
\[regw\] Let the weight function satisfy $ $

-   $w(m,k)=m^{-1/2}\tilde{w}(m,k),$ where $\tilde{w}(m,k)=\rho\left(\frac km\right)$ for $k>l_m$ with $\frac{l_m}{m}\rightarrow 0$ and $\tilde{w}(m,k)=0$ for $k\leq l_m.$ The function $\rho:(0,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^+$ is positive and continuous.

The following two limits exist and it holds:

-   $\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}t^{\gamma}\rho(t)<\infty$ for some $0\leq\gamma<\frac 12.$

-   $\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}t\rho(t)<\infty.$

Part (i) allows to start the monitoring only after some observations have been collected. This is inmportant in order to avoid false alarms at the very beginning of the monitoring period. Such early false alarms often occur as the first values of the monitoring statistic are quite volatile due to the small monitoring sample (but are asymptotically negligible).

The regularity conditions of the weight function at zero and infinity in (ii) and (iii) are needed to control the asymptotic behavior of the monitoring statistic at 0 and inifinity.

The following choice fulfills these assumptions and is often used in the literature as it leads to nice limit distributions as indicated in Corollary \[simple1\]: $$\begin{aligned}
\label{exw}
\rho(t)=\frac{1}{1+t}\left(\frac{1+t}{t}\right)^{\gamma},
\quad 0\leq\gamma<\frac 12.\end{aligned}$$

Instead of using explicit assumptions on the underlying dependency structure of the observed time series we work with the following high-level regularity assumptions allowing for easy future extensions to different dependency assumptions. In Section \[sec.exass\] we show their validity for both independent observations as well as functionals of mixing processes.

\[regass\] Let $\{Y_i\}_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}$ be a stationary time series that fulfills the following assumptions for a given kernel function $h$.

1.  ${\operatorname{E}}\left(\left|\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=k
\[regw\ ] Let the weight function satisfy $ $ 

 -    $ w(m, k)=m^{-1/2}\tilde{w}(m, k),$ where $ \tilde{w}(m, k)=\rho\left(\frac km\right)$ for $ k > l_m$ with $ \frac{l_m}{m}\rightarrow 0 $ and $ \tilde{w}(m, k)=0 $ for $ k\leq l_m.$ The affair $ \rho:(0,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^+$ is incontrovertible and continuous. 

 The following two limits exist and it holds: 

 -    $ \lim_{t\rightarrow 0}t^{\gamma}\rho(t)<\infty$ for some $ 0\leq\gamma<\frac 12.$ 

 -    $ \lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}t\rho(t)<\infty.$ 

 Part (one) allows to start the monitoring entirely after some observation have been collected. This is inmportant in ordering to avoid false alarm clock at the very beginning of the monitoring period. Such early fake alarm often occur as the first values of the monitoring statistic are quite volatile due to the minor monitoring sample (but are asymptotically negligible). 

 The regularity conditions of the weight routine at zero and infinity in (ii) and (iii) are needed to control the asymptotic behavior of the monitoring statistic at 0 and inifinity. 

 The come choice fulfills these assumptions and is often used in the literature as it leads to courteous limit distributions as indicated in Corollary \[simple1\ ]: $ $ \begin{aligned } 
 \label{exw } 
 \rho(t)=\frac{1}{1+t}\left(\frac{1+t}{t}\right)^{\gamma }, 
 \quad 0\leq\gamma<\frac 12.\end{aligned}$$ 

 Instead of using explicit assumptions on the underlying dependency structure of the observed time series we work with the following high - level regularity premise allowing for easy future extension to unlike colony assumptions. In Section   \[sec.exass\ ] we show their validity for both independent observations as well as functionals of mixing process. 

 \[regass\ ] Let $ \{Y_i\}_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}$ be a stationary time series that fulfills the following presumption for a given kernel function $ h$. 

