Chapter 9 §11 proved that a Markov chain settles down
to a unique steady state, but only under three
hypotheses on the eigenvalues of its transition matrix,
one of them diagonalizability. It closed with a promise:
the Perron–Frobenius theorem would give the same
conclusions “for every stochastic matrix with some power
having all entries positive, without assuming
diagonalizability and without computing eigenvalues”.
This section keeps that promise, using the limit theorem
of §05. It then asks what happens when no power is
positive. Irreducible chains still have a unique steady
state, and they approach it on average even when they
oscillate. Reducible chains can have many steady states,
and among them the absorbing chains, which end in a
trap, have an exact theory built on the Neumann
series.
Conventions. Stochastic means
column-stochastic, as in Definition 9.11.1:
and every
column sums to ,
that is, . The entry is the probability
of moving to state from
state , and a
Markov chain is (Definition 9.11.2).
Many books use rows and the transposed matrix; we never
do. The order
is entrywise.
Steady
states and the Perron root
We first place stochastic matrices inside the theory
of this chapter. Since , the entry is the
probability of being in state after steps when starting
from state . By Lemma 19.2.1 (a) it is
positive exactly when the graph has a walk of
length from to : the edges of the graph
are the moves the chain can make in one step, and the
walks are the routes it can take.
Proposition
19.6.1 (The Perron Root of a Stochastic
Matrix)
Let be stochastic. Then:
- (a) , and is a positive left
eigenvector for it;
- (b) the steady
states of are
exactly the nonnegative eigenvectors for whose entries
sum to ;
- (c) if is irreducible, then
has
exactly one steady state , and .
Idea. Example (An irreducible stochastic matrix)
already found these facts for one matrix, and the
argument there is general. The column sums make a left eigenvector
for , and no
eigenvalue is larger in modulus; so a steady state is a
nonnegative eigenvector for the Perron root; when is irreducible,
Perron–Frobenius with the normalization leaves
room for only one.
Proof.
(a) By Proposition 9.11.3
(c), and . By Corollary 10.10.5
(a), every eigenvalue has modulus at most . So .
(b) This is Definition 9.11.2 read
with (a): a steady state is a probability vector with .
(c) By Theorem 19.3.2 (a),
there is with ;
then is a steady state with
. If is any
steady state, it is a nonnegative eigenvector, so
with by Theorem 19.3.2 (c),
and . Hence .
In the notation of §03, the Perron root of a
stochastic matrix is , the all-ones vector is
a positive left eigenvector, and for an irreducible
stochastic matrix the steady state is the right Perron
vector.
Warning. A unique positive
steady state does not make the chain converge.
The swap is stochastic and irreducible, so
by (c) it has exactly one steady state, , and
it is positive. Yet the chain started at alternates
and never approaches it.
Existence and uniqueness of the steady state come from
irreducibility; convergence needs more.
The
long-run theorem
The “more” is primitivity. Here are the three
conclusions of Theorem 9.11.4, in the
same words, under the hypothesis that Chapter 9 §11
promised.
Theorem
19.6.2 (Long-Run Behavior of a Markov
Chain)
Let be stochastic, and suppose that for some
. Then:
- (a) has exactly one steady
state , and
;
- (b)
entrywise as ;
- (c) for every
probability vector , the Markov
chain converges entrywise to .
Idea. For a stochastic matrix, Theorem 19.5.2 has
, and the
left eigenvector can be taken to be , so the limit
becomes once the
steady state is normalized by . The
chain inherits the limit column by column.
Compare the hypotheses with those of Theorem 9.11.4. That
theorem asked for three facts about the eigenvalues:
diagonalizable
over , , and for every other eigenvalue. Chapter 10 §10
(Corollary 10.10.5)
removed the first, but still asked to locate every
eigenvalue on the unit circle. The new hypothesis is a
statement about the zero pattern of one
power of ,
checked by multiplying matrices; no eigenvalue is
computed, and none needs to be. The last two eigenvalue
conditions become conclusions, by Proposition 19.5.1 (c)
and Theorem 19.3.2 (b),
and diagonalizability is simply irrelevant. By Corollary 19.5.5 the
hypothesis can often be checked without multiplying at
all: an irreducible stochastic matrix with one positive
diagonal entry, a state that can stay put, qualifies. In
the vocabulary of probability, a stochastic matrix with
a positive power is called regular.
