Next Article in Journal
Fixed Point Theorems for Set-Valued Contractions in Metric Spaces
Next Article in Special Issue
An Extension of the Fréchet Distribution and Applications
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Solutions of Second-Order Elliptic Equations with C-Bézier Basis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Analysis of Correlation Bounds for Uniformly Expanding Maps on [0, 1]
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Randomly Stopped Minimum, Maximum, Minimum of Sums and Maximum of Sums with Generalized Subexponential Distributions

by
Jūratė Karasevičienė
and
Jonas Šiaulys
*
Institute of Mathematics, Vilnius University, Naugarduko 24, LT-03225 Vilnius, Lithuania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Axioms 2024, 13(2), 85; https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms13020085
Submission received: 30 December 2023 / Revised: 21 January 2024 / Accepted: 25 January 2024 / Published: 27 January 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Probability, Statistics and Estimation)

Abstract

:
In this paper, we find conditions under which distribution functions of randomly stopped minimum, maximum, minimum of sums and maximum of sums belong to the class of generalized subexponential distributions. The results presented in this article complement the closure properties of randomly stopped sums considered in the authors’ previous work. In this work, as in the previous one, the primary random variables are supposed to be independent and real-valued, but not necessarily identically distributed. The counting random variable describing the stopping moment of random structures is supposed to be nonnegative, integer-valued and not degenerate at zero. In addition, it is supposed that counting random variable and the sequence of the primary random variables are independent. At the end of the paper, it is demonstrated how randomly stopped structures can be applied to the construction of new generalized subexponential distributions.

1. Introduction

Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of real-valued and independent random variables (r.v.s) defined on a probability space ( Ω , F , P ) with distribution functions (d.f.s) { F ξ 1 , F ξ 2 , } . Let η be a counting random variable, that is, an r.v. that is nonnegative, integer-valued and not degenerate at zero r.v. In addition, we suppose that the r.v. η and the sequence { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } are independent.
At first, let us define the main random objects under consideration: randomly stopped minimum, randomly stopped maximum, randomly stopped minimum of sums and randomly stopped maximum of sums.
  • Let ξ ( 0 ) = 0 , ξ ( n ) = min { ξ 1 , , ξ n } for n N , and let
    ξ ( η ) = 0 if η = 0 , min { ξ 1 , , ξ η } if η 1
    be the randomly stopped minimum of r.v.s { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } .
  • Let ξ ( 0 ) = 0 , ξ ( n ) = max { ξ 1 , , ξ n } for n N , and let
    ξ ( η ) = 0 if η = 0 , max { ξ 1 , , ξ η } if η 1
    be the randomly stopped maximum of r.v.s { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } .
  • For the sequence of r.v.s { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } and the counting r.v. η , let S 0 : = 0 , S n : = ξ 1 + + ξ n if n N , and in addition, let
    S η = k = 1 η ξ k
    be the randomly stopped sum of r.v.s { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } ,
    S ( η ) = 0 if η = 0 , min { S 1 , , S η } if η 1
    be the minimum of randomly stopped sums of r.v.s { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } , and
    S ( η ) = 0 if η = 0 , max { S 1 , , S η } if η 1
    be the maximum of randomly stopped sums of r.v.s { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } .
By F X , we denote the d.f. of an r.v. X, and by F ¯ , we denote the tail function (t.f.) of a d.f. F, that is, F ¯ ( x ) = 1 F ( x ) for x R . We observe that the following equalities hold for positive x:
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) = n = 1 P ( ξ ( n ) > x ) P ( η = n ) , F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) = n = 1 P ( ξ ( n ) > x ) P ( η = n ) , F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) = n = 1 P ( S ( n ) > x ) P ( η = n ) , F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) = n = 1 P ( S ( n ) > x ) P ( η = n ) .
In this paper, we consider a sequence { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } of independent, real-valued and possibly non-identically distributed r.v.s. We suppose that some of the d.f.s of these r.v.s belong to the class of generalized subexponential distributions OS , and we find conditions under which the d.f.s F ξ ( η ) , F ξ ( η ) , F S ( η ) and F S ( η ) remain in this class. The definition of class OS and some of its properties are described in Section 2.
We use the following notations for the asymptotic relations of arbitrary positive functions f and g: f ( x ) = o g ( x ) means that lim x f ( x ) / g ( x ) = 0 ; f ( x ) x c g ( x ) with c > 0 means that lim x f ( x ) / g ( x ) = c ; f ( x ) = O g ( x ) means that lim sup x f ( x ) g ( x ) < ; and f ( x ) x g ( x ) means that
0 < lim inf x f ( x ) g ( x ) lim sup x f ( x ) g ( x ) < .
The motivation for investigation of randomly stopped structures comes mainly from insurance and finance, where questions related to extremal or rare events are traditionally considered, see e.g., [1,2,3]. In particular, exponential, Pareto, gamma, lognormal and loggamma distributions are extremely popular in actuarial mathematics. Mathematical aspects of risk theory related to calculation of ruin probabilities are considered in a large number of works; see [2,3,4,5,6,7] and references therein. From the mathematical point of view, the success of any insurance business depends on the asymptotic behavior of the distribution of S η , S ( η ) and S ( η ) . If the distribution of individual claim size Z is light-tailed, i.e.,
E e γ Z <
for some γ > 0 , then the corresponding ruin probability is also small for large values of the initial surplus and usually decreases with an exponential rate; see, e.g., [2,3,6,7]. If the individual claim size is heavy-tailed, i.e.,
E e γ Z =
for all γ > 0 , then the ruin probability decreases much more slowly with increasing initial surplus; see, e.g., [7]. Therefore, it is worth finding out at the beginning of the investigation whether the distribution of individual claim sizes is light-tailed or heavy-tailed. One of the most significant research directions in risk theory is the investigation of the ruin probability when the distribution of claim sizes is heavy-tailed. In this paper, we consider the class of generalized subexponential distribution OS . From the description of this class given in Section 2, it follows that part of the distributions of this class have heavy tails, and the other part has light tails. However, even in the event that the random variable generating the claim flow has the OS -class or similar regularity, it is possible to provide some considerable information about ruin probability of the model [8,9,10,11,12,13]. Results on asymptotic behavior of the ruin probability typically turn out to be different for different classes.
The closure properties in probability theory have a long history, back from the middle of the previous century. They appear as substantial supports in reliability theory, queuing theory, branching processes, risk theory, stochastic control, asset pricing and others. Bingham, Goldie and Teugels [14], Seneta [15] and Resnick [16] were among the first researchers to study closure problems. In the mentioned monographs, these authors fully explored the properties of slowly varying, regularly varying, and O-regularly varying functions, which are closely related to the closure properties of distribution functions. It is worth mentioning that the majority of the initial results related to the closure problems were obtained for the d.f.s of identically distributed r.v.s. Some of such results we describe in Section 4. A detailed analysis of closure problems is given in the book by Leipus et al. [17]. The main novelty of this paper is that not only identically distributed r.v.s are considered.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we describe a class of generalized subexponential distributions. The main results of this paper are formulated in Section 3. Section 4 consists of some results on closure under randomly stopped structures for regularity classes related with generalized subexponential distributions. The proofs of the main results are given in Section 5 and Section 6. In Section 7, we present two examples to expose the analytical usefulness of our results; and finally, we provide some concluding remarks in Section 8.

