(s)| ≤ max |r0 (u)||t − s| ≤ C|t − s|2H .
u≥1

Thus we proved the statement (i).
For (ii), one can see that there exists a small number ε > 0 such that r00 (ε) > 0 and a large
number T1 > 0 such that, for all t ≥ T1 , r00 (t) < 0. By the continuity of r00 on (0, ∞), there
exists a T0 ∈ (ε, T1 ) satisfying r00 (T0 ) = 0 and r00 (t) > 0 for any t ∈ (0, T0 ).
Followings are important properties of fOU processes when H < 12 . It is well-known that,
increments of fBM are negatively correlated when H < 12 , and positively correlated when
H > 21 , while for H = 21 increments over different time periods are independent. We found
that for fOU process with H < 12 , the disjoint increments are locally negative correlated. If the
distance of the intervals corresponding the disjoint increments is large, then they are positively
correlated, we call it long-range positive correlation. See the theorem below. Heuristically, fOU
process is locally like fBM so that it has the locally negative correlation property as fBM when
H < 12 . For long distance the drift becomes the dominated force, so the fOU behaves positively
correlated. In the case where H = 12 , the fOU is the standard OU process driven by standard
Bownian motion. The properties of it are well known. Our main concern here is for the true
fOU process case with H < 12 .
Theorem 3.2. Consider the stationary fOU process X with H < 21 . T0 , T1 are given in the
previous lemma.
(i) (Locally negative correlation) For any s0 and s0 ≤ ti < ti+1 ≤ tj < tj+1 ≤ s0 + T0 , then
E(Xti+1 − Xti )(Xtj+1 − Xtj ) ≤ 0.

(3.1)

(ii) (Long-range positive correlation) For any 0 ≤ ti < ti+1 < tj < tj+1 , and if tj − ti+1 > T1 ,
then
(3.2)
E(Xti+1 − Xti )(Xtj+1 − Xtj ) ≥ 0.
Proof. (i) Since
E(Xti+1 − Xti )(Xtj+1 − Xtj )
= (r(tj+1 − ti+1 ) − r(tj+1 − ti )) − (r(tj − ti+1 ) − r(tj − ti ))
= (r(x3 ) − r(x4 )) − (r(x1 ) − r(x2 ))
= − [(r(x4 ) − r(x3 )) − (r(x2 ) − r(x1 ))] ,
where x1 := tj − ti+1 , x2 := tj − ti , x3 := tj+1 − ti+1 , x4 := tj+1 − ti , then we have 0 ≤ x1 <
x2 ≤ x3 < x4 ≤ T0 or 0 ≤ x1 < x3 ≤ x2 < x4 ≤ T0 , and
r(x2 ) − r(x1 )
r(x4 ) − r(x3 )
≥
,
x4 − x3
x2 − x1
by convexity of r. This proves (3.1).
(ii) The proof of (3.2) is almost the same as (i).
9

Now we have the following propositions.
Proposition 3.3. For the stationary fOU process X, it satisfies that
E|Xt − Xs |2 ≤ CH |t − s|2H ,

(3.3)

for any s, t ∈ R+ , and CH depends on H, σ, λ only (we ignore σ, λ here).
Proof. Since X is a stationary Gaussian process, then
E|Xt − Xs |2 = E(Xt2 + Xs2 − 2Xt Xs )
= 2(r(0) − r(|t − s|))
≤ CH |t − s|2H .
The last inequality holds by 2H-Hölder continuity of the covariance function r(t), i.e. Lemma
3.1.(i).
Proposition 3.4. Let X be the stationary fOU process with H ∈ (0, 21 ). Then its covariance
1
RX (s, t) = E(Xs Xt ) is of finite 2H
-variation on [s0 , s0 + T0 ]2 in 2D sense for any s0 . Moreover,
there exist constants C = C(H) and T0 > 0 such that, for all s < t in [s0 , s0 + T0 ],
|RX |

1
−var;[s,t]2
2H

where
|RX |ρρ−var;[s,t]2 := sup

≤ C(H)|t − s|2H ,

(3.4)

iρ
h
E (Xti+1 − Xti )(Xt0j+1 − Xt0j ) ,

X

(3.5)

i,j
0

and P = {ti }, P =

{t0j }

are any two partitions of interval [s, t].

1
Proof. By Lemma 5.54 of [16], we just need to show the finite 2H
-variation by the same partition
P = {ti } of interval [s, t] ⊂ [s0 , s0 + T0 ]. Let us consider
X 
 1
E (Xti+1 − Xti )(Xtj+1 − Xtj ) 2H .
(3.6)
i,j



For a fixed i, and i 6= j, E (Xti+1 − Xti )(Xtj+1 − Xtj ) ≤ 0 for H <
X



E Xti ,ti+1 Xtj ,tj+1

1
2

by Theorem 3.2, hence,

1
2H

j

=

X



E Xti ,ti+1 Xtj ,tj+1

1
2H


1
2 2H
+ E Xti ,ti+1

j6=i

!
≤ E

X

Xti ,ti+1 Xtj ,tj+1

1
2H


1
2 2H
+ E Xti ,ti+1

j6=i



!
1

≤ 2 2H −1 E

X

Xti ,ti+1 Xtj ,tj+1

1
2H
1



+ 2 2H −1 E Xti ,ti+1

j


1
2 2H
+ E Xti ,ti+1


≤ C(H) E Xti ,ti+1 Xs,t

1
2H


1
2 2H
+ C(H) E Xti ,ti+1
.
10

2

1
 2H




Therefore, we have
X



E Xti ,ti+1 Xtj ,tj+1



1
2H

≤ C(H)

X

i,j



E Xti ,ti+1 Xs,t

1
2H

+ C(H)

i

X

E Xti ,ti+1

2

1
 2H

.

i

The second term on the right hand side is controlled by C(H)|t − s| by Proposition 3.3. Now
we show that
X 
 1
E Xti ,ti+1 Xs,t 2H ≤ C(H)|t − s|.
i

Since



E Xti ,ti+1 Xs,t = E Xti+1 Xt − Xti Xt + Xti Xs − Xti+1 Xs
= |r(t − ti+1 ) − r(t − ti ) + r(ti − s) − r(ti+1 − s)|
≤ |r(t − ti+1 ) − r(t − ti )| + |r(ti − s) − r(ti+1 − s)|
≤ CH |ti+1 − ti |2H + CH |ti+1 − ti |2H ≤ 2CH |ti+1 − ti |2H ,
thus
X



E Xti ,ti+1 Xs,t

1
2H

≤

X

C(H) |ti+1 − ti | ≤ C(H)|t − s|.

i

i

Now we have completed the proof.
Corollary 3.5. Let X be the stationary fOU process with H ∈ (0, 21 ). Then its covariance
1
RX (s, t) = E(Xs Xt ) is of finite 2H
-variation on [0, T ]2 in 2D sense. Moreover, there exists a
constant C = C(H) such that, for all s < t in [0, T ],
1

|RX | 2H
≤ C(H)|t − s|.
1
−var;[s,t]2

(3.7)

2H

h i
Proof. We divide the interval [0, T ] into m+1 = TT0 +1 pieces, denote them as [0, T0 ], [T0 , 2T0 ],
· · · , [(m − 1)T0 , mT0 ], [mT0 , T ]. For any subinterval [s, t] ⊂ [0, T ], there exist q1 , q2 ∈ N such
1

that s ∈ [(q1 − 1)T0 , q1 T0 ] and t ∈ [q2 T0 , (q2 + 1)T0 ], by the subadditivity of |RX | 2H
, then
1
−var;[·,·]2
2H
we have
1

1

1

|RX | 2H
≤ |RX | 2H
1
1
−var;[s,t]2
−var;[s,q
2H

2H

1 T0

]2

1

+ |RX | 2H
1
−var;[q
2H

1 T0 ,(q1 +1)T0

]2

+ · · · + |RX | 2H
1
−var;[q
2H

2 T0 ,t]

2

≤ C(H)(|q1 T0 − s| + |2q1 T0 − q1 T0 | + · · · + |t − q2 T0 |)
≤ C(H)|t − s|.
This completes the proof of the corollary.
3.1.2

Regularity of fOU processes

In the following,
R t we study the α-Hölder continuity of one dimensional, stationary fOU
process Xt = σ −∞ e−λ(t−s) dBsH . Before showing the regularity, we recall the usual GarsiaRodemich-Rumsey inequality (see e.g., page 60, Stroock and Varadhan [37]).
Lemma 3.6. (Garsia-Rodemich-Rumsey inequality) Let p(·) and Ψ(·) be continuous, strictly
increasing functions on [0, ∞) such that
p(0) = Ψ(0) = 0, and
11

lim Ψ(t) = ∞.

t→∞

Given T > 0 and φ ∈ C([0, T ], Rd ), if there is a constant B such that

Z TZ T 
|φ(t) − φ(s)|
dsdt ≤ B,
Ψ
p(|t − s|)
0
0

(3.8)

then for all 0 ≤ s ≤ t ≤ T ,
Z

|t−s|
−1

|φ(t) − φ(s)| ≤ 8



Ψ
0

4B
u2


p(du).

