Open Access
Issue
Wuhan Univ. J. Nat. Sci.
Volume 30, Number 6, December 2025
Page(s) 549 - 557
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/wujns/2025306549
Published online 09 January 2026

© Wuhan University 2025

Licence Creative CommonsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

0 Introduction

In many probabilistic and statistical models, random variables are dependent. Consequently, scholars have introduced many types of dependent random variables, such as negatively associated (NA) random variables, negatively orthant dependent (NOD) random variables, and extend negatively dependent (END) random variables and so on. Among these, widely orthant dependent (WOD) random variables represent one of the most general forms of dependence. They were first introduced by Wang et al[1], defined as follows:

Definition 1   The random variables {Xn, n1} are called to be widely upper orthant dependent (WUOD) random variables, if there exist finite sequences of real numbers {gU(n), n1} such that for each n1, x1,x2,,xnR,

P ( X 1 > x 1 ,   X 2 > x 2 , ,   X n > x n ) g U ( n ) i = 1 n P ( X i > x i ) .

The random variables {Xn, n1} are called to be widely lower orthant dependent (WLOD) random variables, if there exist finite sequences of real numbers {gL(n), n1} such that for each n1, x1, x2,, xnR,

P ( X 1 x 1 ,   X 2 x 2 , ,   X n x n ) g L ( n ) i = 1 n P ( X i > x i ) .

The random variables {Xn, n1} are called to be widely orthant dependent (WOD) random variables, if the random variables {Xn, n1} are both WUOD and WLOD. Let g(n)=max{gU(n), gL(n)} be called dominated coefficients.

When gU(n)=gL(n)=1, {Xn, n1} are NOD random variables[2]. When gU(n)=gL(n)=M1, {Xn, n1} are END random variables[3]. Therefore, WOD random variables represent a broad structure of dependent random variables.

Since the concept of WOD random variables was introduced, many scholars have devoted efforts to studying their limit properties and applications, achieving significant results. For example, Wang et al[4] obtained the precise large deviations; Qiu et al[5] established the complete convergence and moment complete convergence of the weighted sums; Liu et al[6] derived the moment complete convergence; Wang et al[7] and Chen et al[8] studied the asymptotic of ruin probabilities in renewal risk models based on WOD sequences; Shen[9] proved the Bernstein-type probability inequality; Wang et al[10] investigated complete convergence and its applications in nonparametric regression models; Ding et al[11] provided results on the complete convergence of weighted sums; Song et al[12-14] analyzed the convergence of moving average processes generated by WOD random variables, and so on.

Inspired by m-END and WOD dependence structures, Fang et al[15] introduced the concept of m-WOD random variables, defined as follows:

Definition 2   For fix integer m1, the random variables {Xn, n1} are called to be m-WOD if for any n2, i1, i2,, inN+, such that |ik-ij|m for all 1kjn, the Xi1, Xi2,, Xin are also WOD random variables.

From the definition, we see that m-WOD random variables represent a broader class of dependence than WOD random variables. Therefore, investigating the complete convergence of m-WOD random variables is very interesting.

It is well-known that for sequencse of independent and identically distributed random variables {Xn, X, n1}, Spitzer[16] proved that EX=0 is equivalent to

n = 1 n - 1 P ( | j = 1 n X j | > ε n ) < ,   ε > 0 . (1)

and (1) is equivalent to

n = 1 n - 1 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k X j | > ε n ) < ,   ε > 0 . (2)

However, the converse does not hold for the dependent case, as shown in Ref. [17]. Therefore, it is more interesting to investigate (2) than (1), and we note that (2) implies Kolmogorov’s strong law of large numbers

1 n j = 1 n X j 0 ,      a . s .

Recently, Chen et al[18-19] obtained Spitzer’s law for maximum partial sums of WOD random variables. Inspired by the above study, this paper aims to generalize Chen’s results[18-19] to cases of complete convergence for m-WOD random variables.

Definition 3   The random variables {Xn, n1} are called to be stochastically dominated by a random variable X, if for any x>0,

P ( | X n | > x ) C P ( | X | > x ) ,   n 1

where the constant C>0.