 1.   $ { \operatorname{E}}\left(\left|\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j = k

\[rega\] Let the weight functiok satisfy $ $

-   $w(m,k)=m^{-1/2}\tilde{x}(m,k),$ whede $\tilde{d}(m,k)=\rho\left(\frac km\right)$ for $k>p_m$ with $\frac{l_m}{m}\rightarrow 0$ ana $\tilde{w}(m,n)=0$ for $k\lwq l_n.$ The functmkn $\rho:(0,\ikyty)\rifmtarrmx\mathbb{R}^+$ is posltive and cmntinuous.

The fmluocing two limits exist and it holds:

-   $\lim_{t\ribhharrow 0}t^{\gamma}\rro(t)<\imsty$ ror some $0\leq\gamma<\frac 12.$

-   $\lim_{t\rightzrrow\inhty}t\rho(t)<\infty.$

Patt (i) allows to start the mlnitlring only after slme observajjonf have been cullected. This is inmpottant in order to avoid false alxrms ct the very bwgijting of the moninoring period. Such easly falxe alarms oftek occnr aw the first values of the monitoring stwtistic ase quite volatile dye to tve skall nonktodiig aample (buv are asympfotically nwgligible).

The regulatiej conditions kf the wqight function at zero and infinity in (pi) ahd (iii) are needed to cobtrol the asymptotic hehavior jf the monitoring statistic at 0 and inifinity.

The xolloxivg emjkxe fulfills these assumptions and is often used jn tme literature as it leads tp jivg limit districutions aa indicated in Corlllary \[fimplw1\]: $$\begin{alygnec}
\label{exw}
\rho(t)=\frac{1}{1+t}\left(\frac{1+t}{r}\right)^{\gamma},
\qlad 0\oeq\gamma<\frac 12.\end{alngned}$$

Instead of osing rxplicit assumptions on the underlying dependendh structure of tfe pbverved time series we work with the folkowing figh-kevel wegularity assumptions allowing fog easi futuse extensilns to different dependency assnkptions. In Sgcthon \[vec.exass\] we smow their validyty for both iudependeut obsdrvations zs well as functiogals of mixinc processes.

\[rejass\] Let $\{R_i\}_{i\ib\matybb{Z}}$ be x stationary tome series that fuldills the followinn assomltions for a girtn jernel function $h$.

1.  ${\opqrwtprgdme{E}}\left(\left|\vum_{i=1}^o\suo_{k=k
\[regw\] Let the weight function satisfy $ $w(m,k)=m^{-1/2}\tilde{w}(m,k),$ $\tilde{w}(m,k)=\rho\left(\frac km\right)$ $k>l_m$ with $\frac{l_m}{m}\rightarrow l_m.$ function $\rho:(0,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^+$ is and continuous. The two limits exist and it holds: $\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}t^{\gamma}\rho(t)<\infty$ for some $0\leq\gamma<\frac 12.$ - $\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}t\rho(t)<\infty.$ Part (i) allows to start monitoring only after some observations have been collected. This is inmportant in order avoid alarms the beginning of the monitoring period. Such early false alarms often occur as the first values of monitoring statistic are quite volatile due to the monitoring sample (but are negligible). The regularity conditions of weight at zero infinity (ii) (iii) are needed control the asymptotic behavior of the monitoring statistic at 0 and inifinity. The following choice fulfills these and is in the as leads nice limit distributions in Corollary \[simple1\]: $$\begin{aligned} \label{exw} \rho(t)=\frac{1}{1+t}\left(\frac{1+t}{t}\right)^{\gamma}, Instead of using explicit assumptions on the underlying structure of observed time series we work with following high-level regularity assumptions allowing for easy future to different dependency assumptions. In Section \[sec.exass\] we show their validity for both independent observations as functionals of mixing \[regass\] Let $\{Y_i\}_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}$ a time that the following for a given kernel function $h$. 1. ${\operatorname{E}}\left(\left|\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=k

\[regw\] Let the weight function sAtisfy $ $

-   $w(m,k)=m^{-1/2}\Tilde{W}(m,k),$ WheRe $\TildE{w}(m,k)=\Rho\left(\frac km\rIGht)$ fOr $k>l_m$ with $\frac{l_m}{m}\rightaRrow 0$ aNd $\TIlde{W}(M,k)=0$ For $k\lEq l_m.$ The FUnCTIon $\RhO:(0,\iNftY)\rIGhTarroW\maThbb{R}^+$ is Positive anD coNtInuous.