(3.9)

As an application of this lemma above, we have
Proposition 3.7. Let X be a one dimensional, stationary fOU process with H ∈ (0, 12 ) on
[0, T ]. Then there exist a constant 0 < β < 1 and an almost surely finite random variable C
independent of T such that
|Xt − Xs | ≤ CT β |t − s|α , a.s.
(3.10)
for any α ∈ (0, H), any 0 ≤ s, t ≤ T .
Proof. By Proposition 3.3, we know that
E|Xt − Xs |2 ≤ CH |t − s|2H .

(3.11)

Since Xt is Gaussian process, all the norms are equivalent, we get
p

E|Xt − Xs |p ≤ Cp (E|Xt − Xs |2 ) 2 ≤ Cp,H |t − s|pH ,

(3.12)

for any p > 2.
Next, we apply the Garsia-Rodemich-Rumsey inequality. Take Ψ(x) = xp and p(x) = xH .
Then inequality (3.12) implies that
Z T Z T 


|Xt − Xs |
Ψ
E
dsdt ≤ Cp,H T 2 .
p(|t − s|)
0
0
Define
Z

T

Z

BT :=

T


Ψ

0

0

|Xt − Xs |
p(|t − s|)



Z

T

Z

T

dsdt =
0

0

|Xt − Xs |p
dsdt.
|t − s|pH

Then for any q > 3, we get
E

∞
X
Bn
n=1

nq

!
=

∞
X
E(Bn )
n=1

nq

≤

∞
X
Cn2
n=1

nq

< ∞.

Thus there exists an almost surely finite random variable R independent of n such that
∞
X
Bn
n=1

nq

≤ R, a.s.

So we have
Bn ≤ Rnq , a.s. ∀n ≥ 1, q > 3.
Take n = [T ], then
BT ≤ Bn+1 ≤ R(n + 1)q ≤ CRT q , a.s. ∀T > 0, q > 3.
12

Then the Garsia-Rodemich-Rumsey inequality gives that


Z |t−s|
4BT
−1
Ψ
|Xt − Xs | ≤ 8
p(du)
u2
0
1

1

q

≤ C(4BT ) p |t − s|H−2/p ≤ CR p T p |t − s|α ,
 2 
for any α ∈ (0, H), p > 3 ∨ H−α
and 3 < q < p. This concludes the lemma.
R t −λ(t−s) H
Remark 3.8. When Xt = σ 0 e
dBs , it still satisfies inequality (3.10).
Besides, we prove a proposition for a function of fOU processes, which will be applied in
section 5.
Proposition 3.9. Let B H = (B H,1 , B H,2 , · · · , B H,d ) be a d-dimensional fBM with H ∈ (0, 12 ),
Rt
X = (X 1 , X 2 , · · · , X d ) a d-dimensional fOU process, where Xti = σ 0 e−λi (t−s) dBsH,i , λi > 0,
σ ∈ R. Define F (Xt ) := Xt ⊗ Xt = (Xti Xtj )i,j=1,2,··· ,d , and the norm of matrix A as kAk =
Pd
i,j=1 |aij |. Then there exist a constant 0 < β < 1, an almost surely finite random variable C
(independent of T ) and a random variable RT (tends to zero almost surely as T → ∞) such
that
kF (Xt ) − F (Xs )k
≤ CRT T β ,
(3.13)
sup
|t − s|α
s6=t
for any 0 ≤ s, t ≤ T , any α ∈ (0, H).
Proof. First, we present a fact about supremum of one dimensional, stationary fOU process
i
i
i
i
(X )∗t = sup0≤s≤t |X s | below. Since we know that X and −X have the same distribution and
their covariance function is


λ2H
i
i
i
2H
2H
t + o(t ) ,
(3.14)
ri (t) = Cov(X s+t , X s ) = C 1 −
G(2H + 1)
for t small, where C = σ 2 λ−2H
HG(2H) and G(·) is Gamma function. So by Theorem 3.1 of
i
Pickands [32], we know that for t tending to infinity
1
1
i
i
sup X s → 0, a.s., δ sup (−X s ) → 0, a.s.,
δ
t 0≤s≤t
t 0≤s≤t
i

i

i

for any δ > 0. Since (X )∗t = (sup0≤s≤t X s ) ∨ (sup0≤s≤t (−X s )), then
i

(X )∗t
→ 0, a.s.
tδ
i

i

Since Xti = X t − e−λt X 0 , so we also have
Now define Rt = supi=1,··· ,d
and 0 ≤ s, t ≤ T ,

(X i )∗t
,
tδ

(X i )∗t
tδ

(3.15)

→ 0, a.s, where (X i )∗t = sup0≤s≤t |Xsi |.

then Rt → 0, a.s. as t → ∞. For any i, j = 1, 2, · · · , d,

|Xti Xtj − Xsi Xsj | = |(Xti − Xsi )Xtj + Xsi (Xtj − Xsj )|
≤ |Xtj ||Xti − Xsi | + |Xsi ||Xtj − Xsj |
≤ (X j )∗T |Xti − Xsi | + (X i )∗T |Xtj − Xsj |
≤ CRT T δ T β |t − s|α + CRT T δ T β |t − s|α
≤ CRT T δ+β |t − s|α ,
where the last second inequality is followed from Proposition 3.7. One can choose δ, β such
that 0 < δ + β =: β 0 < 1. Thus, we have . This completes the proof of the statement.
13

3.1.3

Lévy area of multi-dimensional fOU processes

In this subsection, let B H = (B H,1 , B H,2 , · · · , B H,d ) be a d-dimensional fBM with H ∈ ( 13 , 21 ),
Rt
X = (X 1 , X 2 , · · · , X d ) a d-dimensional fOU process, where Xti = σ −∞ e−λi (t−s) dBsH,i , λi > 0,
σ ∈ R. Then X = (X 1 , X 2 , · · · , X d ) is stationary (see [9]). Its covariance function is given by
RX (s, t) = diag(R1 (s, t), · · · , Rd (s, t)),
where Ri (s, t) = E(Xsi Xti ).
Rt
In this subsection, we will show one estimate for off-diagonal elements of Lévy area 0 Xui ◦
dR1 Xj of the multi-dimensional fOU process X. We denote Stratonovich’s Lévy area of fOU
process X as
Z

Z
t

t

Xui ◦ dR1 Xj

Xu ◦ dR1 X =

A(t) :=
0

0

,
i,j=1,2,··· ,d

and Aij (t) as its components.
Before showing the estimate of off-diagonal elements, we recall a lemma based on Wiener
chaos. We denote Hn (P) as homogeneous Wiener chaos of order n and C n (P) := ⊕nj=0 Hj (P)
the Wiener chaos (or non-homogeneous chaos) of order n. The lemma below gives the hypercontractivity of Wiener chaos.
Lemma 3.10. (Refer to, e.g., Lemma 15.21, [16]) Let q ∈ N and Z ∈ C q (P). Then, for p > 2,
1

1

q

1

(E|Z|2 ) 2 ≤ (E|Z|p ) p ≤ (q + 1)(p − 1) 2 (E|Z|2 ) 2 .

(3.16)

Now we illustrate one estimate for off-diagonal elements, i.e. when i 6= j, we have the
following proposition.
Proposition 3.11. Let XR = (X 1 , · · · , X d ) be a d-dimensional, stationary fOU process with
t
H ∈ ( 13 , 21 ), and Aij (t) = 0 Xui ◦ dR1 Xj , i 6= j, be the off-diagonal elements of Stratonovich’s
e
Lévy area of X. Then there exist 0 < β < 1 and an almost surely finite random variable C
such that
e β , a.s.
|Aij (t) − Aij (s)| ≤ Cn
(3.17)
for any s, t ∈ [n − 1, n] and any integer n ≥ 1.
Proof. First, we rewrite Ri (s, t) as

Ri

s
t



= EXsi Xti ,

and denote

Ri

s
u, v


=

i
,
EXsi Xu,v


Ri




s, t
s, t
i
i
i
i
.
= EXs,t Xu , Ri
= EXs,t
Xu,v
u
u, v

For the second moment of the Lévy area,
!

Z t Z t
Z t
2
j
j
j
i
i
i
E
Xu ◦ dR1 X
=E
Xu Xv ◦ dR1 X ◦ dR1 X
s

s

Z tZ

s
t

E(Xui Xvi )dE(Xuj Xvj )
 
Zs t Zs t  
u
u
=
Ri
dRj
,
v
v
s
s

=

14

where the integral which appears on the right hand side above can be viewed as a 2-dimensional
(2D) Young’s integral (see e.g. Section 6.4 of Friz and Victoir [16]). Then we have
 
  Z tZ t  
  Z tZ t  
Z tZ t  
s, u
u
s, u
u
u
u
Ri
dRj
Ri
dRj
+
Ri
dRj
=
s
v
s, v
v
v
v
s
s
s
s
s
 
  s 
Z tZ t
Z tZ t  
u
s
u
s
dRj
Ri
dRj
+ Ri
+
v
s, v
v
s
s
s
s
s
=: I + II + III + IV.
For the first term I, by Young-Lóeve-Towghi inequality (see e.g. Theorem 6.18 of [16]), we
have
I ≤ C|Ri |

1
−var;[s,t]2
2H

≤ C max{|Ri |21

2H

|Rj |

1
−var;[s,t]2
2H

−var;[s,t]2

, |Rj |21

2H

−var;[s,t]2

}.