Example
(A Chain that Cannot Be Diagonalized)
A token moves among three positions. From position
it always moves
to ; from it moves to or with probability each; from it moves to or with probability each. So Show that Theorem 9.11.4 does
not apply but Theorem 19.6.2 does,
and find the long-run distribution.
Solution. Diagonalization
fails. Expanding along the
first column, For the double eigenvalue, has rank
: its first two
rows are independent, and the third is twice the first
minus the second. So , and is not diagonalizable
(Theorem 9.4.1). Theorem 9.11.4 does
not apply.
A positive power. Squaring, So Theorem 19.6.2 applies
with . ( still has a zero
at position :
three steps cannot take the token from to .)
The steady state. reads and . So
, then
, and is a multiple of
. Scaling
to sum , Check: . In the long run
the token is at position four times out of nine,
wherever it starts.
What the Jordan block does. Solving the
recurrence exactly (for instance from the Jordan form,
as in Chapter 10 §10) gives which one can confirm for against . The
factor in the
second formula comes from the Jordan block
for , whose
powers carry the entry (Chapter
10 §10): the error decays like rather than
. It still
decays, and the theorem never needed to know.
Quick check. Does Theorem 19.6.2 apply
to ? If so,
what is ?
Solution. Yes: is stochastic and
. The steady state solves , so
, and .
The hypothesis of Theorem 19.6.2 is also
necessary for the theorem as stated: if
with , then is primitive (exercise
C2). Without the positivity of it is not needed
for convergence: has no positive power,
yet its powers converge to , whose
steady state has a zero entry.
Irreducible chains: convergence on average
Now drop primitivity but keep irreducibility. By Proposition 19.6.1 (c)
the steady state is still unique
and positive, but by Theorem 19.5.3 and Theorem 19.5.4 the
chain has
eigenvalues on the unit circle, and its powers do not
converge (Corollary 10.10.5
(b)). What survives is convergence of
averages. The average is, entry by entry, the
average over the first steps of the
probability of being in each state; read through
linearity of expectation (see the end of this section),
it is the expected fraction of those steps spent there.
It is this that settles down.
Theorem
19.6.3 (Averages of an Irreducible
Chain)
Let be stochastic and irreducible, with
steady state . Then:
- (a) as
;
- (b) for every
probability vector , the averages
of the
chain converge to ;
- (c) converges if and
only if is
primitive.
Idea. Split every vector into its
component along and a remainder
whose entries sum to . The remainder lies in
the image of , by a dimension count, and on that image the
sum
telescopes: , which
stays bounded, so dividing by kills it. The component
along is
fixed by every power.
Proof.
- (a) Let , the kernel of the nonzero
linear functional , so by
Rank–Nullity (Theorem 2.3.1). Since
, the image of lies in . The kernel of on is the real
eigenspace of
for ; it contains
, and it has dimension at most by Theorem 9.3.1 and Theorem 19.3.2 (b).
(The real and the complex kernel of the real matrix
have the
same dimension,
minus its rank, since row reduction uses only real
arithmetic.) So by Rank–Nullity, and an inclusion
of subspaces of equal dimension is an equality: .
Now fix . Since , the
vector lies in , so for some . As
for every , Every is stochastic (Proposition 9.11.3
(b)), so its entries lie in and . Hence each entry of
has modulus at most , which tends to because , by the
Archimedean property, a consequence of completeness
(fact (A1) in the introduction to Chapter 16). Dividing
the display by ,
. Taking
gives the convergence of column , for each .
(b) by (a),
entry by entry as in the proof of Theorem 19.6.2
(c).
(c) is Theorem 19.6.2 (b).
Suppose . Then tends both to and to , so , and every
column of lies
in the real eigenspace for , which is by the
proof of (a). Each column of has entries summing to , and both properties
survive the limit, by the elementary algebra of limits
recalled in the introduction to Chapter 16 (limits
respect sums, and a nonstrict inequality survives a
limit), so each column of is a probability
vector on the line , namely
itself.
Thus . As in the proof of Theorem 19.5.3, the
entries of
are then
positive for all large , so is primitive.
The proof of (a) used irreducibility only to know
that the eigenspace for is a line through a
probability vector ; nothing about
the period or the other eigenvalues entered.
Example
(A Walk that Oscillates)
A walker on three sites in a row steps to
a neighboring site at every step, choosing each neighbor
with probability when there are
two. So Show that does not converge,
and compute the averages of Theorem 19.6.3
exactly.