In this paper, I(A) denotes the indicator function of an event A, the symbol C represents a positive constant, which can take different values in different places, even in the same formula. Let logn=lnmax{x,e}, X+=XI(X>0), g(n)=max{gU(n), gL(n)}.

1 Some Lemmas and Main Results

Lemma 1[15] The sequences {Xn, n1} are m-WOD random variables, if the functions {fn, n1} are non-decreasing (non-increasing), then {fn(Xn), n1} are also m-WOD random variables sequences with same dominating coefficients.

Lemma 2[15] The sequences {Xn, n1} are m-WOD random variables with dominating coefficients g(n). For every j1, the EXj=0 and E|Xj|p<. Then, there exist positive constants C1=C1(p,m), C2=C2(p,m), depending only on p and m, such that

E ( j = 1 n | X j | p ) [ C 1 ( p , m ) + C 2 ( p , m ) g ( n ) ] j = 1 n E | X j | p ,   1 < p 2 ;

E ( j = 1 n | X j | p ) C 1 ( p , m ) j = 1 n E | X j | p + C 2 ( p , m ) g ( n ) ( j = 1 n E X j 2 ) p / 2 ,   p > 2 .

Lemma 3[15] The sequences {Xn, n1} are m-WOD random variables with dominating coefficients g(n). For every j1, the EXj=0 and E|Xj|p<. Then, there exist positive constants C1=C1(p,m), C2=C2(p,m), depending only on p and m, such that

E ( m a x 1 k n j = 1 k | X j | p ) [ C 1 ( p , m ) + C 2 ( p , m ) g ( n ) ] ( l o g n ) p j = 1 n E | X j | p ,   1 < p 2 ;

E ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k X j | p ) C 1 ( p , m ) ( l o g n ) p j = 1 n E | X j | p + C 2 ( p , m ) g ( n ) ( l o g n ) p ( j = 1 n E X j 2 ) p / 2 ,   p > 2 .

Lemma 4[20] Constant a>0,b>0, let {Xn,n1} be stochastically dominated by X, then there exist positive constants C1,C2 such that the following inequalities are established:

E | X n | a I ( | X n | b ) C 1 [ E | X | a I ( | X | b ) + b a I ( | X | > b ) ] ,

E | X n | a I ( | X n | > b ) C 2 E | X | a I ( | X | > b ) .

Now, we present the main results, the proofs for them will be postponed in next section.

Theorem 1   Let {Xn, n1} be sequences of m-WOD random variables stochastically dominated by a random variable X with dominating coefficients g(n). Let 0<1/pα<1, E|X|p<. Assume that one of the following conditions holds:

A 1 : Let g(x) be a nondecreasing positive function on [0,+), such that g(x)/xτ0 for some τ>0.

A 2 : Let h(x) be a nondecreasing positive function on [0,+), such that h(x)/x0 and n=1g(n)nhγ(n)< for some γ>0.

Then, for θ>max{1/2, α},

n = 1 n α p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j - E X j ) | > ε n θ ) < ,     ε > 0 . (3)

If α=1, we have the following result.

Theorem 2   Let {Xn, n1} be sequences of m-WOD random variables stochastically dominated by a random variable X with dominating coefficients g(n), E|X|p+δ<, p>1, 0<δ<p(p-1). Assume A1 or A2 holds. Then, for θ>max{1/2, p/(p+δ)},

n = 1 n p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j - E X j ) | > ε n θ ) < ,     ε > 0 . (4)

Theorem 3   Let {Xn,n1} be sequences of m-WOD random variables stochastically dominated by a random variable X with dominating coefficients g(n), E|X|p<, p>1. Assume A1 or A2 holds. Then

n = 1 n p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j - E X j ) | > ε n ) < ,     ε > 0 . (5)

If αp=1, we have the following result.