2. Generalized Subexponentiality

Let ξ be an r.v. defined on a probability space ( Ω , F , P ) with a d.f. F ξ .
  • A d.f. F ξ of a real-valued r.v. is said to be generalized subexponential, denoted F ξ OS , if
    lim sup x F ξ F ξ ¯ ( x ) F ¯ ξ ( x ) < ,
    where F ξ F ξ denotes the convolution of d.f. F ξ with itself, i.e.,
    F ξ F ξ ( x ) = F ξ 2 ( x ) : = F ξ ( x y ) d F ξ ( y ) , x R ,
    and F ξ F ξ ¯ denotes the t.f. of F ξ F ξ , i.e.,
    F ξ F ξ ¯ ( x ) = 1 F ξ F ξ ( x ) , x R .
For distributions of the nonnegative r.v.s, class OS was introduced by Klüppelberg [18], and later, for real-valued r.v.s, was studied by Yu and Wang [10], Shimura and Watanabe [9], Baltrūnas et al. [19], Watanabe and Yamamuro [20], Cheng and Wang [21], Lin and Wang [22], Hägele and Lehtomaa [23], Konstantinides et al. [24], Yao and Taimre [25] and Mikutavičius and Šiaulys [26], among others.
In [9], the class of distributions OS is considered together with other distribution regularity classes. In that paper, several closedness properties of the class OS were proved. For example, it is shown that class OS is not closed under convolution roots. This means that there exists r.v. ξ such that n-fold convolution F ξ n OS for all n 2 , but F ξ OS . In [19], the simple conditions are provided under which the d.f. of the special form
F ξ ( x ) = 1 exp 0 x q ( u ) d u
belongs to the class OS , where q is some integrable hazard rate function. For distributions of class OS , the closure under tail-equivalence and the closure under convolution are established in [20]. The detailed proofs of these closures for nonnegative r.v.s are presented in [18] and for real-valued r.v.s in [10]. The closure under convolution means that in the case of independent r.v.s ξ 1 , ξ 2 conditions F ξ 1 OS , F ξ 2 OS imply that F ξ 1 F ξ 2 = F ξ 1 + ξ 2 OS . The closure under tail-equivalence means that conditions F ξ 1 OS , F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) x F ¯ ξ 2 ( x ) imply F ξ 2 OS .
A counterexample, showing that F ξ 1 , F ξ 2 OS for independent r.v.s ξ 1 , ξ 2 does not imply that F ξ 1 ξ 2 OS can be found in [22]. Moreover, in that paper, the closure under minimum is established, which means that F ξ 1 , F ξ 2 OS for independent r.v.s ξ 1 , ξ 2 imply F ξ 1 ξ 2 OS . The authors of articles [24,26] consider when the distribution of the product of two independent random variables ξ , θ belongs to the class OS . For instance, in [26], it is proved that d.f. F ξ θ is generalized subexponential if F ξ OS and θ is independent of ξ , nonnegative and not degenerated at zero.

3. Main Results

In this section, we formulate three theorems, which are the main assertions of this paper. It is easy to see that the results of this article complement the results obtained in [27]. The first theorem deals with the closure under the randomly stopped minimum.
Theorem 1. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s, and let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } . If F ξ k OS for each k, then F ξ ( η ) and F S ( η ) belong to the class OS , and it holds the following asymptotic relations:
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) x F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) = k = 1 ϰ F ¯ ξ k ( x ) ,
F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) x F ¯ S ( ϰ ) ( x )
where ϰ = min { k 1 : P ( η = k ) > 0 } .
The second theorem states the conditions for the maximum of randomly stopped, possibly differently distributed random variables to belong to the class OS .
Theorem 2. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s such that F ξ 1 OS , and let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } with finite expectation E η . If
0 < lim inf x inf n 1 1 n k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) lim sup x sup n 1 1 n k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) < ,
then F ξ ( η ) OS and F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) x F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) .
The third-last theorem describes the conditions under which the d.f. of the randomly stopped maximum of sums is generalized subexponential.
Theorem 3. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s such that F ξ 1 OS and conditions (3) are satisfied. Let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } such that E e λ η < for all λ > 0 . Then F S ( η ) OS and F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) x F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) .
We will present the proofs of all theorems in Section 6. According to the statements of these theorems, many random variables with generalized subexponential distributions can be constructed. We will demonstrate such constructions in Section 7.