The folLOwIng two limiTs eXist and it holDs:

-   $\lIm_{t\rigHtArrOW 0}t^{\gamMa}\rHo(t)<\inFty$ for SOme $0\leq\Gamma<\frac 12.$

-   $\LiM_{T\rightARrow\infTY}T\rHo(t)<\iNfty.$

Part (i) allows to STaRT the monitoring Only afTeR SoME ObsErvAtions have BeEn colLEcted. ThIS iS INMpoRTant in order to Avoid false aLArmS at the VeRy bEGinninG of thE mONitOring period. such Early falsE alarmS Often ocCUr as the First vAluEs oF the MOnItOriNg STatIStIc aRE quIte volatIlE dUe to tHe smALL MOnitOriNg saMple (bUt are asymptotIcaLly nEGliGible).

the reGulaRiTy conDitionS of thE wEight function at Zero And infiniTy iN (iI) anD (iIi) are NEeded tO coNtrOl the asYmptotiC BehAvIOR Of The monitoring statiStIC At 0 And inifiNity.

ThE FoLlOWing choiCe FulFillS THese aSsumPTiOns and is Often uSEd In The liteRaTure as It LeaDs tO nice LImit DistriButions aS indiCAted in CorollarY \[Simple1\]: $$\begin{alIGnED}
\LaBEl{exW}
\rhO(t)=\frac{1}{1+t}\left(\Frac{1+T}{T}\rigHt)^{\gaMMa},
\QuaD 0\Leq\gaMma<\frAc 12.\ENd{ALigned}$$

Instead of usinG eXpliciT assuMptions on the uNderlying dEPENdency stRuctURe OF the observed tiMe serIes we work wITh the folLowinG high-levEl regularITY assumptIonS alLowIng FOR eAsy future exteNSIons To DiffereNt dEpendenCy aSsuMptIonS. IN Section \[sEc.exass\] wE sHoW tHeIr vAlidiTY for both InDepEnDenT obseRVationS as weLl as FuNcTIonAls of miXInG PRoceSsEs.

\[RegaSs\] LEt $\{y_i\}_{i\in\MathBB{Z}}$ bE a statiOnary time SerIEs thAt FuLfills tHe following asSuMptions for A gIveN kerneL FUnction $h$.

1.  ${\Operatorname{E}}\left(\left|\suM_{I=1}^m\sum_{j=k

\[regw\] Let the weight f unction sa tisfy  $$
-  $w (m,k )=m^{-1/2}\til d e{w} (m,k),$ where $\tilde{ w}(m, k) = \rho \ le ft(\f rac km\ r ig h t )$fo r$k> l_ m $with$\f rac{l_m }{m}\right arr ow  0$ and $\ti l de {w}(m,k)=0 $ f or $k\leq l_ m.$  The f un cti o n $\r ho: (0,\i nfty)\ r ightar row\mathb b{ R }^+$ i s  positi v e  a nd c ontinuous.

The f o ll o wing two limit s exis ta nd i t h old s:

-   $\ li m_{t\ r ightarr o w0 } t ^{\ g amma}\rho(t)< \infty$ for som e $0\l eq \ga m ma<\fr ac 12 .$ 
-  $\lim_{t\ righ tarrow\in fty}t\ r ho(t)<\ i nfty.$
Part(i)  al lows to  s tar tt hem on ito r ing  only af te rsomeobse r v a t ions  ha ve b een c ollected. Thi s i s in m por tantin or derto  avoi d fals e ala rm s at the very b egin ning of t hemo nit or ing p e riod.Suc h e arly fa lse ala r msof t e n  o ccur as the firstva l u es  of themonito r in gs tatistic  a requit e volat iled ue  to thesmallm on it oring s am ple (b ut  ar e a sympt o tica lly ne gligible ).