Theorem 4   Let {Xn, n1} be sequences of m-WOD random variables stochastically dominated by a random variable X with dominating coefficients g(n), E|X|hδ(|X|)<, 0<δ1. Assume A2 holds and

l i m s u p x h ( x ) h ( x / h ( x ) ) < , (6)

then

n = 1 n - 1 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j - E X j ) | > ε n ) < ,     ε > 0 . (7)

Remark 1   The m-WOD random variables encompass WOD, m-NA, m-NOD, m-END, among others. Thus, the results in this paper extend and improve upon existing results.

Remark 2   Since stochastic domination is a weaker condition than identical distribution, the results in this paper also hold under the condition of identical distribution.

Remark 3   Taking δ=1 in Theorem 4, we obtain the result of Theorem 1.1 in Ref. [17]. Taking δ=1/2, h(x)=g(x) in Theorem 4, we obtain the result of Theorem 1.2 in Chen et al’s [18]. Therefore, our results extend and improve the results in Refs. [17-18].

2 Proof of Theorems

Proof of Theorem 1   Noting Xi=Xi+-Xi-, hence to prove (3), it only to prove that, for any ε>0,

n = 1 n α p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j + - E X j + ) | > ε n θ / 2 ) < ,     ε > 0 ,

and

n = 1 n α p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j - - E X j - ) | > ε n θ / 2 ) < ,     ε > 0 .

By Lemma 1, {Xn+, n1} and {Xn-, n1} are also m-WOD random variables sequences with dominating coefficients g(n), n1. Therefore, without loss of generality, we assume Xn0, n1.

For a fixed n1, for 1jn, denote

Y n j = X j I ( X j n α ) + n α I ( X j > n α ) ,    Z n j = X j - Y n j = ( X j - n α ) I ( X j > n α ) .

Then

n = 1 n α p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j - E X j ) | > ε n θ ) n = 1 n α p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( Y n j - E Y n j ) | > ε n θ / 2 ) + n = 1 n α p - 2 P ( j = 1 n { X j > n α } )                                                                       n = 1 n α p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( Y n j - E Y n j ) | > ε n θ / 2 ) + n = 1 n α p - 2 j = 1 n P ( X j > n α ) = : I 1 + I 2 .

Thus, to prove (3), we only need to show I1< and I2<.

Combining with Lemma 4 and condition αp-1>-1, we obtain

I 2 C n = 1 n α p - 1 P ( X > n α ) = C n = 1 n α p - 1 k = n P ( k α < X ( k + 1 ) α )

       = C k = 1 P ( k α < X ( k + 1 ) α ) n = 1 k n α p - 1 C k = 1 k α p P ( k α < X ( k + 1 ) α ) C E | X | p < . (8)

By Lemma 1, {Ynj-EYnj} are also m-WOD random variables with the same dominating coefficients.

For I1, by Markov’s inequality and Lemma 3 , we have that for any v>max{2,p},

I 1 C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v E { m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( Y n j - E Y n j ) | v } C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v ( l o g n ) v { j = 1 n E | Y n j | v + g ( n ) ( j = 1 n E | Y n j | 2 ) v / 2 } = : I 11 + I 12 . (9)

For I11, combining with Lemma 4 and the condition θ>{1/2,α}, we obtain

I 11 C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v ( l o g n ) v j = 1 n [ E X j v I ( X j n α ) + n v α P ( X j > n α ) ] C n = 1 n α p - 1 - θ v ( l o g n ) v [ E X v I ( X n α ) + n v α P ( X > n α ) ]

           C n = 1 n α p - 1 - θ v ( l o g n ) v [ E X p n α ( v - p ) I ( X n α ) + E X p n α ( v - p ) P ( X > n α ) ] C n = 1 n - 1 - ( θ - α ) v ( l o g n ) v < . (10)

For I12, we have

I 12 n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) j = 1 n [ E X j 2 I ( X j n α ) + n 2 α P ( X j > n α ) ] v / 2

   C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) [ E X 2 I ( X n α ) + n 2 α P ( X > n α ) ] v / 2 . (11)

To prove I12<, we consider two cases:

Case 1: When p2, the condition E|X|p< implies E|X|2< , taking v>max{p,2(αp-1+τ)2θ-1, 2(αp+γ)2θ-1}, then