Then by Corollary 3.5, we have that
 
Z tZ t  
s, u
u
I=
Ri
dRj
≤ C|t − s|4H .
s,
v
v
s
s

(3.18)

For the second term II, by Young 1D estimate (see e.g. Theorem 6.8 of [16]), we have
 
Z t  
s, u
u
II =
Ri
dRj
s
s, t
s
 
 
·
·
Rj
,
≤ C Ri
s, t 1 −var;[s,t]
s
1
−var;[s,t]
2H

2H

where

Ri

·
s



1
2H

= sup
P

1
−var;[s,t]
2H

= sup
P

≤ sup
P



X

Ri

`

X

t`+1
s




− Ri

t`
s



1
2H

1

|ri (t`+1 − s) − ri (t` − s)| 2H

`

X

CH |t`+1 − t` | ≤ CH |t − s|,

`

and

Rj


·
s, t

1
2H

= sup
1
−var;[s,t]
2H

P

= sup
P

X


Rj

`

X

t`+1
s, t




− Rj

j
E(Xtj` ,t`+1 Xs,t
)

`

1
2H

t`
s, t



1
2H

1

≤ |Rj | 2H
.
1
−var;[s,t]2
2H

i
In above estimate, function ri is the covariance ri (t) = E(Xsi Xs+t
). Thus, we have
 
Z tZ t  
s, u
u
II =
Ri
dRj
≤ C|t − s|4H .
s
v
s
s

15

(3.19)

For the third term III, it is the same with the second term II line by line. So
 
Z tZ t  
s
u
III =
Ri
dRj
≤ C|t − s|4H .
s,
v
v
s
s

(3.20)

For the last term IV ,


  
 
 
 
s
t
s
t
s
IV = Ri
Rj
− Rj
− Rj
+ Rj
s
t
t
s
s
2H
= ri (0)(2rj (0) − 2rj (t − s)) ≤ C|t − s| .

(3.21)

Now combing inequalities (3.18),(3.19),(3.20) and (3.21), we get
!
Z
2
t

Xui ◦ dR1 Xj

E

≤ C|t − s|4H + C|t − s|2H .

(3.22)

s

Let s < t and s, t ∈ [n − 1, n], so we have
Z

2

t

E

!

Xui ◦ dR1 Xj

≤ C|t − s|2H .

s

Now we turn to prove the estimate, for arbitrary p ≥ 2, by the hypercontractivity of Wiener
chaos (see Lemma 3.10), we further have
Z t
p
i
j
p
E[|Aij (t) − Aij (s)| ] = E
Xu ◦ dR1 X
s

Z

≤ 3p (p − 1)p

E

2

t

! p2

Xui ◦ dR1 Xj

s
pH

≤ C|t − s|

.

Take Ψ(x) = xp and p(x) = xH , the above inequality implies that
Z n+1 Z n+1 


|Aij (t) − Aij (s)|
E
Ψ
dsdt ≤ C.
p(|t − s|)
n
n
Define
Z

n+1

Z

Bn :=

n+1


Ψ

n

n

|Aij (t) − Aij (s)|
p(|t − s|)



Z

n+1

Z

dsdt =
n

n

n+1

|Aij (t) − Aij (s)|p
dsdt.
|t − s|pH

Then for any q > 1, we get
E

∞
X
Bn
n=1

nq

!
=

∞
X
E(Bn )
n=1

nq

∞
X
C
≤
< ∞.
nq
n=1

Thus there exists an almost surely finite random variable R independent of n such that
∞
X
Bn
n=1

nq

≤ R, a.s.
16

So we have
Bn ≤ Rnq , a.s. ∀n ≥ 1, q > 1.

(3.23)

Apply the Garsia-Rodemich-Rumsey inequality, and for any n − 1 ≤ s < t ≤ n, we get
Z

|t−s|



−1

|Aij (t) − Aij (s)| ≤ 8

Ψ
0

=
for any p >

3.2

2
H

4Bn
u2



Z
p(du) ≤ 8H
0

8H
(4Bn ) ≤ CR n ,
H − 2/p
1
p

1
p

q
p

1



4Bn
u2

 p1

uH−1 du

a.s.

and 1 < q < p. Thus we complete this proof.

Long time asymptotic of Lévy area

Now in this subsection, we consider the multi-dimensional fOU process which is the solution
to stochastic differential equation
dXt = −ΓXt dt + σdBtH , X0 = 0,

(3.24)

where Γ is a symmetric, positive-definite matrix, σ is a constant, and B H = (B H,1 , B H,2 , · · · , B H,d )
is a d-dimensionalRfBM. Our aim in this section is to show a long time asymptotic property of
t
Lévy area A(t) = 0 Xs ◦ dR1 X of fOU processes X. That is to show
1
1
A(t) =
t
t

Z

t

Xs ◦ dR1 X → 0, a.s.
0

as t goes to infinity.
The components of solution process X are not independent since the interactions between
each other. We first make an orthogonal transformation for this dynamical system. Since the
drift matrix Γ is symmetric and positive-definite, there exists an orthogonal matrix Σ such that
T

ΣΓΣ = Λ,

(3.25)

where Λ = diag{λ1 , · · · , λd } and 0 < λ1 ≤ · · · ≤ λd .
et := ΣXt , and B
e H := ΣB H , since Σ is an orthogonal matrix, B
e H is still a dDefine X
t
t
t
dimensional fBM with Hurst parameter H. Then stochastic differential equation (3.24) becomes
et = −ΛX
et dt + σdB
etH .
dX
et has independent components. We also have that
Now the fOU process X
Z t

Z t
T
e
e
Xs ◦ dR1 X = Σ
Xs ◦ dR1 X Σ.
0

0

What we should prove now is that
1
t

Z

t

e → 0, a.s.
es ◦ dR1 X
X
0

as t goes to infinity.

17

(3.26)

e and B
e H , respectively, for
We may ignore the symbol tilde and use X, B H to denote X
1
2
d
simplicity. Now the d-dimensional fOU process X = (X , X , · · · , X ) has independent components and satisfies
Z
t

Xti = σ

e−λi (t−s) dBsH,i , i = 1, 2, · · · , d.

(3.27)

e−λi (t−s) dBsH,i , i = 1, 2, · · · , d.

(3.28)

0

Define
i
Xt

Z

t

=σ
−∞

i

Then {X t , t ≥ 0} are stationary, ergodic, Gaussian processes, see [9].
3.2.1

On-diagonal case

Lemma 3.12. For the on-diagonal components of Lévy area A(t) =
1
1
Aii (t) =
t
t

Z

Rt
0

Xs ◦ dR1 X, we have

t

Xsi ◦ dR1 Xi → 0, a.s., ∀ i = 1, 2, · · · , d.

(3.29)

0

as t tends to infinity.
Proof. First, we show that for any α > 0,
i

X
lim αt = 0, a.s.
t→∞ t

(3.30)

i

As we know that the covariance of the process X t is


λ2H
i
i
i
2H
2H
ri (t) = Cov(X s+t , X s ) = C 1 −
t + o(t ) ,
G(2H + 1)

(3.31)

for t small, where C = σ 2 λ−2H
HG(2H) and G(·) is Gamma function. Then the limit (3.30)
i
follows from Theorem 3.1 of Pickands [32].
i
i
Since Xti = X t − e−λi t X 0 and
Z t
1
Xsi ◦ dR1 Xi = (Xti )2 ,
2
0
then from (3.30), it follows that
1
lim
t→∞ t

Z

t

Xsi ◦ dR1 Xi = 0, a.s.

0

Thus, we conclude this lemma for on-diagonal case.
3.2.2

Off-diagonal case

Let X = (X 1 , X 2 , · · · , X d ) be the d-dimensional, stationary Gaussian process given by
(3.28). Its covariance function is given by
RX (s, t) = diag(R1 (s, t), · · · , Rd (s, t)),
where Ri (s, t) := E(Xsi Xti ).
18

When i 6= j, we have (as proof of equation (3.22) in Proposition 3.11) that
!
Z t
2
E
Xsi ◦ dR1 Xj
≤ Ct4H + Ct2H .

(3.32)

0

When t ≥ 1, we have
2

t

Z

Xsi

E

◦ dR1 X

j

!
≤ Ct4H .

(3.33)

0

Rt
Now we define Aij (t) = 0 Xsi ◦ dR1 Xj as in subsection 3.1.3, and Znij := n−2H Aij (n) we first
show that when t = n ∈ N (discrete sequence), we have
lim

n→∞

1
Aij (n) = 0, a.s.
n

(3.34)

Proposition 3.13. For the discrete sequence { n1 Aij (n), n ≥ 1} and H ∈ ( 13 , 12 ), we have
1
Aij (n) → 0, a.s.
n

(3.35)

as n goes to infinity.
Proof. By the inequality (3.33), we have
E|Aij (n)|2 ≤ Cn4H .
Then
sup E|Znij |2 ≤ C.
n

According Proposition 15.20 of [16], we know that Znij belongs to the second Wiener chaos
C 2 (P). By Lemma 3.10, we have
p

sup E|Znij |p ≤ 3p (p − 1)p sup(E|Znij |2 ) 2 < ∞.
n

n

For any  > 0, by Chebyshev inequality, we have

P (|Aij (n)| > n) = P |Znij | > n1−2H  ≤
where p >
Then,

1
np(1−2H) p

sup E|Znij |p
n

1
.
1−2H

X

P (|Aij (n)| > n) ≤

n

X
n

C
np(1−2H) p

< ∞.