Solution. The edges of are , , and . Every site
reaches every other through site , so is irreducible (Theorem 19.2.5); and
every edge joins site to , so closed walks
have even length and the period is . The steady state
solves , , so . Multiplying out, So for odd and for even
, and since
the
powers do not converge. A walker who starts at site
is at site at every even step and
never at an odd one.
For the averages, note that . For , the sum
contains once,
times, and times, so For there is one more term, , which
changes the average by at most in each entry. So
the walker spends, in the long run, half its time at the
middle site and a quarter at each end, although at no
single time is its distribution close to if it starts at
a site.
The oscillation can also be removed rather than
averaged. The lazy chain , which
at each step stays put with probability and otherwise
moves by , is
stochastic, irreducible, and has positive diagonal, so
it is primitive by Corollary 19.5.5, and
it has the same steady state; exercise C1 works this
out.
Reducible
chains: many steady states
Without irreducibility, uniqueness fails too. The
chain can split into parts that never communicate, and
each can carry its own equilibrium.
Example
(Two Traps)
States and
exchange with
each other and are never left; state is never left either;
state stays with
probability
and otherwise moves to , or with probability each: Find all steady states, and the limit of the
chain from each starting state.
Solution. Steady states.
Let with a probability
vector. The last row gives , so
. The first
row then gives , so ; the second
and third rows then hold automatically. So
with and
. Writing
and ,
the steady states are exactly the whole segment
of Chapter 18. There are infinitely many, and is a plane: , since
, the first factor from the block
of states and
from state , the
second from the block’s other eigenvalue and from state
. In particular
is not
irreducible, by Proposition 19.6.1
(c).
Limits. The only eigenvalue of modulus is , so converges by Corollary 10.10.5
(b). Its limit
satisfies , as in the proof of Theorem 19.6.3 (c),
and its columns are limits of probability vectors, hence
probability vectors; so each column of is a steady state.
Columns and of every have zeros in rows
and , by induction on : maps a vector with
zeros in those rows to a combination of its own first
two columns, which again has zeros there. So columns
and of are steady states
with , that
is, .
Column of is , so column
of every power,
and of , is
. For column , write it as and find from a conserved
quantity: the row vector satisfies , as a column-by-column check shows
(column : ). Then for all , hence , and entry gives . Thus with last column . The long run depends on
where the chain starts: from state , the chain ends up in
the pair
with probability and in state
with probability
, the ratio
of the one-step probabilities of leaving for each.
In general the steady states of a stochastic matrix
form a convex set, since a convex combination of
probability vectors fixed by is again one; the
example shows it can be a segment rather than a point.
One steady state for each part of the chain that, once
entered, is never left, and all convex combinations of
these: that is the general picture, which we do not
prove here.
Absorbing
chains
The simplest traps are single states. A state is
absorbing if , so that
column of is : once there,
the chain stays. Absorbing states model the end of a
process: a game won or lost, a customer who has left, a
molecule that has reacted.
Definition
19.6.1 (Absorbing Chain)
A stochastic matrix is absorbing if
it has at least one absorbing state, and from
every state some absorbing state can be
reached: for every there are an absorbing
state and an
with . The
states that are not absorbing are called
transient.
Number the states so that the transient states
come first and the absorbing states last. Column for a transient splits into the
probabilities of moving to transient states and to
absorbing states, and the column of an absorbing state
is a standard basis vector. So has the block form
with and . Multiplying blocks and
inducting on ,
since has lower-left block . The entry is the
probability of being at transient state after steps from transient
state ; the column
sums of are
the probabilities of not yet having been absorbed.
Lemma
19.6.4 (Transient Mass Dies Out)
If is
absorbing, with
as above, then every eigenvalue of has modulus less than
, and .
Idea. Every column of sums to at most , which only gives . But after
enough steps every transient state has leaked some mass
into an absorbing state, so every column of a suitable
power sums
to strictly less than , and the column-sum
bound of Chapter 16 gives .
Proof. For absorbing and any , , since all terms are nonnegative;
so the probability of being at never decreases. Fix a
transient . By Definition 19.6.1
there are an absorbing and with ,
and then for every . Let
be the largest of the over the transient
. Column of sums to (Proposition 9.11.3
(b)) and has a positive entry in the
absorbing rows, so column of sums to less than
. Since , its
largest absolute column sum is some , and by Corollary 16.4.2, . By Theorem 9.10.1 with
, the
eigenvalues of are the -th powers of those of
, so and . Finally by Theorem 10.10.2.
The Neumann series now does all the work.