I 12   C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) [ E X 2 ] v / 2 { C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 + τ ( l o g n ) v ,    i f   A 1   h o l d s C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 + 1 + γ ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) n h γ ( n ) ,    i f   A 2   h o l d s < . (12)

Case 2: When 1<p<2, under E|X|p< , taking v>max{2, 2(αp-1+τ)2(θ-α)+(αp-1), 2(αp+γ)2(θ-α)+(αp-1)}, we obtain

         I 12 C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) [ E X p n α ( 2 - p ) I ( X n α ) + E X p n α ( 2 - p ) P ( X > n α ) ] v / 2               C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) n α ( 2 - p ) v / 2 ( E X p ) v / 2 C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 + α v - α p v / 2 ( l o g n ) v g ( n )

              { C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 + α v - α p v / 2 + τ ( l o g n ) v   ,    i f   A 1   h o l d s C n = 1 n α p - 2 - θ v + v / 2 + α v - α p v / 2 + 1 + γ ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) n h γ ( n )   ,     i f   A 2   h o l d s < . (13)

From (8)-(13), the proof of Theorem 1 is completed.

Proof of Theorem 2   For fixed n1, 1jn, denote

Y n j = X j I ( X j n p / ( p + δ ) ) + n p / ( p + δ ) I ( X j > n p / ( p + δ ) ) ,    Z n j = X j - Y n j = ( X j - n p / ( p + δ ) ) I ( X j > n p / ( p + δ ) ) .

The method and the proof for Theorem 2 are the same as Theorem 1, so they are omitted.

Proof of Theorem 3   The condition E|X|p<, p>1, implies that E|X|< . Consequently, there exists a positive integer N such that EXI(X>N)<ε/8.

For j1, let

Y j = X j I ( X j N ) + N I ( X j > N ) ,   Z j = X j - Y j = ( X j - N ) I ( X j > N ) .

Then

n = 1 n p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j - E X j ) | > ε n ) n = 1 n p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( Y j - E Y j ) | > ε n / 2 ) + n = 1 n p - 2 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( Z j - E Z j ) | > ε n / 2 )

                                                                          = : I 3 + I 4 . (14)

Thus, to prove (14), we only need to show that I3< and I4<.

For I3, noting {(Yj-EYj), j1} are sequences of m-WOD with dominating coefficient g(n) for n1 by Lemma 1. By Markov’s inequality, Lemma 3 and Lemma 4, taking v>max{p, 2, 2(p-1+τ), 2(p+γ)}, we have

I 3 C n = 1 n p - 2 - v E m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( Y j - E Y j ) | v   C n = 1 n p - 2 - v ( l o g n ) v j = 1 n E | Y j | v + g ( n ) ( j = 1 n | E Y j | 2 ) v / 2 C n = 1 n p - 2 - v ( l o g n ) v j = 1 n [ E X j v I ( X j N ) + N v P ( X j > N ) ]

+ C n = 1 n p - 2 - v ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) [ j = 1 n E X j 2 I ( X j N ) + N 2 P ( X j > N ) ] v / 2 C n = 1 n p - 1 - v ( l o g n ) v + C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 ( l o g n ) v g ( n )

{ C n = 1 n p - 1 - v ( l o g n ) v +    C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 + τ ( l o g n ) v ,    i f   A 1   h o l d s C n = 1 n p - 1 - v ( l o g n ) v +    C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 + γ + 1 ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) n h γ ( n ) ,    i f   A 2   h o l d s    < . (15)

For n>N, j1, let

Z n j ' = ( X j - N ) I ( N < X j n ) + ( n - N ) I ( X j > n ) .

By definition of Zj and Znj', we get

j = 1 n E Z j j = 1 n E X j I ( X j > N ) < n ε / 8   ,     j = 1 n E Z n j ' j = 1 n E X j I ( X j > N ) < n ε / 8 .