The almost sure convergence follows from the Borel-Cantelli lemma.
Now we can conclude this subsection, that is, to show the limit for arbitrary t rather than
at discrete time N+ .
Theorem 3.14. Suppose stochastic process Xt is fOU process which is the solution to stochastic
differential equation (3.24) and Γ is symmetric and positive-definite. Then
Z
1 t
1
A(t) =
Xs ⊗ ◦dR1 X → 0, a.s.,
t
t 0
as t → ∞, where the above integral is in Stratonovich sense.
19

Proof. First, assume that X is the stationary fOU process as in equation (3.28). The ondiagonal case is proved in Lemma 3.12. For the off-diagonal case, since
1
n1
1
|Aij (t)| ≤ |Aij (t) − Aij (n)| +
|Aij (n)|,
(3.36)
t
t
tn
and setting n = [t], by Proposition 3.11, we have that the first term on the right hand side is
e −1 nβ ≤ Cn
e β−1 → 0, a.s. And the second term also tends to zero by Proposition
controlled by Ct
3.13. Thus we have completed the proof of Theorem 3.14 when fOU process X is stationary.
If X is not stationary version but starts at point 0 at t = 0, we can also prove this asymptotic
1
d
for their Stratonovich integrals. Now let X = (X , · · · , X ) be the stationary version as above.
i
i
Then fOU process Xti = X t − e−λi t X 0 , i = 1, 2, · · · , d. So
Z
Z
Z
1 t i
1 t i
1 t
j
i
j
j
Xu ◦ dR1 X =
λj e−λj u X u duX 0
X u ◦ dR1 X +
t 0
t 0
t 0
Z t
Z
1
1 t
j
i
i
j
−λi u
−
e
dX u X 0 −
λj e−(λi +λj )u duX 0 X 0 ,
t 0
t 0
where the last three integrals are Young’s integrals.
The first term on the right hand side tends to zero almost surely, which has been proved
above. The last term also goes to zero almost surely, which can be proved easily. For the second
Rt
Rt
i
j
and third terms, we can see that 0 λj e−λj u X u du and 0 e−λi u dX u are two Gaussian processes.
Rt i
j
By almost the same arguments as the proof of the limit 1t 0 X u ◦ dR1 X → 0, a.s, we can also
prove that the second and third terms both converge to zero almost surely. Here we just give
a sketch of proof for the second term.
Rt
i
j
Define Zt = 0 λj e−λj u X u du, and ξ = X 0 . First, we show that n1 (ξZn ) → 0, a.s for integer
subsequence. Since
Z n
2 Z n Z n
−λj u i
2
λj e
ri (u − v)e−λj (u+v) dudv
E|Zn | = E
X u du =
0
0
0
Z nZ n
C
e
e−λj (u+v) dudv ≤ 2 (e−λj n − 1)2 ≤ C,
≤ max |ri (t)|
t≥0
λj
0
0
e independent of n. Then
where C, C


1
1
E|ξZn |2
(Eξ 4 ) 2 + (EZn4 ) 2
C
1
P
|ξZn | > ε ≤
≤
≤ 2 2,
2
2
2
2
n
nε
nε
nε
by Borel-Cantelli lemma, we proved that n1 (ξZn ) → 0, a.s.
Now we show for any n ≥ 1 and any s, t ∈ [n, n + 1], there exist a constant β ∈ (0, 1) and
an almost surely finite random variable R such that |Zt − Zs | ≤ Rnβ , a.s.. Since
Z t
2 Z t Z t
2
−λj u i
E|Zt − Zs | = E
λj e
X u du =
ri (u − v)e−λj (u+v) dudv ≤ C|t − s|2 ,
s

s

s

where C is a universal constant, applying Garsia-Rodemich-Rumsey inequality as Proposition
3.11, we get |Zt − Zs | ≤ Rnβ , a.s. Then, choose n = [t],
1
1
n1
1
|ξZt | ≤ |ξ||Zt − Zn | +
|ξZn | ≤ R|ξ|nβ−1 + |ξZn | → 0, a.s.
t
t
tn
n
Thus we proved the limit of the second term. The third term follows likely as above. By taking
an orthogonal transformation for X (independent components), we get the same limit for
Stratonovich integral of solution to equation (3.24). Therefore, we conclude this theorem.
20

4

Pathwise Stable estimators

4.1

Continuous Rough Path Estimator

In this section, let X be fOU process, i.e. the solution to the following stochastic differential
equation
dXt = −ΓXt dt + ΣdBtH .
(4.1)
We construct an estimator based on continuous observation via rough path theory. We suppose
that the rough path enhancement (X0,t (ω), X0,t (ω)) of fOU process Xt (ω) could be continuously
observed in Itô sense defined in section 2. It may leave the users with the question of how to
understand data as a rough path in practice. For this direction, there are in fact works on how
to inverse data to rough paths. We recommend those who may be interested in these questions
to look at the literature on rough path analysis, in particular [6].
For the construction of estimator, we adapt the idea of least square estimator of Hu and
Nualart [19] who derived this estimator in one dimensional case, which is formally taken as the
minimizer
Z T
|Ẋt − (−γXt )|2 dt,
(4.2)
γ
bT := arg min
γ∈Θ

0

where Θ is the parameter space. In multi-dimensional case, we take (formally) the estimator
as the minimizer
Z t
b
Γt := arg min
kΣ−1 Ẋs − (−ΓΣ−1 Xs )k2 ds, t ∈ [0, T ],
(4.3)
Γ∈Θ

0

which leads to the solution
bt = −L−1
Γ
t St ,

(4.4)

where
t

Z
Lt =

(I ⊗ Xs )T Q−1 (I ⊗ Xs )ds ∈ L(V, V ∗ ),

(4.5)

(I ⊗ Xs )T Q−1 dR1 X ∈ V ∗ ,

(4.6)

0
t

Z
St =
0

and space V = Rd×d , L−1
is the inverse of Lt , Q = ΣΣT , I ⊗ X = (δji X k )i,j,k=1,··· ,d , and M T
t
denotes transpose of matrix M . The integral St is taken as Itô rough integral of X defined in
section 2. We call this estimator as rough path estimator.
When Σ = σI (I is identity matrix, σ is a constant), the estimator becomes
bTt = −
Γ

Z

−1 Z

t

Xs ⊗ Xs ds
0

t


Xs ⊗ dR1 X .

(4.7)

0

Acctually, we can make a rotation to dynamical system (4.1), i.e. act Σ−1 to Xt , then we get
the above diagonal case. So without loss of generality, we can suppose that Σ = σI.
Now we give two examples for cases d = 1, 2. For one dimensional case, the rough path
estimator is
Rt
Xs dR1 X
X0,t + X0 X0,t
= − Rt
.
(4.8)
γ
bt = − 0R t
2
Xs ds
Xs2 ds
0
0

21

For d = 2, the transpose of the rough path estimator is
Rt

 Rt 2 2
1
(Xs ) ds − 0 Xs1 Xs2 ds
T
0
b
Rt
Rt 1 2
Γt = −
det(Lt (X)) − 0 Xs1 Xs2 ds
(Xs ) ds
0
Rt

R t 1
Xs dR1 X1 0 Xs1 dR1 X2
0
Rt
.
× Rt 2
Xs dR1 X1 0 Xs2 dR1 X2
0

(4.9)

where
Z

t

(Xs1 )2 ds

Z

t

(Xs2 )2 ds

t

Z

det(Lt (X)) =
−
0
0
Z t
i j
Xsi dR1 Xj = Xij
0,t + X0 X0,t , i, j = 1, 2.

Xs1 Xs2 ds

2
,

(4.10)

0

(4.11)

0

b
As a remark, we mention that here in our paper X(ω), X(ω), and Γ(ω)
are pathwise-defined
almost surely.

4.2

Strong Consistency

bt . The solution X
Now we consider the asymptotic behavior of this rough path estimator Γ
to (4.1) is given by
Z t
−Γt
Xt = e X0 +
e−Γ(t−s) ΣdBsH .
(4.12)
0

Without loss of generality, we suppose that X0 = 0.
In the following, we will prove chain rules for our rough integrals, and then show the almost
sure convergence of our rough path estimator.
4.2.1

Chain Rules

First, we have the following lemma.
Lemma 4.1. For H ∈ ( 31 , 12 ], we have
Z

t

Z
Xs ⊗ dR1 X = −

t



Z

T

Xs ⊗ Xs ds Γ + σ
0

0

t

Xs ⊗ dR1 BH .