4. Results for Other Regularity Classes

In this section, we will describe classes of distributions related to the class OS . For the described classes, we will present some results on their closure with respect to a randomly stopped structures. Section 4 of paper [27] lists many results on the closure of regularity classes with respect to a randomly stopped sum. Meanwhile, there are only a few similar results about the properties of other randomly stopped structures. We present below some of such results.
  • A d.f. F ξ of a real-valued r.v. ξ is said to be dominatedly varying, denoted F ξ D , if
    lim sup x F ξ ¯ ( y x ) F ¯ ξ ( x ) <
    for all (or, equivalently, for some) y ( 0 , 1 ) .
The class of dominatedly varying d.f.s D was introduced by Feller [28] and later considered in [14,20,29,30,31,32], among others. We remark only that D OS . The following assertion on F S η D is presented in Theorem 4 of [33].
Theorem 4. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s with common d.f. F ξ D , and let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } . Then F S η D if E η p + 1 < for some
p > J F ξ + : = lim y 1 log y log lim inf x F ¯ ξ ( x y ) F ¯ ξ ( x ) .
In the inhomogeneous case, when summands are not necessary identically distributed, the following statement is obtained in Theorem 2.1 of [34].
Theorem 5. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent nonnegative r.v.s, and let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } . Then, F S η D if the following three conditions are satisfied:
(i)
F ξ ϰ D for some ϰ supp ( η ) : = { n N 0 : P ( η = n ) > 0 } ,
(ii)
lim sup x sup n > ϰ 1 n F ¯ ξ ϰ ( x ) i = 1 n F ¯ ξ i ( x ) < ,
(iii)
E η p + 1 < for some p > J F ξ ϰ + .
  • A d.f. F ξ of a real-valued r.v. ξ is said to be consistently varying, denoted F ξ C , if
    lim y 1 lim sup x F ¯ ( x y ) F ¯ ( x ) = 1 , o r , e q u i v a l e n t l y , lim y 1 lim inf x F ¯ ( x y ) F ¯ ( x ) = 1 .
A class of consistently varying distributions was introduced by Cline [35] as a generalization of regularly varying distributions, and subsequently has been considered in the various contexts; see, for instance, [31,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45]. It follows from definitions that C D OS . The following two assertions on F ξ ( η ) C and F S ( η ) C are presented in Theorem 4 and 5 of [43].
Theorem 6. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s, and let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } . Then, d.f. F ξ ( η ) belongs to the class C if the following three conditions hold:
(i)
F ξ ϰ C for some ϰ supp ( η ) ,
(ii)
for each k ϰ , either F ξ k C or F ¯ ξ k ( x ) = o F ¯ ξ ϰ ( x ) ,
(iii)
lim sup x sup n ϰ 1 φ ( n ) F ¯ ξ ϰ ( x ) k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) < ,
where φ ( n ) n = 1 is a positive sequence such that E φ ( η ) I [ 1 , ) ( η ) < .
Theorem 7. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s, and let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } . Then, F S ( η ) C if the following three conditions are satisfied:
(i)
F ξ k C for each k N ,
(ii)
lim sup x sup n 1 1 n F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) < ,
(iii)
E η p + 1 < for some p > J F ξ 1 + .
  • A d.f. F ξ of a real-valued r.v. ξ is said to be regularly varying with index α 0 , denoted F ξ R α , if
    lim sup x F ¯ ( x y ) F ¯ ( x ) = y α f o r a n y y > 0 .
    By R : = α 0 R α we denote all regularly varying d.f.s.
The standard properties of regularly varying d.f.s and some historical notes on such functions can be found in [14,16,46,47,48]. We remark only that R C D OS . The following assertion on d.f. F ξ ( η ) is presented in Theorem 5.1(i) of [49].
Theorem 8. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s, and let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } such that E η < . Then, F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) x E η F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) , and hence, F ξ ( η ) R α if and only if F ξ 1 R α .
The assertion bellow on d.f. F ξ ( η ) can be found in Theorem 4 of [50].
Theorem 9. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s. Then, d.f. F ¯ ξ k belongs to the class R for all k N if and only if F ξ ( η ) R for every counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } .
  • A d.f. F ξ of a real-valued r.v. ξ is said to belong to the class of generalized long-tailed distributions OL if for any (equivalently, for some) y > 0
    lim sup x F ¯ ( x y ) F ¯ ( x ) < .
The class of d.f.s OL was proposed by Shimura and Watanabe in [9]. The main properties of the functions from this class are discussed in [9,51,52,53,54,55,56,57], among others. We note only that OS OL . In Theorem 2.4 of [54], the assertion below on F S ( η ) OS is presented.
Theorem 10. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s, and let η be a counting r.v. independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } . Then, the d.f. of the randomly stopped maximum of random sums F S ( η ) belongs to the class OL if F ξ 1 OL and r.v. η satisfies the following two requirements:
lim sup n P ( η > n ) max 1 k n P ( η = k ) < , lim sup n P ( η n ) P ( η = n ) < .