For I4, we obtain

I 4 C n = 1 n p - 2 P ( j = 1 n Z j + j = 1 n E Z j > n ε / 2 ) C n = 1 n p - 2 P ( j = 1 n Z j > 3 n ε / 8 ) C n = 1 n p - 2 P ( j = 1 n Z n j ' > 3 n ε / 8 ) + C n = 1 n p - 2 P ( j = 1 n X j > n )      C n = 1 n p - 2 P ( | j = 1 n ( Z n j ' - E Z n j ' ) | + j = 1 n E Z n j ' > 3 n ε / 8 ) + C n = 1 n p - 1 P ( X > n )

      C n = 1 n p - 2 P ( | j = 1 n ( Z n j ' - E Z n j ' ) | > n ε / 4 ) + C n = 1 n p - 1 P ( X > n ) = : I 41 + I 42 . (16)

For I42, by E|X|p<, p>1, we have

I 42 C n = 1 n p - 1 k = n P ( k < X k + 1 )   C k = 1 P ( k < X k + 1 ) n = 1 k   n p - 1 C k = 1 k p P ( k < X k + 1 ) C E X p < . (17)

For I41, taking v>max{2, p}, we have

I 41 C n = 1 n p - 2 - v E | j = 1 n ( Z n j ' - E Z n j ' ) | v C n = 1 n p - 2 - v j = 1 n E | Z n j ' | v + g ( n ) ( j = 1 n E | Z n j ' | 2 ) v / 2 = : I 411 + I 412 .  

By Lemma 4 and I42<, we get

I 411 C n = 1 n p - 2 - v j = 1 n [ E X j v I ( X j n ) + n v P ( X j > n ) ] C n = 1 n p - 1 - v [ E X v I ( X n ) + n v P ( X > n ) ]        C n = 1 n p - 1 - v E X v I ( X n ) + C n = 1 n p - 1 P ( X > n ) C n = 1 n p - 1 - v k = 1 n E X v I ( k - 1 < X k ) + C E X p

                               C k = 1 k p - v E X v I ( k - 1 < X k ) + C E X p C E X p < . (18)

For I412, we have

I 412 = C n = 1 n p - 2 - v g ( n ) { j = 1 n [ E X j 2 I ( X j n ) + n 2 P ( X j > n ) ] } v / 2 C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 g ( n ) [ E X 2 I ( X n ) + n 2 P ( X > n ) ] v / 2 .

The proof of I412< will be conducted under the following two cases.

Case 1: When p2, the E|X|p< implies that EX2< , taking v>max{p, 2(p-1+τ), 2(p+γ)}, then

I 412 C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 g ( n ) ( E X 2 ) v / 2 { C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 + τ ,    i f   A 1   h o l d s C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 + 1 + γ g ( n ) n h γ ( n ) ,    i f   A 2   h o l d s   < . (19)

Case 2: When 1<p<2, under the condition E|X|p< , taking v>max{2, 2(p-1+τ)p-1, 2(p+γ)p-1}, we have

I 412 C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 g ( n ) [ E X p n 2 - p I ( X n ) + E X p n 2 - p P ( X > n ) ] v / 2 C n = 1 n p - 2 - v / 2 n ( 2 - p ) v / 2 g ( n ) ( E X p ) v / 2  

                           C n = 1 n p - 2 + v / 2 - p v / 2 g ( n ) { C n = 1 n p - 2 + v / 2 - p v / 2 + τ ,    i f   A 1   h o l d s C n = 1 n p - 2 + v / 2 - p v / 2 + 1 + γ g ( n ) n h γ ( n ) ,   i f   A 2   h o l d s < . (20)

From (14)-(20), the proof of Theorem 3 is completed.