(4.13)

0

Here, the integrals can be either Stratonovich’s or Itô’s rough integrals.
Proof. We use the relationship between almost rough paths and rough paths, see Theorem 3.2.1
in [27], to prove this lemma. To simplify notations, we show d = 1 case, i.e. to prove
Z t
Z t
Z t
2
Xs dR1 X = −γ
(Xs ) ds + σ
Xs dR1 BH .
(4.14)
0

0

0

First, by the theory of rough differential equations and (2.8), we know that
Zs,t ' f (Zs )Zs,t + Df (Zs )Zs,t ,
Zs,t ' f (Zs ) ⊗ f (Zs )Zs,t ,

22

(4.15)
(4.16)

where the right hand sides are actually almost rough paths associated Zs,t , and ' means the
difference is controlled by ω(s, t)θ with θ > 1, for all (s, t) ∈ ∆. So by (4.15), we have


Z t

H
H
Zs,t ' Bs,t , −γXs (t − s) + σBs,t , t − s + 0, −γ
Xs,u du, 0 .
s

Since

Z

t

Z

s

t

Xu du − Xs (t − s) = o(|t − s|),

Xs,u du =
s

so we have

H
H
Zs,t ' Bs,t
, −γXs (t − s) + σBs,t
,t − s .
This implies
H
Xs,t ' −γXs (t − s) + σBs,t
.

(4.17)

Actually, this above formula could be seen from stochastic differential equation (4.1) directly.
Now by (4.16), we have
Rt H 
Rt H

dX
Bs,u du
B
BH
u
s,u
s,t
s
s
M1
M2
M3  ,
Zs,t ' 
Rt
Rt
1
H
(u − s)dXu 2 (t − s)2
(u − s)dBu
s
s
where
σBH
s,t

Z

t

Z

t

(u − s)dBuH ,
s
Z t
Z t
H
Bs,u dXu − γXs
M2 = σ
(u − s)dXu ,
s
s
Z t
1
H
Bs,u
du − γXs (t − s)2 .
M3 = σ
2
s

M1 =

− γXs

Hence,
Z

t

Xs,u dBuH

(u − s)dBuH ' σBH
s,t ,
s
s
Z t
Z t
Z t
H
H
Xs,t ' σ
Bs,u dXu − γXs
(u − s)dXu ' σ
Bs,u
dXu ,
s
s
s
Z t
Z t
1
H
Xs,u du ' σ
Bs,u
du − γXs (t − s)2 = o(|t − s|).
2
s
s
'

σBH
s,t

− γXs

(4.18)
(4.19)
(4.20)

Combine (4.17) and (4.19), we further have Xs,t ' σ 2 BH
s,t .
Now using the results above, we can show the equation (4.14) since we have
LHS ' Xs Xs,t + Xs,t
H
' −γ(Xs )2 (t − s) + σXs Bs,t
+ σ 2 BH
s,t

' RHS.
Thus we have completed the proof of this lemma.
As a corollary, we have
bt has the following expression:
Corollary 4.2. For H ∈ ( 13 , 21 ], the rough path estimator Γ
Z t
−1 Z t

T
T
H,γ
bt = Γ −
Γ
Xs ⊗ Xs ds
Xs ⊗ dR1 B
.
(4.21)
0

0

23

4.2.2

Almost sure convergence

bt , i.e.
In order to establish the strong consistency of the rough path estimator Γ
bt → Γ, a.s. as t → ∞,
Γ

(4.22)

our aim now is to prove that
1
t

t

Z

Xs ⊗ Xs ds → C1 (H), a.s..

(4.23)

0

Z
1 t
Xs ⊗ dR1 BH,γ → 0, a.s.,
t 0
Then by Slutsky Theorem and Corollary 4.2, we can get (4.22).

(4.24)

Proposition 4.3. Suppose stochastic process Xt is the fOU process to stochastic differential
equation (4.1) and Γ is symmetric and positive-definite, then
Z
1 t
Xs ⊗ Xs ds → C1 (H), a.s.,
t 0
where the above
on the left hand side is Lebesgue integral and the constant matrix
R ∞integral
2H−1 −Γx
2
e dx.
C1 (H) = σ H 0 x
Proof. Define the process
Z

t

e−Γ(t−s) dBsH ,

X t := σ

(4.25)

−∞

then the process X is stationary Gaussian process and it is ergodic (see subsection 3.2). By
the ergodic theorem (see [9]), we have
Z
1 t
X s ⊗ X s ds = E(X 0 ⊗ X 0 ), a.s.
(4.26)
lim
t→∞ t 0
Since
Xt = X t − e−Γt X 0 ,
so that

Z
1 t
Xs ⊗ Xs ds = E(X 0 ⊗ X 0 ), a.s.
lim
t→∞ t 0
For the right hand side, applying integration by parts, we have
Z 0
 Z 0

2
Γs
H
Γs
H
E(X 0 ⊗ X 0 ) = σ E
e dBs ⊗
e dBs
−∞
−∞
Z 0 Z 0

2 2
Γ(s+u)
H
H
=σ Γ E
e
(Bs ⊗ Bu )duds
−∞ −∞
Z ∞Z ∞
1
2 2
=σ Γ
e−Γ(s+u) I(s2H + u2H − |s − u|2H )duds
2
Z 0∞ 0
= σ2Γ
x2H e−Γx dx,
0

and

Z
Γ

∞

x

2H −Γx

e

Z
dx = H

0

0

Thus we have proved this lemma.
24

∞

x2H−1 e−Γx dx.

(4.27)

Proposition 4.4. Suppose stochastic process Xt is the fOU process to stochastic differential
equation (4.1) and Γ is symmetric and positive-definite, then
Z
1 t
Xs ⊗ dR1 BH,γ → 0, a.s.,
t 0
where BH,γ is Itô type rough path enhancement of fBM BtH as in section 2 with H ∈ ( 13 , 21 ].
Proof. Applying integration by parts, we have


Z t
Z t
−Γ(t−s) H
−Γ(t−s)
H
H
e
Bs ds .
e
dBs = σ Bt − Γ
Xt = σ

(4.28)

0

0

By definitions of Itô integration and Stratonovich integration with respect to fBM for fOU
process (see rough differential equation (2.8)), we have
Z t
Z t
H,γ
Xs ⊗ ◦dR1 BH,Str − σϕγ (t),
(4.29)
Xs ⊗ dR1 B
=
0

0

where

1
ϕγ (t) = It2H − U γ (t),
2
Z tZ s
γ
U (t) = HΓ
e−Γ(s−u) (s2H−1 − (s − u)2H−1 )duds.

and

0

0

For the first term on the right hand side, it is defined as Stratonovich integral, and has the
following expression (by Lemma 4.1)
Z t
Z t
Z t
H,Str
σ
Xs ⊗ ◦dR1 B
=
Xs ⊗ ◦dR1 X + Γ
Xs ⊗ Xs ds.
(4.30)
0

0

0

Now we represent U γ (t) as
Z t
Z t
1 2H
−Γs 2H−1
e s
ds − HΓt
e−Γs s2H−1 ds
U (t) = It − H
2
0
Z t 0
+ HΓ
e−Γs s2H ds,
γ

0

and we have
γ

Z

ϕ (t) = H

t
−Γs 2H−1

e s
ds + HΓt
0
Z t
− HΓ
e−Γs s2H ds,

Z

t

e−Γs s2H−1 ds

0

0

Since

Rt
0

e−Γs sα−1 ds ↑

R∞
0

e−Γs sα−1 ds ≤ C as t → ∞, then
Z ∞
1 γ
lim ϕ (t) = HΓ
e−Γs s2H−1 ds, a.s.
t→∞ t
0

Then Combing equations (4.29), (4.30) and Theorem 3.14, and Proposition 4.3, for
Z t
Z t
Z t
H,γ
σ
Xs ⊗ dR1 B
=
Xs ⊗ ◦dR1 X + Γ
Xs ⊗ Xs ds − σ 2 ϕγ (t),
0

0

0

25

(4.31)

we have
σ
lim
t→∞ t

Z

t
H,γ

Xs ⊗ dR1 B

2

Z

∞

= ΓC1 (H) − σ HΓ

0

e−Γs s2H−1 ds = 0, a.s.

0

Thus we conclude this proposition.
As a corollary of Theorem 3.14, now we have the following statement, in which the integral
is in Itô sense.
Corollary 4.5. Suppose stochastic process Xt is the fOU process to stochastic differential equation (4.1) and Γ is symmetric and positive-definite, then
Z
1 t
Xs ⊗ dR1 X → C2 (H), a.s.,
(4.32)
t 0
where the above integral is in Itô sense.
Proof. As we can see from the definition of rough integral and Lemma 4.1 that
Z t
X ⊗ dR1 X ' Xs Xs,t + Xs,t
s

' Xs Xs,t + σ 2 BH,γ
s,t
' Xs Xs,t + σ 2 (BH,Str
− ϕγs,t )
s,t
Z t
'
X ⊗ ◦dR1 X − σ 2 ϕγs,t ,
s

for any (s, t) ∈ ∆. Thus we have
Z t
Z t
Xs ⊗ dR1 X =
Xs ⊗ ◦dR1 X − σ 2 ϕγ (t).
0

(4.33)

0

By Theorem 3.14 and the limit in equation (4.31), we get
Z
Z ∞
1 t
2
lim
Xs ⊗ dR1 X = −σ HΓ
e−Γs s2H−1 ds =: C2 (H), a.s.
t→∞ t 0
0

(4.34)

Besides, by the definition of C1 (H), we also have the relation between C2 (H) and C1 (H) as
C2 (H) = −ΓC1 (H).
bt as t tends to infinity.
Now we have strong consistency of the rough path estimator Γ
Theorem 4.6. Suppose Γ is a parametric matrix and it is symmetric and positive-definite. Let
bt be the rough path estimator as (4.7) of Γ for the stochastic differential equation (4.1). Then
Γ
bt → Γ, a.s., as t → ∞.
Γ

(4.35)

Proof. Applying Proposition 4.3 and Proposition 4.4, and by Slutsky Theorem, we have
 Z t
−1  Z t

1
1
H
Xs ⊗ Xs ds
Xs ⊗ dR1 B
→ 0, a.s.
t 0
t 0
bt almost surely
as t goes to infinity. Hence, by Corollary 4.2, the rough path estimator Γ
converges to Γ.
26

Rt
Remark 4.7. Suppose we take the stochastic integral 0 Xs ⊗ dR1 X in the rough path estimator
bt (equation (4.7)) as Stratonovich rough integral rather than Itô rough integral as above, we
Γ
can see that
bt → 0, a.s., as t → ∞,
Γ
(4.36)
by Theorem 3.14 and Proposition 4.3. That is to say, we cannot use Stratonovich rough integral
to do this estimation problem.