Theorem
19.6.5 (Absorbing Chains)
Let be
absorbing, in the block form above. Then:
- (a) is invertible,
and the fundamental matrix satisfies ;
- (b)
entrywise;
- (c) every column of
the
matrix is a probability vector.
Idea. The lemma gives , which is
exactly what the Neumann series needs. In the block
formula for ,
the lower-left block is times a partial sum of
that series, so it converges to ; and column sums
equal to pass to
the limit.
Proof.
(a) By Lemma 19.6.4 and Theorem 10.10.6,
converges and equals . Each partial sum is , and a limit of
nonnegative numbers is nonnegative, since a nonstrict
inequality survives a limit (the elementary algebra of
limits, recalled in the introduction to Chapter 16); so
.
(b) By the block
formula, the upper-left block of is (Lemma 19.6.4), and the
lower-left block is . Each entry of is a fixed linear
combination of entries of the partial sum, so by the
algebra of limits, (B3) of Chapter 10 §10. The other two
blocks do not depend on .
(c) Every column
of sums to
, and so does
every column of the limit in (b). For a transient , column of the limit is ,
so the entries of sum to ; they are nonnegative
because .
Reading the answer. The theorem is
pure algebra; its meaning comes from reading entries as
probabilities. The -entry of the limit in (b), for absorbing
and transient
, is the limit of
the nondecreasing probabilities of being at after steps from : the
probability of being absorbed at . So is the matrix
of absorption probabilities. Two further readings use a
fact from probability that this book does not develop,
linearity of expectation: the expected
number of steps at which an event occurs is the sum over
the steps of the probabilities of that event. With it,
since
is the probability of being at transient at step from , counting the visit at step when ; and summing over
, the column sums
are the expected numbers of
steps before absorption. Nothing in the proofs
depends on these readings.
Example
(Gambler’s Ruin)
A gambler holds , , or coins and bets one coin
at a time on a fair toss, winning or losing a coin with
probability
each. Play stops when the gambler holds coins (ruin) or coins (target). Find
the fundamental matrix, the expected length of play, and
the probability of reaching the target, from each
starting fortune.
Solution. The transient states are
the fortunes , in that order, and the absorbing ones are
and , in that order. From
fortune the
gambler moves to or
with probability each, so the first row of recording ruin from
fortune and the
second reaching the target from fortune . Each column of sums to , and every fortune
reaches by
losing, so the chain is absorbing.
The fundamental matrix. Solve with
. The result is check the first column: , and the other columns
likewise. A gambler starting with coins holds exactly
coins at steps on average,
counting the start, and holds or coins at one step each
on average.
Length of play. : from
fortunes
the game lasts ,
, tosses on average.
Absorption. From fortune the gambler reaches the
target with probability and is ruined with
probability . Each column sums to , as Theorem 19.6.5 (c)
requires: the game ends with probability . Both answers match the
classical formulas for a fair game with target : success
probability and
expected length , which gives .
The matrix of
this example has eigenvalues and , of
modulus less than
as Lemma 19.6.4 requires;
but the lemma was proved without finding them, which is
the pattern of this whole section.
Exercises
A. Check your
understanding
Exercise
(A1)
- (a) State the
long-run theorem Theorem 19.6.2, and
name the three hypotheses of Theorem 9.11.4 that it
no longer needs.
- (b) True or false:
every irreducible stochastic matrix has exactly one
steady state. Justify your answer.
- (c) True or false:
for every irreducible stochastic matrix, converges. Justify
your answer.
- (d) True or false:
if a stochastic matrix has two different steady states,
it has infinitely many. Justify your answer.
- (e) In an absorbing
chain, what do the column sums of the fundamental matrix
measure, and why do the columns of sum to ?
Solution.
(a) If is stochastic and
for
some , then has exactly one steady
state , it
is positive, , and every chain
converges to . It no longer
assumes that is
diagonalizable, that , or that
every other eigenvalue has modulus less than .
(b) True, by Proposition 19.6.1
(c); moreover the steady state is positive.
(c) False. The
swap is irreducible and
stochastic, and its powers alternate between and itself. By Theorem 19.6.3 (c),
the powers converge exactly when the matrix is
primitive.
(d) True. If
are steady states, then for is
nonnegative, has entries summing to , and is fixed by ; different give different vectors,
since .
(e) The column
sum is
the expected number of steps before absorption from
transient state .
The columns of
sum to because
the columns of do and (Theorem 19.6.5 (c)):
absorption is certain.
B. Practice
Exercise
(B1: When does the long-run theorem apply?)
