computation of Sn2 (Xi/n) and RVm,r will become clear in the next subsection.
In the sequel we shall need the following assumption.
Assumption 1.
(a) σ (∙) and μ (∙), defined in (1), satisfy local Lipschitz and growth conditions. Therefore, for
any compact subsets M (under the null hypothesis) and J (under the alternative hypothesis)
of the range of the process Xt, there exist constants K1M, K2M, K3M, K4M, K1J and K2J, such
that, ∀(x,y) ∈ M and ∀(x',y') ∈ J,
∣σ(χ) - σ(y)I ≤ KM lx - yl,
∣σ(x)12 ≤ KM(1 + ∣x∣2),
∣μ(χ) - μ(y)I ≤ KMIx - y∣, ∣μ(χ) - μ(y)∣ ≤ KJIx - y,∖
and
xμ(x) ≤ KM(1 + ∣x∣2), Xμ(X) ≤ KJ (1 + ∣x,∣2).
(b) σJ (∙) and b (∙), defined in (2), satisfy local Lipschitz and growth conditions. Therefore, for
any compact subset L of the range of the process ft, there exist constants KJL, K2L, K3L and
K4L , such that, ∀(p, q) ∈ L,
∣σJ(p) - σJ(q)∣ ≤ KJL ∣p- q∣ ,
∣σJ(p)∣2 ≤ K2L(1 + ∣p∣2),
∣b(p) - b(q)∣ ≤ K3L ∣p - q∣
and
pb(p) ≤ K4L(1 + ∣p∣2).
(c) μ(∙), σ(∙) and g (∙) are continuously differentiable.
Assumption 1(a) states local Lipschitz and growth conditions for the drift term under both hy-
potheses and for the variance term under the null hypothesis. Assumption 1(b) states local Lipschitz
and growth conditions for the variance term under the alternative. Assumptions 1(a)(b) ensure the
existence of a unique strong solution under both hypotheses (see e.g. Chung and Williams, 1990,
p.229). Since we are studying the diffusion processes over a fixed time span, we do not need to
impose more demanding assumptions, such as stationarity and ergodicity.9
9Note that Bandi and Phillips (2001, 2003) allow the time span to approach infinity, and then require the diffusion
to be null Harris recurrent.