4.3

Pathwise Stability

In this subsection, we will show that our rough path estimator is pathwise stable and robust.
bT is a functional on the path space C([0, T ], Rd ), or exactly on the rough path space
Note that Γ
Ωp ([0, T ], Rd ). For every observation sample path X(ω) or rough path enhancement X(ω) =
bT (X(ω)) or Γ
bT (X(ω)) = Γ
bT ((X(ω), X(ω))).
(X(ω), X(ω)), one has a corresponding estimator Γ
In the following, we will use the rough path notation rather than sample path, since our
continuous rough path estimator depends on X(ω) = (X(ω), X(ω)) rather than just the first
level sample path X(ω).
e are
A natural question about robustness of estimator arise: if two observations X and X
very close in some sense, e.g. uniform distance or p-variation distance etc, does it give arise to
e In other words, is the estimator Γ
bT (X) ≈ Γ
bT (X)?
bT (·) continuous in some
close estimations Γ
distance?
Actually, the rough path idea gives us a good solution to this problem. As well-known, in
rough path space, rough integration is continuous with respect to p-variation distance. Now we
first recall the p-variation rough path distance dp :
! pi
dp (X, Y) = max sup
i=1,2

P

X

|Xit`−1 ,t` − Yti`−1 ,t` |

p
i

,

(4.37)

`

where X = (X1 , X2 ) and Y = (Y1 , Y2 ) are two rough paths in rough path space Ωp ([0, T ], Rd ),
and P is any partition of interval [0, T ].
bT (·) under p-variation distance dp .
Now we give the continuity of estimator Γ
Theorem 4.8. Let X be a fOU process driven by fBM with Hurst parameter H ∈ ( 31 , 12 ] and
bT : (X(ω), X(ω)) →
(X, X) be the Itô rough path enhancement. Then rough path estimator Γ
bT ((X(ω), X(ω))) is continuous with respect to p-variation distance dp for 1 < p < 3.
Γ
H
Proof. The statement is a corollary of Theorem 5.3.1 of Lyons and Qian [27].

5

Rough Path Estimator Based on High-Frequency Data

In previous sections, the estimator we have considered up to now is based on continuous
observations. However, in the real world the process can be only observed at discrete time.
Thus deriving an estimator based on discrete observations is necessary. Based on our continuous
rough path estimator, we can construct a discrete rough path estimator and it still has very
good properties. We assume that the fOU process X can be enhanced to an Itô rough path
X = (1, X, X) as section 2 and can be observed at discrete time {t` = `h, ` = 0, 1, 2, · · · , n}, or
equivalently we can get the discrete data {(Xt0 ,t1 , Xt0 ,t1 ), (Xt1 ,t2 , Xt1 ,t2 ), · · · , (Xtn−1 ,tn , Xtn−1 ,tn )}
in Itô sense as in section 2. Here, n is sample size, h = hn is the observation frequency, and
27

t := nh is the time horizon. We further assume that as the sample size n tends to infinity, the
observation frequency h = hn → 0 and time horizon t = nh → ∞. In other words, the data is
high-frequency. Besides, we also should give more assumptions to balance the rate of sample
size n and the frequency h in order to get good estimator below. Now we give the theorem of
almost sure convergence for our high-frequency rough path estimator.
Theorem 5.1. Suppose the fOU process X which is the solution to stochastic differential equation (3.24) with H ∈ ( 31 , 12 ] can be observed at discrete time {t` = `h, ` = 0, 1, 2, · · · , n} and as
sample size n → ∞, n and h satisfy
nh → ∞, h = hn → 0, nhp → 0,
for some p ∈ (1, 1+H+β
), and 0 < β < 1. Let
1+β
!−1
n
X
eTn = −
Γ
(X`h ⊗ X`h )h

n−1
X

`=0

(5.1)

!
X`h X`h,(`+1)h + X`h,(`+1)h ,

(5.2)

`=0

eT denotes transpose of matrix Γ.
e Then
where Γ
en → Γ, a.s.
Γ

(5.3)

as n → ∞.
Proof. Let
Z

nh

Z
0

0

and
Len =

n
X

nh

Xu ⊗ dR1 X,

Xu ⊗ Xu du, Anh =

Lnh =

en =
(X`h ⊗ X`h )h, A

n−1
X

X`h X`h,(`+1)h + X`h,(`+1)h .

`=0

`=0

By Proposition 4.3, we know that
Z nh
1
1
Lnh =
Xu ⊗ Xu du → C1 (H), a.s. as n → ∞.
nh
nh 0

(5.4)

From Corollary 4.5, we have
1
1
Anh =
nh
nh

nh

Z

Xu ⊗ dR1 X → C2 (H), a.s. as n → ∞.

(5.5)

0

In the following, we show that

1 
Lnh − Len → 0, a.s.,
nh

(5.6)

and


1 
en → 0, a.s.
Anh − A
nh
If so, combining (5.4), (5.5), (5.6) and (5.7), we can conclude this theorem, that is,

−1


1
1
−1
en = −
Len − Lnh +
Lnh
−Len A
nh
nh



1 e
1
×
An − Anh +
Anh
nh
nh
→ −C1 (H)−1 C2 (H) = Γ, a.s.
28

(5.7)

Now we first show the limit (5.7), we have
1
en = 1
Anh − A
nh
nh
1
=
nh

nh

Z

n−1
X
Xu ⊗ dR1 X −
(X`h X`h,(`+1)h + X`h,(`+1)h )

0
n−1
X
`=0

`=0

!

(`+1)h

Z

Xu ⊗ dR1 X − (X`h X`h,(`+1)h + X`h,(`+1)h )
`h

n−1 Z (`+1)h
1 X
Xu ⊗ dR1 X − (X`h X`h,(`+1)h + X`h,(`+1)h ) .
≤
nh `=0 `h

Since
Z

(`+1)h

Z

(`+1)h

Xu ⊗ dR1 X − X`h X`h,(`+1)h ,

X`h,u ⊗ dR1 X =

X`h,(`+1)h =

`h

`h

so we have got
1
en = 0.
Anh − A
nh
For the limit (5.6),
1
1
Lnh − Len =
nh
nh

Z

nh

Xu ⊗ Xu du −
0

n
X

(X`h ⊗ X`h )h

`=0

!
Z (`+1)h
n−1
1 X
=
Xu ⊗ Xu du − (X`h ⊗ X`h )h
nh `=0
`h
n−1 Z (`+1)h
1 X
≤
Xu ⊗ Xu du − (X`h ⊗ X`h )h .
nh `=0 `h
Let F (Xt ) = Xt ⊗ Xt , and any 0 ≤ s < t ≤ T . Then by Proposition 3.9, we get
Z t
F (Xu )du − F (Xs )(t − s) ≤ CRT T β |t − s|1+α , ∀α ∈ (0, H).
s

Take s = `h, t = (` + 1)h, and T = nh, we have
Lnh − Len ≤

n−1
X

 1+α+β 1+β
CRnh (nh)β h1+α = CRnh n1+β h1+α+β = CRnh nh 1+β
.

`=0

By assumption, there exists a number p ∈ (1, 1+H+β
) such that nhp → 0 and nh → ∞ as
1+β
n → ∞. And Rnh → 0, a.s. So we get Lnh − Len → 0, a.s. (We may assume that the
components of fOU process X are independent, we should make an orthogonal transformation
for X.) Thus, we have completed the proof of Theorem 5.1.

6

Numerical Study

In this section, we give some examples based on simulation to demonstrate our theoretical
results. We simulate samples from one and two dimensional fOU processes X to stochastic
differential equation (1.1) by Euler scheme. In one dimensional case, there is no need to
29

simulate the Lévy area. For two dimensional examples, we exploit the trapezoidal scheme (For
those who may be interested in this aspect, see e.g. [29] to get some ideas) to discretize the
fractional Lévy area in order to get the second level X of fOU rough path (X, X). Thus we
can get the simulation of sample paths (first level processes) X by Euler scheme and Lévy area
(second level processes) X by trapezoidal scheme. Then we use our theoretical results to do
estimation for the drift parameter. We get one estimation for each sample path and simulate
1000 paths of fOU process by Monte Carlo iteration. We demonstrate that our rough path
estimator performs very good.