5. Auxiliary Lemmas

In this section, we will present some auxiliary lemmas that will be applied to the derivations of the main Theorems 1–3. The first lemma is a collection of the basic properties of d.f.s from class OS .
Lemma 1. 
Let X and Y be two real-valued r.v.s with corresponding d.f.s F X and F Y . Then, the following statements are correct:
(i)
F X OS if and only if sup x R F X F X ¯ ( x ) F ¯ X ( x ) < .
(ii)
If F X OS and F ¯ Y ( x ) x F ¯ X ( x ) , then F Y OS .
(iii)
If F X OS and F Y OS , then F X F Y OS .
(iv)
If F X OS , then F X OL i.e., lim sup x F ¯ X ( x 1 ) F ¯ X ( x ) < .
(v)
If F X OS and F ¯ Y ( x ) = O F ¯ X ( x ) , then F X F Y OS and F X F Y ¯ ( x ) x F ¯ X ( x ) .
The complete proof of the lemma is presented in Lemma 1 of [27], and proofs of the separate parts of the lemma can be found in [9,10,18,20].
The next lemma is a refined version of Lemma 2 from [27]. As a result, we present this lemma together with a modified proof.
Lemma 2. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s, for which F ξ 1 OS , and for other indices k 2 , either F ξ k OS or F ¯ ξ k ( x ) = O ( F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) ) . Then,
F ¯ S n ( x ) x k A n F ξ k ¯ ( x )
where A n : = k { 1 , 2 , , n } : F ξ k OS , and hence, F S n OS for all n N .
Proof. 
If n = 1 ,then the statement is obvious because S 1 = ξ 1 . If n = 2 , then two options are possible: F ξ 2 OS or F ¯ ξ 2 ( x ) = O ( F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) ) . In the first case, F S 2 = F ξ 1 F ξ 2 In the second case, F ¯ S 2 ( x ) x F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) by part (v) of the Lemma 1. The asymptotic relation of the lemma holds for both cases.
Let us suppose that the asymptotic relation (4) is valid for some n = N , i.e.,
F ¯ S N ( x ) x k A N F ξ k ¯ ( x ) = F ξ 1 F ξ k 1 F ξ k r ¯ ( x )
where A N = { 1 , k 1 , , k r } = k { 1 , 2 , , N } : F ξ k OS .
The above relation and parts (ii), (iii) of Lemma 1 imply that F S N OS . The tail of any d.f. from class OS remains positive throughout the set of real numbers. Hence, relation (5) implies that
0 < inf x R F ¯ S N ( x ) k A N F ξ k ¯ ( x ) sup x R F ¯ S N ( x ) k A N F ξ k ¯ ( x ) < .
For n = N + 1 , we have two possibilities: either F ξ N + 1 OS , or F ¯ ξ N + 1 ( x ) = O F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) . If F ξ N + 1 OS , then according to (6), it holds that
F ¯ S N + 1 ( x ) = F ¯ S N ( x y ) d F ξ N + 1 ( y ) c 1 N k A N F ξ k ¯ ( x y ) d F ξ N + 1 ( y ) = c 1 N k A N + 1 F ξ k ¯ ( x ) , x R
for some positive quantity c 1 N not depending on x and A N + 1 = A N { N + 1 } . Similarly,
F ¯ S N + 1 ( x ) c 2 N k A N + 1 F ξ k ¯ ( x ) , x R
for some positive quantity c 2 N .
The above two estimates imply the asymptotic relation (4) in the case n = N + 1 .
If F ¯ ξ N + 1 = O F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) , then according to (6), for positive x, we have that
F ¯ ξ N + 1 ( x ) F ¯ S N ( x ) 1 c 2 N F ¯ ξ N + 1 ( x ) k A N F ξ k ¯ ( x ) 1 c 2 N k A N { 1 } F ¯ ξ k ( 0 ) F ¯ ξ N + 1 ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x )
because
F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) k A N { 1 } F ¯ ξ k ( 0 ) = P ξ 1 > x , ξ k 1 > 0 , , ξ k r > 0 P ξ 1 + ξ k 1 + + ξ k r > x ,
where k 1 , , k r = A N { 1 } . Consequently, F ¯ ξ N + 1 ( x ) = O F ¯ S N ( x ) , and according to the part (v) of Lemma 1, we obtain that
F ¯ S N + 1 ( x ) = F S N F ξ N + 1 ¯ ( x ) x F ¯ S N ( x ) x k A N + 1 F ξ k ¯ ( x )
with A N + 1 = A N in the case.
We derived the asymptotic relation (4) for n = N + 1 by supposing that this relation holds for n = N . Due to the induction principle, the asymptotic relation (4) is valid for all n N . The assertion F S n OS follows from (4) after using part (ii) and (iii) of Lemma 1. This finishes the proof of the lemma. □
The following technical assertion is Lemma 3 in [27].
Lemma 3. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s, for which F ξ 1 OS and
lim sup x sup k 1 F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) <
Then, there exists a constant c 3 , for which
F ¯ S n ( x ) c 3 n 1 F ¯ ξ 1 ( x )
for all x R and for all n N .
For maximum of sums S ( n ) = max { S 1 , S 2 , , S n } it holds the following similar statement.
Lemma 4. 
Under condition of Lemma 3, there exists a constant c 4 such that
F ¯ S ( n ) ( x ) c 4 n F ¯ ξ 1 ( x )
for all x R and n N .
Proof. 
If x R and n N , then
F ¯ S ( n ) ( x ) = P max { S 1 , S 2 , S n } > x = P k = 1 n { S k > x } k = 1 n P { S k > x } .
Let us suppose c 4 = max { c 3 , 2 } . According to estimate (7) from Lemma 3, we have that
F ¯ S ( n ) ( x ) k = 1 n c 3 k 1 F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) c 4 n 1 c 4 1 c 4 n F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) .
The estimate of the lemma is proved. □
The next lemma is on the minimum X ( n ) = min { X 1 , , X n } of a collection of independent r.v.s { X 1 , , X n } . The similar assertion is presented in Lemma 3.1 of [22]. Unfortunately, the proof presented there is suitable for nonnegative absolutely continuous r.v.s. Hence, we present the detailed proof of the lemma below.
Lemma 5. 
Let { X 1 , X 2 , X n } , n N be a collection of independent real-valued r.v.s with d.f.s { F X 1 , F X 2 , F X n } . If F X k OS for all k { 1 , 2 , n } , then d.f. F X ( n ) of X ( n ) = min { X 1 , X 2 , , X n } belongs to the class OS as well.
Proof. 
If n = 1 , then assertion of the lemma is trivial. If n 2 , then
min { X 1 , X 2 , , X n } = min min { X 1 , X 2 , , X n 1 } , X n .
It follows from this equality that it is sufficient to prove the statement of the lemma for the case n = 2 , i.e., it is sufficient for us to prove such a statement:
X , Y independent r . v . s F X OS , F Y OS F X Y OS .
  • At first, let us suppose that X and Y are absolutely continuous r.v.s. In such a case,
    F ¯ min ( X , Y ) ( x ) = F ¯ X Y ( x ) = F ¯ X ( x ) F ¯ Y ( x ) = x f X ( y ) d y x f Y ( y ) d y
    with density functions f X and f Y . For x R , we have
    F X Y 2 ¯ ( x ) F ¯ X Y ( x ) = 1 F ¯ X Y ( x ) F ¯ X Y ( x y ) d F X Y ( y ) = 1 F ¯ X ( x ) F ¯ Y ( x ) F ¯ X ( x y ) F ¯ Y ( x y ) d F ¯ X ( y ) F ¯ Y ( y ) = F ¯ X ( x y ) F ¯ Y ( x y ) F ¯ Y ( y ) f X ( y ) d y F ¯ X ( x ) F ¯ Y ( x ) + F ¯ X ( x y ) F ¯ Y ( x y ) F ¯ X ( y ) f Y ( y ) d y F ¯ X ( x ) F ¯ Y ( x ) .
    If Y 1 and Y 2 are independent copies of Y, then
    F ¯ Y ( x y ) F ¯ Y ( y ) = P ( Y 1 > x y ) P ( Y 2 > y ) P ( Y 1 + Y 2 > x ) = F Y 2 ¯ ( x ) .
    for all x , y R . Hence, condition F Y OS implies that
    sup x , y R F ¯ Y ( x y ) F ¯ Y ( y ) F ¯ Y ( x ) sup x R F Y 2 ¯ ( x ) F ¯ Y ( x ) c 5
    for some constant c 5 according to Lemma 1(i). Similarly for r.v. X, we obtain that
    sup x , y R F ¯ X ( x y ) F ¯ X ( y ) F ¯ X ( x ) sup x R F X 2 ¯ ( x ) F ¯ X ( x ) c 6
    for some another constant c 6 . Hence, according to the decomposition (9),
    sup x R F X Y 2 ¯ ( x ) F ¯ X Y ( x ) max { c 5 , c 6 } sup x R F ¯ X ( x y ) f X ( y ) d y F ¯ X ( x ) + F ¯ Y ( x y ) f Y ( y ) d y F ¯ Y ( x ) = max { c 5 , c 6 } sup x R F X 2 ¯ ( x ) F ¯ X ( x ) + F Y 2 ¯ ( x ) F ¯ Y ( x ) max { c 5 , c 6 } ( c 5 + c 6 ) ,
    which implies that F X Y OS due to Lemma 1(i) again.
  • Now, let us suppose that r.v.s X and Y are not necessarily absolutely continuous.
    At first, let us consider r.v. X. Since OS OL (see Lemma 1(iv)), we have that F X OL . If function F X belongs to OL , then the function F X ( log x ) , x > 0 , is nonincreasing O-regularly varying, according to Bingham [14], because
    lim sup x F ¯ X ( log x y ) F ¯ X ( log x ) = lim sup x F ¯ X ( log x + log y ) F ¯ X ( log x ) < .
    for an arbitrary y > 0 .
    From the representation Theorem-see Theorem 2.2.7 in [14], or Theorem A.1 together with Definition A.4 and Remark in page 100 of [15]-we have that
    F ¯ X ( log x ) = exp a ( x ) A x b ( t ) t d t
    for all x A . Here, A is a positive number, a and b 0 are bounded integrable functions. Therefore, for all x log A
    F ¯ X ( x ) = exp a ( x ) log A x b ( u ) d u
    with bounded and integrable functions a and b 0 . Since b is a positive-bounded and integrable function, function
    G ( x ) = 1 exp log A x b ( u ) d u I [ log A , ) ( x )
    is an absolutely continuous d.f. from class OL with tail function
    G ¯ ( x ) = I ( , log A ) ( x ) + exp log A x b ( u ) d u I [ log A , ) ( x )
    In addition, the boundedness of function a in (10) implies that
    F ¯ X ( x ) x G ¯ ( x )
    In a similar way, we derive that
    F ¯ Y ( x ) x H ¯ ( x )
    for some absolutely continuous d.f. H OL . According to Lemma 1(ii) and the first part of the proof d.f., 1 G ¯ H ¯ belongs to the class OS , and from Lemma 1(ii), again, we obtain F X Y OS because
    F X Y ¯ ( x ) = F X ¯ ( x ) F Y ¯ ( x ) x G ¯ ( x ) H ¯ ( x ) .
It follows from both parts of the proof that relation (8) holds. At the same time, the assertion of the lemma is proved. □
The last technical lemma is necessary for the examination of randomly stopped maximum of sums. For the proof of the lemma below, we use the revised episodes of proof of Theorem 2 from article [27].
Lemma 6. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be a sequence of independent real-valued r.v.s such that d.f. F ξ 1 OS and
lim inf x inf n 1 1 n k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) > 0 ,
Then,
inf x R F ¯ S ( n ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) inf x R F ¯ S n ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) c 7 n 1
for all n 1 and some c 7 > 0 , where S n = ξ 1 + + ξ n and S ( n ) = max { S 1 , S 2 , S n } .
Proof. 
Conditions of the lemma give that
inf k 1 F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) Δ
for all x x Δ and some positive Δ . If x < x Δ , then
inf k 1 F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) inf k 1 F ¯ ξ k ( x Δ ) = inf k 1 F ¯ ξ k ( x Δ ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x Δ ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x Δ ) Δ F ¯ ξ 1 ( x Δ ) : = c 8 > 0
due to the assumption F ξ 1 OS . The derived inequalities imply that
F ¯ ξ k ( x ) c 8 F ¯ ξ 1 ( x )
for all x R and k { 1 , 2 , } . Using the last estimate, we obtain
F ¯ S 2 ( x ) = F ¯ ξ 2 ( x y ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x y ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x y ) d F ξ 1 ( y ) c 8 F ξ 1 F ξ 1 ¯ ( x ) c 8 F ¯ ξ 1 ( 0 ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) , x R .
Similarly,
F ¯ S 3 ( x ) = F ¯ S 2 ( x y ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x y ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x y ) d F ξ 3 ( y ) c 8 F ¯ ξ 1 ( 0 ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x y ) d F ξ 3 ( y ) = c 8 F ¯ ξ 1 ( 0 ) F ¯ ξ 3 ( x y ) d F ξ 1 ( y ) c 8 2 F ¯ ξ 1 ( 0 ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x y ) d F ξ 1 ( y ) = c 8 2 F ¯ ξ 1 ( 0 ) F ξ 1 F ξ 1 ¯ ( x ) c 8 2 F ¯ ξ 1 ( 0 ) 2 F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) , x R .
Continuing tbe process, we obtain
F ¯ S n ( x ) c 8 F ¯ ξ 1 ( 0 ) n 1 F ¯ ξ 1 ( x )
for all x R and n N . Hence, the second estimate in (11) holds with c 7 = c 8 F ¯ ξ 1 ( 0 ) . The first inequality in (11) is obvious because
F ¯ S n ( x ) = P ( S n > x ) P ( max ( S 1 , S 2 , . . S n ) > x ) = F ¯ S ( n ) ( x )
for an arbitrary real number x. Lemma 6 is proved. □

