TheoremBase

Proof

Throughout, measurable for a map on [0,T]×Ω[0,T]\times\Omega means measurable with respect to B[0,T]⊗F\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]}\otimes\mathcal{F} and B(R)\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}), and a subset of [0,T]×Ω[0,T]\times\Omega is called measurable when it belongs to B[0,T]⊗F\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]}\otimes\mathcal{F}. Fix k∈{0,…,K−1}k\in\{0,\dots,K-1\}.

Preliminaries.

Coordinate maps. Throughout, Γ\Gamma denotes a generic Borel set, Γ∈B(R)\Gamma\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}) (the letters BB and SS being the rate bound and the mean-field state trajectory of the adopted setting). The preimage of Γ\Gamma under (s,ω)↦s(s,\omega)\mapsto s is (Γ∩[0,T])×Ω(\Gamma\cap[0,T])\times\Omega, a measurable rectangle in the sense of the product σ\sigma-algebra definition, since Γ∩[0,T]∈B[0,T]\Gamma\cap[0,T]\in\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]} and Ω∈F\Omega\in\mathcal{F}; so (s,ω)↦s(s,\omega)\mapsto s is measurable. For a random variable XX on (Ω,F,P)(\Omega,\mathcal{F},P) the preimage of Γ\Gamma under (s,ω)↦X(ω)(s,\omega)\mapsto X(\omega) is [0,T]×X−1(Γ)[0,T]\times X^{-1}(\Gamma), again a measurable rectangle; so (s,ω)↦X(ω)(s,\omega)\mapsto X(\omega) is measurable. For D∈FD\in\mathcal{F} the set [0,T]×D[0,T]\times D is a measurable rectangle, and its indicator (s,ω)↦1D(ω)(s,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{D}(\omega) is measurable by claim 1 of the arithmetic of measurable functions. For a function v:[0,T]→Rv:[0,T]\to\mathbb{R} continuous on [0,T][0,T], the map s↦v(s)s\mapsto v(s) is measurable with respect to B[0,T]\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]} by claim 4 of the measurability toolkit, and (s,ω)↦v(s)(s,\omega)\mapsto v(s) is measurable on [0,T]×Ω[0,T]\times\Omega, the preimage of Γ\Gamma being v−1(Γ)×Ωv^{-1}(\Gamma)\times\Omega with v−1(Γ)∈B[0,T]v^{-1}(\Gamma)\in\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]}.

The clock set. By claim 2 of the block cascade lemma, σ(k)\sigma^{(k)} is a stopping time of the system filtration (Ftsys)t∈[0,T](\mathcal{F}^{\mathrm{sys}}_{t})_{t\in[0,T]} with values in [tk,T][t_{k},T]; by claim 1 of Stopping Times on a Compact Time Interval: Elementary Operations, the Prior Sigma-Algebra, Dyadic Approximation, Sampling, and Hitting Times, applied to that filtration, σ(k)\sigma^{(k)} is therefore measurable with respect to FTsys⊆F\mathcal{F}^{\mathrm{sys}}_{T}\subseteq\mathcal{F} and B(R)\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}), that is, a random variable. By the same claim 2, GkG_{k} is an event and G0⊇G1⊇⋯⊇GKG_{0}\supseteq G_{1}\supseteq\dots\supseteq G_{K}, while G0=Ω0G_{0}=\Omega_{0} by the definition of the good sets in the setting of that lemma; so Gk⊆Ω0G_{k}\subseteq\Omega_{0}. By its claim 1, t0=0t_{0}=0, tK=Tt_{K}=T and tk<tk+1t_{k}<t_{k+1}, so [tk,tk+1][t_{k},t_{k+1}] is a nondegenerate compact subinterval of [0,T][0,T]. The map (s,ω)↦σ(k)(ω)−s(s,\omega)\mapsto\sigma^{(k)}(\omega)-s is measurable by the coordinate maps and claim 2 of the arithmetic lemma, so

Sk={(s,ω)∈[0,T]×Ω: s<σ(k)(ω)},\mathcal{S}_{k}=\bigl\{(s,\omega)\in[0,T]\times\Omega:\ s<\sigma^{(k)}(\omega)\bigr\},

the preimage of the Borel set (0,∞)(0,\infty) under it, is measurable, and

{(s,ω): ω∈Tk(s)}=([0,T]×Gk)∩Sk\bigl\{(s,\omega):\ \omega\in\mathcal{T}_{k}(s)\bigr\}=\bigl([0,T]\times G_{k}\bigr)\cap\mathcal{S}_{k}

is measurable, a σ\sigma-algebra being closed under intersections. Its indicator, which is the first map of claim 1, is therefore measurable by claim 1 of the arithmetic lemma.