6.1

One-dimensional example

In this subsection, we demonstrate an example of one dimensional fOU process with Hurst
parameter H ∈ ( 31 , 12 ] to stochastic differential equation
dXt = −2Xt dt + dBtH , X0 = 0, t ∈ [0, T ].

(6.1)

We use Euler scheme to draw n equidistant samples on a time horizon T with observation
frequency h = Tn for each sample path X(ω). The samples are
Xh (ω), X2h (ω), · · · , Xnh (ω),
and through Monte Carlo iterations, we get 1000 sample paths {X(ωj ), j = 1, 2, · · · , 1000}.
See Figure 6.1 below, they are simulated sample paths of fBM and respective fOU processes
for varying Hurst parameter H ≤ 21 . One could see from Figure 6.1 that the sample paths of
fBM and fOU processes become rougher and rougher as Hurst parameter H becomes smaller,
and locally sample path of fOU process looks like fBM who generates it.
By our theory, the discretized rough path estimator γ
en in this model is given by
Pn−1
X`h (ω)X`h,(`+1)h (ω) + X`h,(`+1)h (ω)
Pn
,
(6.2)
γ
en (ω) = − `=1
2
`=1 X`h (ω) h
where X`h,(`+1)h (ω) = X(`+1)h (ω) − X`h (ω) are increments of sample path X(ω) and the second
level/Lévy area
X`h,(`+1)h (ω) = X◦`h,(`+1)h (ω) − ϕ`h,(`+1)h
Z (`+1)h
=
X`h,u (ω) ◦ dR1 X(ω) − ϕ`h,(`+1)h
`h

1
= (X(`+1)h (ω) − X`h (ω))2 − ϕ`h,(`+1)h ,
2
where ϕ`h,(`+1)h = ϕ((` + 1)h) − ϕ(`h), ϕ(t) = 12 t2H − U (t), and
Z tZ
U (t) = 2H
0

s

e−2(s−u) (s2H−1 − (s − u)2H−1 )duds.

0

In summary, (X`h,(`+1)h (ω), X`h,(`+1)h (ω))`=0,1,··· ,n−1 are our discrete observation for estimation.
Note that since the dimension d = 1 in this model, there is no Lévy area to be discretized. In the
real world application such as the Vasicek interest rate model, the problem left for estimation
is how to enhance high-frequency data to Itô rough path. We may refer to [6] as an inspiration
for answering this problem.
30

Figure 6.1: Sample Paths of fBM and fOU. From left to right and from top to bottom, H =
0.50, 0.45, 0.40, 0.35, respectively. Blue paths are fBM while red paths are fOU.

31

We illustrate our simulation results in Table 1, where, one can see the mean and standard
deviation of our discretized rough path estimators γ
en (ω) for varying Hurst parameter H based
on 1000 Monte Carlo iterations of sample path X(ω). We take the time horizon T = {20, 30, 40},
sample size n = {210 , 211 , 212 }, and Hurst parameter H = {0.50, 0.45, 0.40, 0.35}. From Table
1, we can see that the estimated values are very good. The mean is very close to the true
parameter value γ = 2, and the standard deviation is small. That means the estimators are
stable for each sample path.
Table 1: Mean and standard deviation of rough path estimators based on 1000 Monte Carlo
iterations in dimension d = 1, n sample size, T time horizon, H Hurst parameter, and true
parameter value γ = 2.
H = 0.50
Mean Std dev

H = 0.45
Mean Std dev

H = 0.40
Mean Std dev

H = 0.35
Mean Std dev

T

n

20

210
211
212

2.0636
2.0669
2.0734

0.4606
0.4517
0.4667

2.0349
2.0513
2.0667

0.4219
0.4173
0.4312

2.0284
2.0219
2.0361

0.3668
0.3645
0.3615

1.9946
2.0268
2.0270

0.3341
0.3353
0.3308

30

210
211
212

1.9972
2.0351
2.0557

0.3655
0.3694
0.3581

1.9963
2.0381
2.0358

0.3442
0.3316
0.3342

1.9573
2.0183
2.0206

0.2847
0.3092
0.3045

1.9646
2.0015
2.0249

0.2648
0.2648
0.2597

40

210
211
212

1.9687
2.0052
2.0284

0.3067
0.3075
0.3090

1.9418
1.9918
2.0100

0.2789
0.2892
0.2720

1.9365
1.9807
2.0056

0.2516
0.2625
0.2549

1.9239
1.9840
2.0003

0.2289
0.2206
0.2306

In addition, we can see even more information about our rough path estimators from Table
1. Actually, the sample size n, time horizon T and sampling frequency h = Tn affect the value of
these estimators for different Hurst parameter H. One can see that when sample size n fixed, as
time horizon T = nh becomes larger, the mean and standard deviation become smaller. When
time horizon T fixed, as sample size n becomes large, the estimated values change regularly
according to T . One may notice that it does not become better even if T and n become larger
and larger. The reason behind that is T and n are not the only two variables which effect the
estimator. Actually, the sampling frequency h also works. The assumption in Theorem 5.1
T = nh → ∞, h → 0, nhp → 0, as n → ∞,

(6.3)

), is very important when one computes the value of estimator. The
for some p ∈ (1, 1+H+β
1+β
three limits above mean that the convergence rate of mesh size/sampling frequency should be
not too slow or too large. One should give a proper mesh size/sampling frequency h in order
to obtain better value of estimator. Besides, the proper sampling frequency h also depends on
Hurst parameter H. In Table 1, when T, n, h are fixed, the mean value and standard deviation
both become smaller. It is better to use different sampling frequency h according to Hurst
parameter H.
Following is a Box-and-Whisker Plot, in which the central red mark of each blue box indicates the median of rough path estimators γ
en (ω) based on 1000 Monte Carlo iterations of sample
paths X(ω), and the bottom and top edges of the box indicate the 25th and 75th percentiles,
respectively. Besides, the outliers are plotted individually using the red ’+’ symbol.
32

Figure 6.2: Box-Whisker plot of rough path estimator γ
en of 1000 Monte Carlo simulation, xlabel is Hurst parameter H from 0.35 to 0.50. Here, time horizon T = 80, sample size n = 213 .

6.2

Two-dimensional example

In this subsection, we give numerical examples for two dimensional fOU processes, for
example, the dynamics
dXt = −ΓXt dt + dBtH , X0 = 0, t ∈ [0, T ],

(6.4)

with parameter matrix

Γ=


1 2
.
2 5

That is,
dXt1 = −(Xt1 + 2Xt2 )dt + dBtH,1 ,
dXt2 = −(2Xt1 + 5Xt2 )dt + dBtH,2 .
We still apply Euler scheme to draw n equidistant samples {Xh (ω), X2h (ω), · · · , Xnh (ω)} on
time horizon T with frequency h = Tn . In Figure 6.3, we show the paths of components of
two dimensional fBM and its associated fOU process with H = 0.45. B H,1 and B H,2 are
independent, and X 1 and X 2 locally look like B H,1 and B H,2 , respectively, for this model. In
order to estimate the parameter matrix, we should enhance sample paths to data in rough
path sense. That is, to get {(X`h,(`+1)h (ω), X`h,(`+1)h (ω))`=0,1,··· ,n−1 } as our observation data for
estimation.
bT (ω) = (Γ
bij (ω))i,j=1,2 is given
For dimension d = 2, the continuous rough path estimator Γ
T
by
Z T
Z T
1
ij
3−j
2
b
ΓT (ω) = −
(Xs (ω)) ds
Xsj (ω)dR1 Xi (ω)
VT (X(ω))
0
0
(6.5)

Z T
Z T
i
3−i
3−j
i
−
Xs (ω)Xs (ω)ds
Xs (ω)dR1 X (ω) ,
0

0

33

Figure 6.3: An example of sample paths of two-dimension fBM (B1, B2) and fOU (X1, X2)
with H = 0.45.
where
Z
VT (X(ω)) =
0

T

(Xs1 (ω))2 ds

Z

T

(Xs2 (ω))2 ds

Z
−

T

Xs1 (ω)Xs2 (ω)ds

2
,

0

0

and all the rough integrals above are defined in our Itô sense. Discretizing every integral above,
we obtain our high frequency rough path
R estimator. The attention we need pay to is the cross
term of rough integral, i.e. Lévy area X i dR1 Xj or Xij . Since
◦,ij
Xij
s,t = Xs,t − ϕs,t ,

where ϕs,t is defined in section 2 and X◦,ij
s,t denotes the second level/Lévy area of fOU rough path
enhancement in the Stratonovich sense. Now we can discretize the Stratonovich’s Lévy area
X◦,ij by trapezoidal scheme, see [29]. By this, we get {(X`h,(`+1)h (ω), X`h,(`+1)h (ω))`=0,1,··· ,n−1 }
as our discrete observation data for estimation.
We illustrate our two dimensional simulation results in Table 2 below. In this case, we estimate the parameter matrix Γ using the simulated data {(X`h,(`+1)h (ω), X`h,(`+1)h (ω))`=0,1,··· ,n−1 }.
We draw 1000 sample paths by Monte Carlo iterations.
In Table 2, every component of ’Mean’ denotes average of the value of respective estimator
based on 1000 Monte Carlo simulation. And the component of ’Standard deviation (Std dev)’
represents the fluctuation of estimation of parameter with corresponding index. One could see
that, under proper time horizon T , sample size n and frequency h, the rough path estimator
performs very well and the results are quite stable.
As a remark, in one dimensional case, we have seen that the performance of discrete estimator dependents on time horizon T , sample size n and frequency h. But it is not so sensitive in
dimension d = 1 so that we can still use the same sample setting for varying Hurst parameter
H. However, in dimension d = 2, it becomes a little sensitive to sampling mode. One should
adhere to the conditions about T, n, h in Theorem 5.1 in order to obtain better estimated values. In Table 2, we set frequency h becomes smaller as sample size n becomes larger and Hurst
parameter H smaller.
34

en based on 1000 Monte Carlo
Table 2: Mean and standard deviation of rough path estimators Γ
iterations in dimension d = 2, n sample size, T time horizon, h sampling frequency, H Hurst
parameter, and true parameter matrix Γ = [1 2; 2 5].
n = 211

n = 212

n = 213

H = 0.50 T = 20, h = 0.0098 T = 30, h = 0.0073 T = 40, h = 0.0049

 
 