6. Proofs of the Main Results

In this section, we prove all main results of the paper.

6.1. Proof of Theorem 1

Proof. 
At first, let us consider the first part of the theorem. Due to Lemma 1(ii), it is enough to prove the asymptotic relations (1) because F ξ ( ϰ ) OS by Lemma 5. By definition of the randomly stopped minimum for positive x, we have
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) = n = 1 F ¯ ξ ( n ) ( x ) P ( η = n ) = F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) P ( η = ϰ ) + n = ϰ + 1 F ¯ ξ ( n ) ( x ) P ( η = n ) = F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) P ( η = ϰ ) + F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) n = ϰ + 1 P ( η = n ) k = ϰ + 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) = F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) P ( η = ϰ ) 1 + 1 P ( η = ϰ ) n = ϰ + 1 P ( η = n ) k = ϰ + 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) P ( η = ϰ ) 1 + F ¯ ξ ϰ + 1 ( x ) P ( η ϰ + 1 ) P ( η = ϰ ) .
On the other hand, for all x > 0 ,
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) P ( η = ϰ ) .
On this basis, we can assert that
0 < lim inf x F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) lim sup x F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ ( ϰ ) ( x ) < .
Hence, relation (1) holds, and by Lemma 5, it follows that F ¯ ξ ( η ) OS .
Let us consider the second part of the theorem. By Lemma 2, we have that F S k OS for each k N , and by Lemma 5, we have that F S ( ϰ ) OS . Hence, it suffices to prove the asymptotic relation (2) in order to obtain F S ( η ) OS . Similar to the first part of the proof, we obtain that
F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ S ( ϰ ) ( x ) P ( η = ϰ ) 1 + F ¯ S ϰ + 1 ( x ) P ( η ϰ + 1 ) P ( η = ϰ ) ,
and
F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ S ( ϰ ) ( x ) P ( η = ϰ )
for all positive x. Therefore,
0 < lim inf x F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ S ( ϰ ) ( x ) lim sup x F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ S ( ϰ ) ( x ) < ,
and the desired relation (2) follows. This finishes the proof of the theorem. □