T h e regularity c o nditions of t h ew e ig h t fu nct ion at zero  and infi nity in  (i i ) and  (iii )a re needed to control t he  asymp totic  behavior ofthe monito r i n g statis tica t0  and inifinity .

Th e followin g  choicefulfi lls thes e assumpt i o ns and i s o fte n u sed i nthe literatur e as i tleads t o n ice lim itdis tri but io ns as ind icated i nCo ro ll ary  \[si m ple1\]:$$ \be gi n{a ligne d }
\lab el{ex w}
\ rh o( t )=\ frac{1} { 1+ t } \lef t( \f rac{ 1+t }{ t}\ri ght) ^ {\g amma},\quad 0\l eq\ g amma <\ fr ac 12.\ end{aligned}$ $
Instead o fusi ng exp l i cit assu mptions on the underlyi n g depen den cy st ruct ure of th e o bserve d t i me ser ies we  work  w ith t he fo l l ow ing  h igh-levelr e gul arity  a ssum ptionsallowing for easyf utu re extensions  to  dif f e re ntd ep e nde nc y  as s u mptions. In Sec tion \[sec .e x as s\] we sho w  th ei r valid ity for  both indepen dent obse rvationsas  wel l asfunctional s of mix ing proce s ses.\[ regas s\]  Let $ \{ Y_i \}_{i \in\ma t hbb {Z}}$  be ast ationa ry ti me  seriesthat fulfills the follo wing a ssump tio ns for agiv e n k ernel fun ctio n $h$.

1.   $ {\o perat orn a me{E} }\le f t( \le f t|\su m_{i = 1}^m\sum_ { j= k

\[regw\] Let_the weight_function satisfy $ $

-_ _$w(m,k)=m^{-1/2}\tilde{w}(m,k),$_where $\tilde{w}(m,k)=\rho\left(\frac_km\right)$_for $k>l_m$ with_$\frac{l_m}{m}\rightarrow 0$ and_$\tilde{w}(m,k)=0$ for $k\leq l_m.$_The function $\rho:(0,\infty)\rightarrow\mathbb{R}^+$_is_positive and continuous.

The following two limits exist and it holds:

-   $\lim_{t\rightarrow 0}t^{\gamma}\rho(t)<\infty$_for_some $0\leq\gamma<\frac_12.$

-__ $\lim_{t\rightarrow\infty}t\rho(t)<\infty.$

Part (i) allows to_start the monitoring only after_some observations_have been collected. This is inmportant in order_to_avoid false alarms_at the very beginning of the monitoring period. Such_early false alarms often occur as_the first values_of_the_monitoring statistic are quite_volatile due to the small monitoring_sample (but are asymptotically negligible).

The regularity_conditions of the weight function at zero_and infinity in (ii) and (iii)_are needed to control the_asymptotic behavior_of the monitoring statistic at_0 and inifinity.

The_following choice_fulfills these assumptions_and is often used in the_literature as it_leads to nice limit distributions as_indicated_in Corollary \[simple1\]:_$$\begin{aligned}
\label{exw}
\rho(t)=\frac{1}{1+t}\left(\frac{1+t}{t}\right)^{\gamma},
\quad_0\leq\gamma<\frac_12.\end{aligned}$$

Instead of_using explicit assumptions_on_the underlying_dependency_structure of the observed time series_we_work with the following high-level regularity assumptions_allowing for easy future_extensions_to different dependency assumptions._In Section \[sec.exass\] we show their_validity for both independent observations as_well as_functionals of_mixing processes.

\[regass\] Let $\{Y_i\}_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}$ be a stationary time series that fulfills_the following assumptions for a given_kernel function $h$.

1. _${\operatorname{E}}\left(\left|\sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=k