The fluctuation processes on the regular event. By parts (b) and (c) of Joint Measurability of the State and Control of the Controlled N-Agent Dynamics, applied to the transition-rate family β\beta with control set A\mathcal{A}, the family β~\tilde\beta, the horizon TT, the driving system, the policy hh and the solution of the adopted setting, the maps (s,ω)↦1Ω0(ω)Σsγ(ω)(s,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)\Sigma^{\gamma}_{s}(\omega) and (s,ω)↦1Ω0(ω)αsj(ω)(s,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)\alpha^{j}_{s}(\omega) are measurable (that lemma names the trace Borel σ\sigma-algebra on [0,T][0,T] through the earlier version of the interval toolkit; it is the same family of sets S∩[0,T]S\cap[0,T], S∈B(R)S\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R})). Put, for (s,ω)∈[0,T]×Ω(s,\omega)\in[0,T]\times\Omega,

sˉsγ(ω)=1Ω0(ω) ssγ(ω)=N(1Ω0(ω)Σsγ(ω)−1Ω0(ω)Ssγ),aˉsj(ω)=1Ω0(ω) asj(ω)=N(1Ω0(ω)αsj(ω)−1Ω0(ω)Asj),\bar{\mathfrak{s}}^{\gamma}_{s}(\omega)=\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)\,\mathfrak{s}^{\gamma}_{s}(\omega)=\sqrt{N}\bigl(\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)\Sigma^{\gamma}_{s}(\omega)-\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)S^{\gamma}_{s}\bigr),\qquad \bar{\mathfrak{a}}^{j}_{s}(\omega)=\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)\,\mathfrak{a}^{j}_{s}(\omega)=\sqrt{N}\bigl(\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)\alpha^{j}_{s}(\omega)-\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)A^{j}_{s}\bigr),

the second expressions by the definition of the fluctuation processes. Since s↦Ssγs\mapsto S^{\gamma}_{s} and s↦Asjs\mapsto A^{j}_{s} are continuous on [0,T][0,T], the maps (s,ω)↦1Ω0(ω)Ssγ(s,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)S^{\gamma}_{s} and (s,ω)↦1Ω0(ω)Asj(s,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_{0}}(\omega)A^{j}_{s} are measurable by the preliminaries and claim 3 of the arithmetic lemma, and hence each sˉγ\bar{\mathfrak{s}}^{\gamma} and each aˉj\bar{\mathfrak{a}}^{j} is measurable by claim 2 of that lemma. These maps are bounded: Σs(ω)\Sigma_{s}(\omega) and SsS_{s} lie in the probability simplex Δl\Delta^{l} (the empirical state measure by the definition of a solution, SS by the adopted setting), and any two points x,yx,y of Δl\Delta^{l} satisfy ∣x−y∣≤2|x-y|\le2, because ∣xγ−yγ∣≤1|x^{\gamma}-y^{\gamma}|\le1 gives (xγ−yγ)2≤∣xγ−yγ∣≤xγ+yγ(x^{\gamma}-y^{\gamma})^{2}\le|x^{\gamma}-y^{\gamma}|\le x^{\gamma}+y^{\gamma} and so ∣x−y∣2≤2|x-y|^{2}\le2; hence ∣sˉs(ω)∣≤2N|\bar{\mathfrak{s}}_{s}(\omega)|\le2\sqrt{N}, where sˉs=(sˉs1,…,sˉsl)\bar{\mathfrak{s}}_{s}=(\bar{\mathfrak{s}}^{1}_{s},\dots,\bar{\mathfrak{s}}^{l}_{s}). Likewise αs(ω)\alpha_{s}(\omega) and AsA_{s} lie in A\mathcal{A}, the control being A\mathcal{A}-valued and AA taking values in A\mathcal{A} by the adopted setting, so ∣αs(ω)−As∣≤∣αs(ω)∣+∣As∣≤2R|\alpha_{s}(\omega)-A_{s}|\le|\alpha_{s}(\omega)|+|A_{s}|\le2R by the triangle inequality of Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n: Square, Distance, Vanishing, Coordinate Bounds, Homogeneity, Triangle Inequalities and Expansion of a Square and the definition of the control bound, whence ∣aˉs(ω)∣≤2NR|\bar{\mathfrak{a}}_{s}(\omega)|\le2\sqrt{N}R with aˉs=(aˉs1,…,aˉsm)\bar{\mathfrak{a}}_{s}=(\bar{\mathfrak{a}}^{1}_{s},\dots,\bar{\mathfrak{a}}^{m}_{s}).