Proof of Theorem 4   We get E|X|< by E|X|hδ(|X|)<. Consequently, there exists a positive integer A such that EXI(X>A)<ε/8. For j1, let

Y j = X j I ( X j A ) + A I ( X j > A ) ,   Z j = X j - Y j = ( X j - A ) I ( X j > A ) ,

then

n = 1 n - 1 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( X j - E X j ) | > ε n ) n = 1 n - 1 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( Y j - E Y j ) | > ε n / 2 ) + n = 1 n - 1 P ( m a x 1 k n | j = 1 k ( Z j - E Z j ) | > ε n / 2 ) = : I 5 + I 6 . (21)

For I5, be the same as I3 in Theorem 3, taking v>2(γ+1), we have

I 5 C n = 1 n - v ( l o g n ) v + C n = 1 n - 1 - v / 2 + γ + 1 ( l o g n ) v g ( n ) n h γ ( n ) < . (22)

Noting nhδ(n), taking nhδ(n)>A. For 1jn, let

Z n j ' = ( X j - A ) I ( A < X j n h δ ( n ) ) + ( n h δ ( n ) - A ) I ( X j > n h δ ( n ) ) .

By the definitions of Zj and Znj', we have

j = 1 n E Z j < n ε / 8 ,   j = 1 n E Z n j ' < n ε / 8 .

For I6, as I4 in Theorem 3, we have

I 6 C n = 1 n - 1 P ( | j = 1 n ( Z n j ' - E Z n j ' ) | > n ε / 4 ) + C n = 1 P ( X > n / h δ ( n ) ) = : I 61 + I 62 . (23)

By (11), we have suph(x)h(x/h(x))C. Since 0<h(x), 0<δ1, we get

I 62 C n = 1 P { X h δ ( X ) > n h δ ( n ) h δ ( n h δ ( n ) ) }   C n = 1 P { X h δ ( X ) > n [ h ( n h ( n ) ) h ( n ) ] δ } C n = 1 P { X h δ ( X ) > n C }

                         C n = 1 k = n P ( k < C X h δ ( X ) k + 1 ) C k = 1 k P ( k < C X h δ ( X ) k + 1 ) C E X h δ ( X ) < . (24)

For I61, taking v>2, we have

I 61 C n = 1 n - 1 - v E | j = 1 n ( Z n j ' - E Z n j ' ) | v C n = 1 n - 1 - v j = 1 n E | Z n j ' | v + g ( n ) ( j = 1 n E | Z n j ' | 2 ) v / 2 = : I 611 + I 612 . (25)

By h(x),xhδ(x) and I62<, we have

I 611 = C n = 1 n - 1 - v j = 1 n [ E X j v I ( X j n h δ ( n ) ) + ( n h δ ( n ) ) v P ( X j > n h δ ( n ) ) ]        C n = 1 n - v [ E X v I ( X n h δ ( n ) ) + ( n h δ ( n ) ) v P ( X > n h δ ( n ) ) ] C n = 1 n - v E X v I ( X n h δ ( n ) ) + C n = 1 P ( X > n h δ ( n ) )        C n = 1 n - v k = 1 n E X v I ( k - 1 h δ ( k - 1 ) < X k h δ ( k ) ) + C E X h δ ( X ) C k = 1 E X v I ( k - 1 h δ ( k - 1 ) < X k h δ ( k ) ) n = k n - v + C E X h δ ( X )        C k = 1 k - v + 1 E X v I ( k - 1 h δ ( k - 1 ) < X k h δ ( k ) ) + C E X h δ ( X ) C k = 1 E X I ( k - 1 h δ ( k - 1 ) < X k h δ ( k ) ) 1 h δ ( v - 1 ) ( k ) + C E X h δ ( X )

             C E X + C E X h δ ( X )   < . (26)

For I612, we have

I 612 = C n = 1 n - 1 - v g ( n ) j = 1 n [ E X j 2 I ( X j n h δ ( n ) ) + ( n h δ ( n ) ) 2 P ( X j > n h δ ( n ) ) ] v / 2        C n = 1 n - 1 - v / 2 g ( n ) [ E X n h δ ( n ) I ( X n h δ ( n ) ) + E X n h δ ( n ) I ( X > n h δ ( n ) ) ] v / 2

                                                C n = 1 n - 1 - v / 2 g ( n ) n v / 2 h v δ / 2 ( n ) [ E X ] v / 2 C n = 1 g ( n ) n h v δ / 2 ( n ) < . (27)

From (21)-(27), the proof of Theorem 4 is completed.