1.0956 1.9720
1.0548 1.9579
1.0551 2.0091
Mean
1.9765 5.0381 1.9918 5.0443 1.9848 5.0146
0.3350 0.6824
0.2755 0.5955
0.2429 0.5142
Std dev
0.3374 0.7399
0.2719 0.5590
0.2313 0.4984
H = 0.45 T = 13, h = 0.0063 T = 22, h = 0.0054 T = 40, h = 0.0049

 
 

1.1163 1.9832
1.0731 1.9943
1.0449 2.0105
Mean
1.9889 5.1160 1.9665 5.0106 1.9744 4.9902
0.4135 0.9030
0.3172 0.6914
0.2169 0.4743
Std dev
0.4429 0.8453
0.3034 0.6128
0.2166 0.4517
H = 0.40 T = 14, h = 0.0068 T = 20, h = 0.0049 T = 35, h = 0.0043

 
 

1.1030 2.0077
1.0585 1.9836
1.0361 1.9946
Mean
1.9767 5.0416 1.9895 5.0283 1.9790 4.9894
0.3745 0.8473
0.3200 0.7466
0.2275 0.5441
Std dev
0.3878 0.7160
0.3242 0.6152
0.2367 0.4517
H = 0.35 T = 14, h = 0.0068 T = 20, h = 0.0049 T = 30, h = 0.0037

 
 

1.0724 1.9606
1.0555 2.0065
1.0298 1.9927
Mean
1.9588 4.9324 1.9645 4.9839 1.9796 4.9908
0.3612 0.8816
0.3074 0.7608
0.2448 0.6067
Std dev
0.3796 0.6448
0.3234 0.5628
0.2488 0.4453

e12
Figure 6.4: Curves of mean of Γ
n based on 100 Monte Carlo simulated paths, time horizon
8
T = 40 fixed, x-label n from 2 to 214 .
35

In Figure 6.4, we fix time horizon T = 40, and take sample sizes n = 28 , 29 , · · · , 214 . We
e12 (as an example) with respect to sample size
show the trend of mean of estimated values Γ
n
n based on 100 Monte Carlo simulated sample paths. As one can see, when sample size n is
too small or observation frequency h = Tn too large, the estimated values are bad. However, as
expected, the estimation becomes good with n increasing or h decreasing, and stabilised at the
exact value Γ12 = 2.

References
[1] Y. Aı̈t Sahalia. Maximum likelihood estimation of discretely sampled diffusions: a closed
form approximation approach. Econometrica, 70, 223-262 (2002).
[2] Y. Aı̈t-Sahalia, J. Jacod. Estimating the degree of activity of jumps in high frequency
financial data. Annals of Statistics, 37, 2202-2244 (2009).
[3] Y. Aı̈t-Sahalia, J. Jacod. Is Brownian motion necessary to model high frequency data?
Annals of Statistics, 38, 3093-3128 (2010).
[4] Y. Aı̈t-Sahalia, J. Jacod. High-Frequency Financial Econometrics. Princeton University
Press, (2014).
[5] Y. Aı̈t-Sahalia, P. Mykland, L. Zhang. Ultra high frequency volatility estimation with
dependent microstructure noise. Journal of Econometrics, 160, 160-175 (2011).
[6] I. Bailleul, J. Diehl. The Inverse Problem for Rough Controlled Differential Equations.
SIAM J. Control Optim., 53, 5, 2762-2780 (2015).
[7] A. Beskos, O. Papaspiliopoulos, G. Roberts. Monte Carlo maximum likelihood estimation
for discretely observed diffusion processes. Annals of Statistics, 37, 223-245 (2009).
[8] R. Carmona, J. Fouque, L. Sun. Mean field games and systemic risk. Commun. Math. Sci.,
13, 4, 911-933 (2015).
[9] P. Cheridito, H. Kawaguchi, M. Maejima, Fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes. Electron. J. Probab. 8, 1-14 (2003).
[10] F. Comte, V. Genon-Catalot. Estimation for Lévy processes from high frequency data
within a long time interval. Annals of Statistics, 39, 803-837 (2011).
[11] L. Coutin, Z. Qian. Stochastic analysis, rough path analysis and fractional Brownian motions. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields, 122, 108-140 (2002).
[12] J. Diehl, P. Friz, H. Mai. Pathwise stability of likelihood estimators for diffusions via rough
paths, Ann. Appl. Probab., 26, 4, 2169-2192 (2016).
[13] V. Fasen. Statistical estimation of multivariate Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes and applications to co-integration, J. Econometrics, 172, 2, 325-337 (2013).
[14] J. Fouque, T. Ichiba. Stability in a model of interbank lending. SIAM J. Financial Math.,
4, 1, 784-803 (2013).
[15] P. Friz, M. Hairer. A Course on Rough Paths: With an Introduction to Regularity Structures, Springer, New York (2014).
36

[16] P. Friz, N. Victoir. Multidimensional Stochastic Processes as Rough Paths. Theory and
Applications. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 120. Cambridge Univ. Press,
Cambridge, 2010.
[17] M. Gubinelli. Controlling rough paths. J. Functional Analysis, 216, 1, 86-140 (2004).
[18] Y. Hu. Analysis on Gaussian spaces. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Hackensack,
NJ (2017). ISBN 978-981-3142-17-6.
[19] Y. Hu, D. Nualart. Parameter estimation for fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes. Stat.
Probab. Lett., 80, 11-12, 1030-1038 (2010).
[20] Y. Hu, D. Nualart, H. Zhou. Parameter estimation for fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes of general Hurst parameter, Stat. Inference Stoch. Process. (2017).
[21] J. Jacod, A.N. Shiryaev. Limit Theorems for Stochastic Processes, 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag,
(2003).
[22] M.L. Kleptsyna, A. Le Breton. Statistical analysis of the fractional Ornstein-Uhlenbeck
type process. Stat. Inference Stoch. Process. 5, 229-248 (2002).
[23] R.S. Liptser, A.N. Shiryaev. Statistics of Random Processes, I. General Theory. SpringerVerlag New York, (1977).
[24] R.S. Liptser, A.N. Shiryaev. Statistics of Random Processes, II. Applications. SpringerVerlag New York, (1978).
[25] T. Lyons. Differential equations driven by rough signals. Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana, 14,
215-310 (1998).
[26] T. Lyons, M. Caruana, and T. Lévy. Differential equations driven by rough paths. Springer,
2007.
[27] T. Lyons, Z. Qian. System Control and Rough Paths. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford (2002).
M
[28] P. Mykland, L. Zhang. Inference for continuous semimartingales observed at high frequency. Econometrica, 77,1403-1445 (2009).
[29] A. Neuenkirch, S. Tindel, J. Unterberger. Discretizing the fractional Lévy area, Stoc.
Process Appl., 120, 223-254 (2010).
[30] R. Norvaisa, Weighted power variation of integrals with respect to a Gaussian process.
Bernoulli, 21, 2, 1260-1288 (2015).
[31] A. Papavasiliou, C. Ladroue. Parameter estimation for rough differential equations. Annals
of Statistics, 39, 4, 2047-2073 (2011).
[32] J. Pickands, Asymptotic properties of the maximum in a stationary Gaussian process.
Trans. Am. Math. Soc., 145, 75-86 (1969).
[33] V. Pipiras, M.S. Taqqu. Integration questions related to fractional Brownian motion,
Probab. Theory Related Fields, 118, 251-291 (2000).

37

[34] Z. Qian, X. Xu. Itô integrals for fractional Brownian motion and application to option
pricing, ArXiv Mathematics e-prints (2018). arXiv: 1803.00335v1.
[35] P. Rao, Semimartingales and their Statistical Inference, Chapman & Hall/CRC, (1999).
[36] P. Rao, Statistical Inference for Diffusion Type Processes, Arnold, (1999).
[37] D.W. Stroock, S.R.S. Varadhan, Multidimensional Diffusion Processes. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, Germany (1979).
[38] C. Tudor, F. Viens. Statistical aspects of the fractional stochastic calculus. Annals of
Statistics, 35, 3, 1183-1212 (2007).

38