Claim 1.

The near-field and far-field indicators. The map (s,ω)↦∣aˉs(ω)∣(s,\omega)\mapsto|\bar{\mathfrak{a}}_{s}(\omega)| is measurable by the composition lemma, the Euclidean norm being a sequentially continuous function on Rm\mathbb{R}^{m} (by claim 5 of Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n: Square, Distance, Vanishing, Coordinate Bounds, Homogeneity, Triangle Inequalities and Expansion of a Square, ∣∣x∣−∣y∣∣≤∣x−y∣\bigl||x|-|y|\bigr|\le|x-y|) and the components aˉj\bar{\mathfrak{a}}^{j} being measurable. Hence the set U={(s,ω):∣aˉs(ω)∣≤Nϱ}\mathsf{U}=\{(s,\omega):|\bar{\mathfrak{a}}_{s}(\omega)|\le\sqrt{N}\varrho\}, the preimage of the Borel set (−∞,Nϱ](-\infty,\sqrt{N}\varrho], is measurable. For ω∈Tk(s)⊆Gk⊆Ω0\omega\in\mathcal{T}_{k}(s)\subseteq G_{k}\subseteq\Omega_{0} one has aˉs(ω)=as(ω)\bar{\mathfrak{a}}_{s}(\omega)=\mathfrak{a}_{s}(\omega), so

{(s,ω): ω∈Tknr(s)}={(s,ω): ω∈Tk(s)}∩U,\bigl\{(s,\omega):\ \omega\in\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{nr}}_{k}(s)\bigr\}=\bigl\{(s,\omega):\ \omega\in\mathcal{T}_{k}(s)\bigr\}\cap\mathsf{U},

a measurable set, and its indicator, the second map of claim 1, is measurable. The third map is 1Tk(s)−1Tknr(s)\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}_{k}(s)}-\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{nr}}_{k}(s)} at every point, Tk(s)\mathcal{T}_{k}(s) being the disjoint union of Tknr(s)\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{nr}}_{k}(s) and Tkfr(s)\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{fr}}_{k}(s), hence measurable by claim 2 of the arithmetic lemma.

The energy density. Under (H1) and (H2), conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem gives that every RtR_{t} is symmetric positive definite, hence invertible, and that all entries of t↦Rtt\mapsto R_{t} and of t↦Mt=Rt−1Wt⊤t\mapsto\mathsf{M}_{t}=R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{\top} are continuous on [0,T][0,T]; write Mtiγ\mathsf{M}^{i\gamma}_{t} (i∈{1,…,m}i\in\{1,\dots,m\}, γ∈{1,…,l}\gamma\in\{1,\dots,l\}) for the entries of Mt\mathsf{M}_{t}. Define on [0,T]×Ω[0,T]\times\Omega

uˉsi(ω)=aˉsi(ω)+∑γ=1lMsiγ sˉsγ(ω)(i∈{1,…,m}),qˉs(ω)=∑i=1m∑j=1mRsij uˉsi(ω) uˉsj(ω).\bar{u}^{i}_{s}(\omega)=\bar{\mathfrak{a}}^{i}_{s}(\omega)+\sum_{\gamma=1}^{l}\mathsf{M}^{i\gamma}_{s}\,\bar{\mathfrak{s}}^{\gamma}_{s}(\omega)\qquad(i\in\{1,\dots,m\}),\qquad \bar{q}_{s}(\omega)=\sum_{i=1}^{m}\sum_{j=1}^{m}R^{ij}_{s}\,\bar{u}^{i}_{s}(\omega)\,\bar{u}^{j}_{s}(\omega).