For each stochastic matrix, determine whether Theorem 19.6.2
applies. Justify your answer, and when it applies, find
the limit of .
- (a) .
- (b) .
- (c) .
Solution.
(a) It applies.
The edges of
are , , and the loop
. The cycle
reaches every state from every state, so is irreducible (Theorem 19.2.5). It
has the positive diagonal entry , so it is
primitive by Corollary 19.5.5. The
steady state solves , , so , and ,
every column equal to . Check: .
(b) It does not
apply. This is a permutation matrix, so every power is a
permutation matrix (Lemma 3.4.7) and
has zero entries. Its powers cycle with period (Example (The Cyclic Permutation))
and do not converge.
(c) It does not
apply. Every power is lower triangular with -entry , as one checks by
induction: . The powers converge nonetheless,
to :
state is
absorbing, and is the unique
steady state, with a zero entry.
Exercise
(B2: A three-state chain)
Let .
- (a) Show that is stochastic and that
.
- (b) Find the steady
state, and hence and the long-run distribution of every
chain with this transition matrix.
Solution.
- (a) The entries are
nonnegative and the columns sum to . Multiplying out,
- (b) : the first row gives , so , and the third gives , so . So is a multiple of
, and
scaling to sum
gives . By Theorem 19.6.2, ,
every column equal to , and every chain
converges to whatever its
initial distribution.
Exercise
(B3: An unfair game)
A gambler holds or coins and wins each
toss with probability , losing with
probability . Play stops at
or coins. Find the
fundamental matrix, the expected length of play, and the
probability of reaching coins from each
starting fortune.
Solution. Order the states as (transient) and
(absorbing).
From : to with probability , to with . From : to with , to with . So The chain is absorbing, since from either
fortune repeated losses reach . Then has
determinant , so by Theorem 0.9.8 The expected lengths of play are , and So the probability of reaching coins is from coin and from coins, far below the
fair values
and . The
columns of sum
to , as they
must.
C. Going deeper
Exercise
(C1: The lazy chain)
Let be stochastic and irreducible, with
steady state , and let .
- (a) Prove that is stochastic and
primitive, and that is its unique
steady state. Deduce that .
- (b) Let be the walk of Example (A Walk that Oscillates).
Show that is the
matrix of exercise B2, and that for every , where .
Hint: write in terms of and .
Solution.
(a) , and , so is stochastic. By Exercise (C1: Shifting by the identity)
(a) with ,
is
primitive, say ; then , so
is primitive. Also . By Theorem 19.6.2 (a),
has exactly one
steady state, so it is , and by part (b)
of that theorem .
(b) With as in Example (A Walk that Oscillates),
the matrix of Exercise (B2: A three-state chain),
and . Put , every
column equal to . Then ; ,
since each column of sums to , so ; and , so . Also . Subtracting, , so . If
, then so the formula holds for every by induction,
starting from . The lazy walk converges although the
walk itself oscillates, and its distance to the limit
halves at every step.
Exercise
(C2: The converse of the long-run theorem)
Let be stochastic.
- (a) Prove that if
for some ,
then is
primitive.
- (b) Give a
stochastic with
for a probability vector , but no power of
positive. Which
entry of
is responsible?
Solution.
(a) The limit
has
-entry . Each of the
entries of
converges to
a positive number, so it is positive for all beyond some ; for larger than all the
, . So is primitive.
(b) . By induction
: indeed has first row
and second row . So
, while every power has -entry . The responsible entry
is : (a)
fails exactly because is not
positive.
Exercise
(C3: First-step analysis)
Let be
absorbing, with fundamental matrix and 𝛕.
- (a) Prove that , and
deduce that for every transient . Interpret this
equation.
- (b) Prove, by
multiplying by ,
that
satisfies , and interpret it.
- (c) Use (a) to
recompute the expected lengths of play of Example (Gambler’s Ruin)
without inverting a matrix.
Solution.
(a) because
is the inverse
of , so
.
Multiplying on the left by , 𝛕𝛕, whose -th entry is . In words: from , one step is taken, the
chain lands at transient with probability , and from there
the expected remaining time is ; landing at an
absorbing state contributes nothing more.
(b) Multiply
on
the left by :
,
that is, . The probability of
absorption at
from is the
probability of stepping into at once, plus the
probability of stepping to a transient and being absorbed at
from
there.
(c) With as in Example (Gambler’s Ruin),
(a) reads , , . The first and third equations
give , so , giving and . (The
system has only one solution, since its matrix is , which is
invertible by Theorem 19.6.5
(a).)