References

  1. Wang K Y, Wang Y B, Gao Q W. Uniform asymptotics for the finite-time ruin probability of a dependent risk model with a constant interest rate[J]. Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, 2013, 15(1): 109-124. [CrossRef] [MathSciNet] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ebrahimi N, Ghosh M. Multivariate negative dependence[J]. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 1981, 10(4): 307-337. [Google Scholar]
  3. Liu L. Precise large deviations for dependent random variables with heavy tails[J]. Statistics & Probability Letters, 2009, 79(9): 1290-1298. [Google Scholar]
  4. Wang K Y, Yang Y, Lin J G. Precise large deviations for widely orthant dependent random variables with dominatedly varying tails[J]. Frontiers of Mathematics in China, 2012, 7(5): 919-932. [Google Scholar]
  5. Qiu D H, Chen P Y. Complete and complete moment convergence for weighted sums of widely orthant dependent random variables[J]. Acta Mathematica Sinica, English Series, 2014, 30(9): 1539-1548. [Google Scholar]
  6. Liu X, Shen Y, Yang J, et al. Complete moment convergence of widely orthant dependent random variables[J]. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 2017, 46(14): 7256-7265. [Google Scholar]
  7. Wang Y B, Cui Z L, Wang K Y, et al. Uniform asymptotics of the finite-time ruin probability for all times[J]. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 2012, 390(1): 208-223. [CrossRef] [MathSciNet] [Google Scholar]
  8. Chen P Y, Wang L, Wang Y B. Uniform asymptotics for the finite-time ruin probabilities of two kinds of nonstandard bidimensional risk models[J]. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 2013, 401(1): 114-129. [Google Scholar]
  9. Shen A T. Bernstein-type inequality for widely dependent sequence and its application to nonparametric regression models[J]. Abstract and Applied Analysis, 2013, 2013(1): 862602. [Google Scholar]
  10. Wang X J, Xu C, Hu T C, et al. On complete convergence for widely orthant dependent random variables and its applications in nonparametric regression models[J]. TEST, 2014, 23(3): 607-629. [Google Scholar]
  11. Ding Y, Wu Y, Wang X J, et al. Complete convergence for weighted sums of widely orthant dependent random variables[J]. Applied Mathematics—A Journal of Chinese Universities Series A, 2015, 30(4): 417-424(Ch). [Google Scholar]
  12. Song M Z, Chu Y. Convergence of moving average processes for WOD random variable[J]. J Wuhan Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2021, 67(5): 452-460(Ch). [Google Scholar]
  13. Song M Z, Wu Y F, Chu Y. Complete qth-moment convergence of moving average process for m-WOD random variable[J]. Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences, 2022, 27(5): 396-404. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  14. Song M Z, Wu Y F. Complete convergence for moving average processes under m-WOD random variables[J]. Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences, 2024, 29(6): 529-538. [Google Scholar]
  15. Fang H Y, Ding S S, Li X Q, et al. Asymptotic approximations of ratio moments based on dependent sequences[J]. Mathematics, 2020, 8(3): 361. [CrossRef] [MathSciNet] [Google Scholar]
  16. Spitzer F. A combinatorial lemma and its application to probability theory[J]. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 1956, 82(2): 323-339. [Google Scholar]
  17. Bai P, Chen P Y, Sung S H. On complete convergence and the strong law of large numbers for pairwise independent random variables[J]. Acta Mathematica Hungarica, 2014, 142(2): 502-518. [Google Scholar]
  18. Chen P Y, Hak S. A Spitzer-type law of large numbers for widely orthant dependent random variables[J]. Statistics & Probability Letters, 2019, 154: 108544. [Google Scholar]
  19. Chen P Y, Sung S H. Complete convergence for weighted sums of widely orthant-dependent random variables[J]. Journal of Inequalities and Applications, 2021, 2021(1): 45. [Google Scholar]
  20. Wu Q Y. Probability Limit Theory for Mixing Sequences[M]. Beijing: Sicence Press of China, 2006(Ch). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.