Each uˉi\bar{u}^{i} is measurable, as a finite sum of products of measurable maps (the entries Msiγ\mathsf{M}^{i\gamma}_{s} being measurable as continuous functions of ss, by the preliminaries), by claims 2 and 3 of the arithmetic lemma, and so is qˉ\bar{q}. For ω∈Ω0\omega\in\Omega_{0} one has aˉs(ω)=as(ω)\bar{\mathfrak{a}}_{s}(\omega)=\mathfrak{a}_{s}(\omega) and sˉs(ω)=ss(ω)\bar{\mathfrak{s}}_{s}(\omega)=\mathfrak{s}_{s}(\omega), hence uˉs(ω)=us(ω)\bar{u}_{s}(\omega)=u_{s}(\omega) and qˉs(ω)=us(ω)⋅Rsus(ω)\bar{q}_{s}(\omega)=u_{s}(\omega)\cdot R_{s}u_{s}(\omega) by the entry pairing; since Tknr(s)⊆Ω0\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{nr}}_{k}(s)\subseteq\Omega_{0}, the fourth map of claim 1 equals 1Tknr(s)(ω)qˉs(ω)\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{nr}}_{k}(s)}(\omega)\bar{q}_{s}(\omega) at every point of [0,T]×Ω[0,T]\times\Omega and is therefore measurable by claim 3 of the arithmetic lemma.

Nonnegativity and boundedness. By (H1), us⋅Rsus≥r∣us∣2≥0u_{s}\cdot R_{s}u_{s}\ge r|u_{s}|^{2}\ge0 at every point, so the fourth map is nonnegative. By the extreme value theorem fix reals CR≥0C_{R}\ge0 and Cinv≥0C_{\mathrm{inv}}\ge0 bounding in absolute value all entries of RtR_{t} and of Mt\mathsf{M}_{t} on [0,T][0,T]. Then at every point, using ∣aˉsi∣≤∣aˉs∣≤2NR|\bar{\mathfrak{a}}^{i}_{s}|\le|\bar{\mathfrak{a}}_{s}|\le2\sqrt{N}R and ∣sˉsγ∣≤∣sˉs∣≤2N|\bar{\mathfrak{s}}^{\gamma}_{s}|\le|\bar{\mathfrak{s}}_{s}|\le2\sqrt{N}, one has ∣uˉsi∣≤2NR+2lCinvN=:cu|\bar{u}^{i}_{s}|\le2\sqrt{N}R+2lC_{\mathrm{inv}}\sqrt{N}=:c_{u} and hence ∣qˉs∣≤m2CRcu2=:Cu|\bar{q}_{s}|\le m^{2}C_{R}c_{u}^{2}=:C_{u}; since 0≤1Tknr(s)≤10\le\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{nr}}_{k}(s)}\le1, the bound 0≤1Tknr(s) us⋅Rsus≤Cu0\le\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{nr}}_{k}(s)}\,u_{s}\cdot R_{s}u_{s}\le C_{u} of claim 1 follows. This proves claim 1.

