Talk:Stratonovich integral

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Hairer in topic Argumentation

Finance bias

edit

The section of advantages/disadvanteges of the Stratonovich integral displayed a strong bias towards application in financial math. I've edited this paragraph and added the applications of the Stratonovich integral in physics.

--193.175.8.13 (talk) 10:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Not valid

edit

the formula for the transition from Ito to Stratonovich integral is in general not valid. Please check e.g. Protter pg. 82 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgi.dimitroff (talkcontribs) 10:30, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Right, there is one sigma too many. I fixed that. Or do you mean something different? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
The formula for the transition from Ito to Stratonovich integral is still invalid. The general formula however is correct. It might make sense to just give the conversion from an Ito SDE to the corresponding Stratonovich SDE instead. --137.205.192.27 (talk) 09:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Change of definition

edit

In the first section the definition is made with $\frac{X_{t_{i+1}}+X_{t_i}}{2}$ but then in the comparison with Ito integral it's ${X_{\frac{t_{i+1}+{t_i}}{2}$ used instead, without explanation.148.60.140.216 (talk) 09:19, 27 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Argumentation

edit

The section "Stratonovich interpretation and supersymmetric theory of SDEs" seems totally polemical. I hardly have my own view -- but from its tone, I don't believe what it says. 2001:171B:2274:7C21:B131:9FDB:F82B:CF1C (talk) 13:53, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, I have removed most of it and tried to reformulate the first couple of sentences in a more factual way. Hairer (talk) 22:07, 17 November 2021 (UTC)Reply