Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Non-(strong, geometrically) ergodicity criteria for discrete time Markov chains on general state

Ling-Di Wang, Yu Chen, Yu-Hui Zhang

TL;DR

This work develops inverse-problem criteria for non-ergodicity, non-strong ergodicity, and non-geometric ergodicity of discrete-time Markov chains on general state spaces by exploiting minimal nonnegative solutions to drift-type inequalities involving the one-step kernel. The authors establish a rigorous framework based on minimal solution theory, Dynkin's formula, and Lyapunov-type conditions, and they introduce an approximation scheme using increasing compact sets to derive necessity results and address geometric ergodicity. The methods are then applied to a broad immigration-augmented class of Markov processes, yielding explicit, verifiable criteria for recurrence, ergodicity, and their non-geometric/non-strong variants. The paper also provides two concrete examples—a general immigration birth process and a birth–death–immigration model—illustrating how the criteria translate into computable conditions. Overall, the results offer practical tools for diagnosing non-stability in complex Markov models relevant to applied probability and stochastic processes.

Abstract

For discrete-time Markov chains on general state spaces, we establish criteria for non-ergodicity and non-strong ergodicity, and derive sufficient conditions for non-geometric ergodicity via the theory of minimal nonnegative solutions. Our criteria are formulated based on the existence of solutions to inequalities involving the chain's one-step transition kernel. Meanwhile, these practical criteria are applied to a type of examples, which can effectively characterize the non-ergodicity and non-strong ergodicity of a specific class of single birth (death) processes.

Non-(strong, geometrically) ergodicity criteria for discrete time Markov chains on general state

TL;DR

This work develops inverse-problem criteria for non-ergodicity, non-strong ergodicity, and non-geometric ergodicity of discrete-time Markov chains on general state spaces by exploiting minimal nonnegative solutions to drift-type inequalities involving the one-step kernel. The authors establish a rigorous framework based on minimal solution theory, Dynkin's formula, and Lyapunov-type conditions, and they introduce an approximation scheme using increasing compact sets to derive necessity results and address geometric ergodicity. The methods are then applied to a broad immigration-augmented class of Markov processes, yielding explicit, verifiable criteria for recurrence, ergodicity, and their non-geometric/non-strong variants. The paper also provides two concrete examples—a general immigration birth process and a birth–death–immigration model—illustrating how the criteria translate into computable conditions. Overall, the results offer practical tools for diagnosing non-stability in complex Markov models relevant to applied probability and stochastic processes.

Abstract

For discrete-time Markov chains on general state spaces, we establish criteria for non-ergodicity and non-strong ergodicity, and derive sufficient conditions for non-geometric ergodicity via the theory of minimal nonnegative solutions. Our criteria are formulated based on the existence of solutions to inequalities involving the chain's one-step transition kernel. Meanwhile, these practical criteria are applied to a type of examples, which can effectively characterize the non-ergodicity and non-strong ergodicity of a specific class of single birth (death) processes.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 11 sections, 23 theorems, 128 equations.

Key Result

Theorem 1.1

(Non-ergodicity) Assume that the Markov chain $\{X_n\}$ satisfies Assumption 1. Then $\{X_n\}$ is not ergodic if there exist a set $A \in \mathscr{B}^+(\mathscr{X})$ and a sequence of functions $\{V^{(n)}(x)\}_{n \ge 1}$ with $V^{(n)}(x): \mathscr{X} \to \mathbb{R}$ that satisfy the following condit The converse also holds when the Markov chain $\{X_n\}$ is recurrent.

Theorems & Definitions (29)

  • Theorem 1.1
  • Corollary 1.2
  • Remark 1.3
  • Theorem 1.4
  • Remark 1.5
  • Proposition 1.6
  • Theorem 1.7
  • Proposition 1.8
  • Remark 1.9
  • Definition 2.1
  • ...and 19 more