Claim 2. Let ff be any one of the three maps (s,ω)↦1Tknr(s)(ω) us(ω)⋅Rsus(ω)(s,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{nr}}_{k}(s)}(\omega)\,u_{s}(\omega)\cdot R_{s}u_{s}(\omega), (s,ω)↦1−1Tk(s)(ω)(s,\omega)\mapsto1-\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}_{k}(s)}(\omega) and (s,ω)↦1Tkfr(s)(ω)(s,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}^{\mathrm{fr}}_{k}(s)}(\omega). Each is measurable with respect to B[0,T]⊗F\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]}\otimes\mathcal{F} by claim 1 (the second by claims 1 and 2 of the arithmetic lemma), and each takes values in [0,C][0,C] with C=max⁡(Cu,1)C=\max(C_{u},1). The measure spaces ([0,T],B[0,T],λ[0,T])([0,T],\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]},\lambda_{[0,T]}) and (Ω,F,P)(\Omega,\mathcal{F},P) are finite, hence σ\sigma-finite: the first has total mass TT by claim 1 of the interval toolkit, the second total mass 11. Regarded as a map into [0,∞][0,\infty], ff is measurable in the sense required by Tonelli and Fubini Theorems — that of Lebesgue Integral of a Nonnegative Measurable Function (that theorem names the earlier version of the same definition item; the measurability clause used here is given there by the same words), namely {f>a}∈B[0,T]⊗F\{f>a\}\in\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]}\otimes\mathcal{F} for every real aa — since {f>a}\{f>a\} is the preimage of the Borel set (a,∞)(a,\infty), ff being real-valued; that definition records that for real-valued functions its notion of measurability agrees with measurability with respect to B(R)\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}). By the Tonelli part of Tonelli and Fubini Theorems, the function F:s↦∫Ωf(s,ω) dP(ω)F:s\mapsto\int_{\Omega}f(s,\omega)\,dP(\omega), with the integral of nonnegative measurable functions, is measurable with respect to B[0,T]\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]} as a [0,∞][0,\infty]-valued function, that is, {F>a}∈B[0,T]\{F>a\}\in\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]} for every real aa; its values lie in [0,C][0,C] by the monotonicity of the integral and P(Ω)=1P(\Omega)=1, so FF is real-valued and, by the agreement just recalled, measurable with respect to B[0,T]\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]} and B(R)\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}). At each ss the section f(s,⋅)f(s,\cdot) is measurable by the sections part of the Tonelli theorem, nonnegative and bounded, hence a bounded random variable, and F(s)F(s) is its expectation E[f(s,⋅)]\mathbb{E}[f(s,\cdot)], which that definition sets equal to the integral of the nonnegative function f(s,⋅)f(s,\cdot) with respect to PP. This gives the measurability on [0,T][0,T] of the three functions of claim 2, and their values are real numbers in [0,C][0,C]. For the restriction to the block [tk,tk+1][t_{k},t_{k+1}], a nondegenerate compact subinterval of [0,T][0,T] as noted in the preliminaries: if g:[0,T]→Rg:[0,T]\to\mathbb{R} is measurable with respect to B[0,T]\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]} and Γ∈B(R)\Gamma\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}), then g−1(Γ)=Γ′∩[0,T]g^{-1}(\Gamma)=\Gamma'\cap[0,T] for some Γ′∈B(R)\Gamma'\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}) (the class of sets Γ′∩[0,T]\Gamma'\cap[0,T] with Γ′\Gamma' Borel being exactly B[0,T]\mathcal{B}_{[0,T]}), so the preimage of Γ\Gamma under the restriction of gg to [tk,tk+1][t_{k},t_{k+1}] is g−1(Γ)∩[tk,tk+1]=Γ′∩[0,T]∩[tk,tk+1]=Γ′∩[tk,tk+1]∈B[tk,tk+1]g^{-1}(\Gamma)\cap[t_{k},t_{k+1}]=\Gamma'\cap[0,T]\cap[t_{k},t_{k+1}]=\Gamma'\cap[t_{k},t_{k+1}]\in\mathcal{B}_{[t_{k},t_{k+1}]}; hence the restriction is measurable with respect to B[tk,tk+1]\mathcal{B}_{[t_{k},t_{k+1}]}.

Finally, the integrals over [tk,tk+1][t_{k},t_{k+1}] of these three functions — which are respectively the kk-th summand of the sum in the first display of claim 7, the integral in the third display of claim 1(d), and the integral in the first inequality of claim 1(c) of Ledger Decomposition of the Recentred N-Agent Cost over the Block Cascade and Its Near-Field Filtering Lower Bound — are the integrals of these restrictions with respect to λ[tk,tk+1]\lambda_{[t_{k},t_{k+1}]}, which are Lebesgue integrals over the compact interval of bounded measurable functions; and the measurability of the three restrictions with respect to B[tk,tk+1]\mathcal{B}_{[t_{k},t_{k+1}]}, just shown, is what hypothesis (MS) of Asymptotic Lower Bound for the Recentred N-Agent Cost by the Fluctuation LQG Value, under Law-Transported Injection Certificates demands of the instance of the present setting formed from each of its solutions, admissible parameter vectors and block indices. This proves claim 2.

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…