6.2. Proof of Theorem 2

Proof. 
For x > 0 , we have
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) = n = 1 P ( ξ ( n ) > x ) P ( η = n ) = n = 1 P k = 1 n { ξ k > x } P ( η = n ) = n = 1 P k = 1 n ξ k > x , j = 1 k 1 { ξ j x } P ( η = n ) .
Therefore,
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) = n = 1 P ( η = n ) k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) j = 1 k 1 F ξ j ( x ) .
Condition (3) implies that
k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) c 9 n
for all n N , some c 9 and sufficiently large x, say x > x 1 . Hence,
lim sup x F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) c 9 n = 1 P ( η = n ) n = c 9 E η .
In a similar way from (3), we derive that there exists c 10 > 0 , such that
k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) c 10 n
for all n and sufficiently large x, say x > x 2 . Decomposition (13) implies that for each N 1 ,
lim inf x F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) lim inf x n = 1 N P ( η = n ) k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) j = 1 k 1 F ξ j ( x ) = n = 1 N P ( η = n ) lim inf x k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) j = 1 k 1 F ξ j ( x ) n = 1 N P ( η = n ) lim inf x k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) lim inf x j = 1 n 1 F ξ j ( x ) c 10 n = 1 N n P ( η = n ) .
By passing N to infinity, we obtain
lim inf x F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) c 10 E η .
Since 0 < E η < , the derived relations (14) and (15) imply that F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) x F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) , and hence, F ξ ( η ) OS due to Lemma 1(ii). Theorem 2 is proved. □

6.3. Proof of Theorem 3

Proof. 
For x > 0 , we have
F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) = n = 1 P ( S ( n ) > x ) P ( η = n ) .
Therefore, for such x,
F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) = n = 1 F ¯ S ( n ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) P ( η = n ) n = 1 sup x > 0 F ¯ S ( n ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) P ( η = n ) n = 1 c 11 n P ( η = n ) E c 11 η <
with c 11 2 due to conditions of the theorem and Lemma 4. Consequently,
lim sup x F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) < .
Now, we check if
lim inf x F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) > 0 .
For positive x, it holds that
F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) = n = 1 F ¯ S ( n ) ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) P ( η = n ) n = 1 c 12 n 1 P ( η = n ) > 0 .
with a positive constant c 12 according to conditions of the theorem and Lemma 6.
The derived estimates (16) and (17) imply that F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) x F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) . Hence, F S ( η ) OS due to Lemma 1(ii). Theorem 3 is proved. □

7. Construction of Generalized Subexponential Distributions

In this section, we present two examples showing how using Theorems 1, 2 and 3 it is possible to construct new distributions belonging to the class OS . It is quite difficult to write the analytical expression of d.f.s F ξ ( η ) , F ξ ( η ) , F S ( η ) and F S ( η ) in the general case, but according to Theorems 1–3, we can establish whether the constructed distributions are generalized subexponential.
Example 1. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , , } be a sequence of independent and identically distributed r.v.s such that
F ¯ ξ k ( x ) = I ( , 0 ) ( x ) + e x ( 1 + x ) 3 1 + sin x 3 I [ 0 , ) ( x ) , k N .
According to the results of [55], the d.f. F ξ 1 belongs to the edge of the class OS . In addition, requirement (3) is certainly satisfied. Therefore, Theorems 1–3 can be applied for sequence of independent and identically distributed r.v.s { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , , } .
Theorem 1 gives that d.f.s F ξ ( η ) and F S ( η ) belong to OS for each counting r.v. η independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } . In particular, if
P ( η = n ) = ( 1 p ) p n 2 , n { 2 , 3 , } , p ( 0 , 1 ) ,
then d.f.s F ξ ( η ) and F S ( η ) with tails
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) = ( 1 p ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) 2 1 p F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) , F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) = F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) , x 0 ,
belong to the class of generalized subexponential distributions.
Theorem 2 implies that d.f. F ξ ( η ) belongs to the class OS for each counting r.v. η independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } such that E η < . In a special case, when the counting random variable is defined by the equality (18), according to Theorem 2, we obtain that the distribution function with tail
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) = 1 p p 2 F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) n = 2 p n k = 1 n F ξ 1 ( x ) k 1 , x 0 ,
belongs to the class OS .
Finally, by Theorem 3, we obtain that d.f. F S ( η ) is generalized subexponential if counting r.v. η is independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } and E e λ η < for each λ > 0 . In particular, if
P ( η = n ) = 1 c 13 e n 2 , n N , c 13 = n = 1 e n 2 ,
then d.f. F S ( η ) with tail
F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) = 1 c 13 n = 1 e n 2 k = 1 n F ξ k ¯ ( x ) , x 0 ,
belongs to the class OS .
Example 2. 
Let { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } be independent r.v.s such that
F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) = I ( , 1 ) ( x ) + e 1 x x 2 I [ 1 , ) ( x ) , F ¯ ξ k ( x ) = I ( , 1 ) ( x ) + e 1 k 1 e x x 2 I [ 1 , ) ( x ) , k { 2 , 3 , } .
According to the results of [58,59] d.f.s F ξ k belongs to the class OS for all k N . In addition,
lim sup x sup n 1 1 n k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) = 1 ,
and
lim inf x inf n 1 1 n k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) F ¯ ξ 1 ( x ) = 1 1 2 e .
Hence, the sequence of r.v.s { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , , } also satisfies the conditions of Theorems 1–3.
Theorem 1 gives that d.f.s F ξ ( η ) and F S ( η ) belong to OS for each counting r.v. η independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } . In a particular case, when r.v. η is distributed according to the geometric law (18) d.f.s F ξ ( η ) and F S ( η ) with tails
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) = I ( , 1 ) ( x ) + ( 1 p ) e p 2 n = 2 e x p x 2 n k = 2 n e 1 k 1 I [ 1 , ) ( x ) , F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) = F ¯ ξ 1 ( x )
belongs to the class OS .
Similarly, Theorem 2 implies that d.f. F ξ ( η ) belongs to class OS for each counting r.v. η independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } such that E η < . If the counting random variable is defined by equality (18), then by Theorem 2, we obtain that the distribution function with tail
F ¯ ξ ( η ) ( x ) = I ( , 1 ) ( x ) + 1 p p 2 n = 2 p n k = 1 n F ¯ ξ k ( x ) j = 1 k 1 F ξ j ( x ) I [ 1 , ) ( x )
belongs to the class OS .
Theorem 3 gives that d.f. F S ( η ) belongs to class OS if the counting r.v. η is independent of { ξ 1 , ξ 2 , } and E e λ η < for each λ > 0 . In particular, if η is distributed according to the Poisson law
P ( η = n ) = μ n n ! e μ , n N 0 = { 0 , 1 , 2 , } , μ > 0 ,
then d.f. F S ( η ) with tail
F ¯ S ( η ) ( x ) = e μ n = 1 μ n n ! k = 1 n F ξ k ¯ ( x ) , x 1 ,
belongs to class OS .

8. Concluding Remarks

In this paper, we study distribution functions obtained by randomly stopping minimum, maximum, minimum of sums and maximum of sums of random variables. Primary random variables are considered to be real-valued, independent and possibly differently distributed. The random variable defining the stopping moment is integer-valued, nonnegative and not degenerate at zero. We find conditions when the distribution functions of these randomly stopped structures belong to the class of generalized subexponential distributions. The belonging of the distributions of randomly stopped structures to the class of generalized subexponential distributions can be determined either by primary random variables or by counting random variables. In this paper, we consider the case where a set of primary random variables has a decisive value. Our main results are formulated in Theorems 1–3. The primary random variables considered in all theorems can be differently distributed. But the additional conditions of all theorems are satisfied in the case where the primary random variables are identically distributed.
In the future, it would be interesting to study the case when some randomly stopped structure belongs to the class of generalized subexponential distributions due to the specific properties of the counting random variable. In this case, primary random variables should probably have significantly lighter tails compared to the counting random variable tail.
On the other hand, it would be interesting to study the closure properties of randomly stopped structures that are not related to the sum or maximum, but related to the product of random variables, as was performed in paper [60], for instance. In the class of generalized subexponential distributions, this would be easier compared to other classes due to the results obtained in article [26].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.Š.; methodology, J.K. and J.Š.; software, J.K.; validation, J.Š.; formal analysis, J.K.; investigation, J.K. and J.Š.; writing—original draft preparation, J.K.; writing—review and editing, J.Š.; visualization, J.Š.; supervision, J.Š.; project administration, J.Š.; funding acquisition, J.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express deep gratitude to the academic editor and anonymous referees for their valuable suggestions and comments, which have helped to improve the previous version of the paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Embrechts, P.; Goldie, C.M. On closure and factorization properties of subexponential and related distributions. J. Aust. Math. Soc. Ser. A 1980, 29, 243–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Rolski, T.; Schmidli, H.; Schmidt, V.; Teugels, J. Stochastic Processes for Insurance and Finance; John Wiley and Sons: Chichester, UK, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  3. Asmussen, S.; Albrecher, H. Ruin Probabilities; World Scientific: Singapore, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  4. Buhlmann, H. Mathematical Methods in Risk Theory; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1970. [Google Scholar]
  5. Gerber, H.U. An Introduction to Mathematical Risk Theory; S.S. Huebner Foundation for Insurance Education, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1979. [Google Scholar]
  6. Grandell, J. Aspects of Risk Theory; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  7. Schmidli, H. Stochastic Control in Insurance; Springer: London, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  8. Klüppelberg, C. Asymptotic ordering of risks and ruin probabilities. Insur. Math. Econ. 1993, 12, 259–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Shimura, T.; Watanabe, T. Infinite divisibility and generalized subexponentiality. Bernoulli 2005, 11, 445–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yu, C.; Wang, Y. Tail behaviour of supremum of a random walk when Cramer’s condition fails. Front. Math. China 2014, 9, 432–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wang, Y.; Xu, H.; Cheng, D.; Yu, C. The local asymptotic estimation for the supremum of a random walk with generalized strong subexponential summands. Stat. Pap. 2018, 59, 99–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Cheng, F. A note on randomly weighted sums of dependent subexponential random variables. Chin. Ann. Math. Ser. B 2018, 41, 441–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Shimura, T.; Watanabe, T. Subexponential densities of compound Poisson sums and the supremum of a random walk. Kyoto J. Math. 2023, 63, 223–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bingham, N.H.; Goldie, C.M.; Teugels, J.L. Regular Variation; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  15. Seneta, E. Regularly Varying Functions. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Volume 508; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1976. [Google Scholar]
  16. Resnick, S.I. Extreme Values, Regular Variation and Point Process; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  17. Leipus, R.; Šiaulys, J.; Konstantinides, D. Closure Properties for Heavy-Tailed and Related Distributions; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  18. Klüppelberg, C. Asymptotic ordering of distribution functions and convolution semigroups. Semigr. Forum 1990, 40, 77–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Baltrūnas, A.; Omey, E.; Van Gulck, S. Hazard rates and subexponential distributions. Publ. l’Institut Math. 2006, 80, 29–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Watanabe, T.; Yamamuro, K. Ratio of the tail of an infinitely divisible distribution on the line to that of its Lévy measure. Electron. J. Probab. 2010, 15, 44–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Cheng, D.; Wang, Y. Asymptotic behavior of the ratio of tail probabilities of sum and maximum of independent random variables. Lith. Math. J. 2012, 52, 29–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Lin, J.; Wang, Y. New examples of heavy tailed O-subexponential distributions and related closure properties. Stat. Probab. Lett. 2012, 82, 427–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Hägele, M.; Lehtomaa, J. Large deviation for a class of multivariate heavy-tailed risk processes used in insurance and finance. J. Risk. Financ. Manag. 2021, 14, 202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Konstantinides, D.; Leipus, R.; Šiaulys, J. A note on product-convolution for generalized subexponential distributions. Nonlinear Anal. Model. Control 2022, 27, 1054–1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Yao, H.; Taimre, T. Estimating tail probabilities of random sums of phase-type-scale mixture random variables. Algorithms 2022, 15, 350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mikutavičius, G.; Šiaulys, J. Product convolution of generalized subexponential distributions. Mathematics 2023, 11, 248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Karasevičiene, J.; Šiaulys, J. Randomly stopped sums with generalized subexponential distributions. Axioms 2023, 12, 641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Feller, W. One-sided analogues of Karamata’s regular variation. Enseign. Math. 1969, 15, 107–121. [Google Scholar]
  29. Tang, Q.; Yan, J. A sharp inequality for the tail probabilities of i.i.d. r.v.’s with dominatedly varying tails. Sci. China Ser. A 2002, 45, 1006–1011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Tang, Q.; Tsitsiashvili, G. Precise estimates for the ruin probability in the finite horizon in a discrete-time risk model with heavy-tailed insurance and financial risks. Stoch. Process. Appl. 2003, 108, 299–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Cai, J.; Tang, Q. On max-type equivalence and convolution closure of heavy-tailed distributions and their applications. J. Appl. Probab. 2004, 41, 117–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Konstantinides, D. A class of heavy tailed distributions. J. Numer. Appl. Math. 2008, 96, 127–138. [Google Scholar]
  33. Leipus, R.; Šiaulys, J. Closure of some heavy-tailed distribution classes under random convolution. Lith. Math. J. 2012, 52, 249–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Danilenko, S.; Šiaulys, J. Randomly stopped sums of not identically distributed heavy tailed random variables. Stat. Probab. Lett. 2016, 113, 84–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Cline, D.B.H. Intermediate regular and Π variation. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 1994, 68, 594–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Cline, D.B.H.; Samorodnitsky, G. Subexponentiallity of the product of independent random variables. Stoch. Process. Appl. 1994, 49, 75–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Schlegel, S. Ruin probabilities in perturbed risk models. Insur. Math. Econ. 1998, 22, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Jelenković, P.R.; Lazar, A.A. Asymptotic results for multiplexing subexponential on-off processes. Adv. Appl. Probab. 1999, 31, 394–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ng, K.W.; Tang, Q.; Yan, J.; Yang, H. Precise large deviations for sums of random variables with consistently varying tails. J. Appl. Probab. 2004, 41, 93–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Tang, Q. Asymptotics for the finite time ruin probability in the renewal model with consistent variation. Stoch. Models 2004, 20, 281–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Aleškevičienė, A.; Leipus, L.; Šiaulys, J. Tail behavior of random sums under consistent variation with application to the compound renewal risk model. Extremes 2008, 11, 261–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Foss, S.; Korshunov, D.; Zachary, S. An Introduction to Heavy-Tailed and Subexponential Distributions, 2nd ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  43. Andrulytė, I.M.; Manstavičius, M.; Šiaulys, J. Randomly stopped maximum and maximum of sums with consistently varying distributions. Mod. Stoch. Theory Appl. 2017, 4, 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Buldygin, V.V.; Indlekofer, K.H.; Klesov, O.I.; Steinebach, J.G. Pseudo-Regularly Varying Functions and Generalized Renewal Processes; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  45. Paukštys, S.; Šiaulys, J.; Leipus, R. Truncated moments for heavy-tailed and related distribution classes. Mathematics 2023, 11, 2172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Karamata, J. Sur un mode de croissance régulière. Théorèmes fundamentoux. Bull. Soc. Math. Fr. 1933, 61, 55–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Embrechts, P.; Klüppelberg, C.; Mikosch, T. Modelling Extremal Events for Insurance and Finance; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  48. Bingham, N.H. Regular variation and probability: The early years. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 2007, 200, 357–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Jessen, A.; Mikosch, T. Regularly varying functions. Publ. Ins. Math. Nouv. Sér. 2006, 94, 172–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sprindys, J.; Šiaulys, J. Regularly distributed randomly stopped sum, minimum and maximum. Nonlinear Anal. Model. Control 2020, 25, 509–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Su, C.; Chen, Y. Behaviors of the product of independent random variables. Int. J. Math. Anal. 2007, 1, 21–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Albin, J.M.P.; Sunden, M. On the asymptotic behaviour of Lévy processes, part I: Subexponential and exponential processes. Stoch. Process. Their Appl. 2009, 119, 281–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Xu, H.; Scheutzov, M.; Wang, Y. On a transformation between distributions obeing the principle of a single big jump. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2015, 430, 672–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Danilenko, S.; Šiaulys, J.; Stepanauskas, G. Closure properties of O-exponential distributions. Stat. Probab. Lett. 2018, 140, 63–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Cui, Z.; Wang, Y. On the long tail property of product convolution. Lith. Math. J. 2020, 60, 315–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Xu, H.; Wang, Y.; Cheng, D.; Yu, C. On the closure under infinitely divisible distribution roots. Lith. Math. J. 2022, 62, 259–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Leipus, R.; Šiaulys, J.; Konstantinides, D. Minimum of heavy-tailed random variables is not heavy-tailed. AIMS Math. 2023, 8, 13066–13072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Cline, D.B.H. Convolution tails, product tails and domain of attraction. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields 1986, 72, 529–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Watanabe, T. The Wiener condition and the conjectures of Embrechts and Goldie. Ann. Probab. 2019, 47, 1221–1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Pakes, A.G. Tails of stopped random products: The factoid and some relatives. J. Appl. Probab. 2008, 45, 1161–1180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Karasevičienė, J.; Šiaulys, J. Randomly Stopped Minimum, Maximum, Minimum of Sums and Maximum of Sums with Generalized Subexponential Distributions. Axioms 2024, 13, 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms13020085

AMA Style

Karasevičienė J, Šiaulys J. Randomly Stopped Minimum, Maximum, Minimum of Sums and Maximum of Sums with Generalized Subexponential Distributions. Axioms. 2024; 13(2):85. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms13020085

Chicago/Turabian Style

Karasevičienė, Jūratė, and Jonas Šiaulys. 2024. "Randomly Stopped Minimum, Maximum, Minimum of Sums and Maximum of Sums with Generalized Subexponential Distributions" Axioms 13, no. 2: 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms13020085

APA Style

Karasevičienė, J., & Šiaulys, J. (2024). Randomly Stopped Minimum, Maximum, Minimum of Sums and Maximum of Sums with Generalized Subexponential Distributions. Axioms, 13(2), 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms13020085

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop