Throughout, ∥ ⋅ ∥ 2 \lVert\cdot\rVert_{2} ∥ ⋅ ∥ 2 is the mean-square norm of Square-Integrable Random Variables and the Mean-Square Inner Product , λ : = λ [ 0 , T ] \lambda:=\lambda_{[0,T]} λ := λ [ 0 , T ] , and d d d and g β , γ g_{\beta,\gamma} g β , γ are as in Almost-Everywhere Mean-Square Limits of Cauchy Sequences of Admissible Controls . Claims 3, 4, 5, 6 of the interval toolkit are used to pass between Riemann and Lebesgue integrals, for the integral Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, for null integrands, and for measurability of limits on co-null sets. Entry bounds M R M_R M R for R R R and M Γ M_{\Gamma} M Γ for Γ \Gamma Γ on [ 0 , T ] [0,T] [ 0 , T ] exist by Extreme Value Theorem on a Compact Interval , the entries being continuous .
Fix an extended admissible α \alpha α and an approximating sequence ( ( α ( n ) ) , D ) \bigl((\alpha^{(n)}),D\bigr) ( ( α ( n ) ) , D ) . Write X ^ ( n ) : = X ^ ( α ( n ) ) \widehat X^{(n)}:=\widehat X(\alpha^{(n)}) X ( n ) := X ( α ( n ) ) for the controlled estimator of α ( n ) \alpha^{(n)} α ( n ) and X ^ : = X ^ ( α ) \widehat X:=\widehat X(\alpha) X := X ( α ) for the extended controlled estimator , and set, componentwise,
v t ( n ) : = α t ( n ) − Γ ( t ) X ^ t ( n ) , v t : = α t − Γ ( t ) X ^ t , φ n ( t ) : = E [ v t ( n ) ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ( n ) ) ] , v^{(n)}_t:=\alpha^{(n)}_t-\Gamma(t)\widehat X^{(n)}_t,\qquad v_t:=\alpha_t-\Gamma(t)\widehat X_t,\qquad \varphi_n(t):=\mathbb{E}\bigl[v^{(n)}_t\cdot\bigl(R(t)v^{(n)}_t\bigr)\bigr], v t ( n ) := α t ( n ) − Γ ( t ) X t ( n ) , v t := α t − Γ ( t ) X t , φ n ( t ) := E [ v t ( n ) ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ( n ) ) ] ,
so that φ α ( t ) = E [ v t ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ) ] \varphi_{\alpha}(t)=\mathbb{E}[v_t\cdot(R(t)v_t)] φ α ( t ) = E [ v t ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t )] ; all tuples here are tuples of square-integrable random variables, so these expectations are defined and finite by claim 1 of Expected Bilinear Forms: Trace Formula and Mean-Square Continuity . Since every R ( t ) R(t) R ( t ) is positive definite , x ⋅ ( R ( t ) x ) ≥ 0 x\cdot(R(t)x)\ge0 x ⋅ ( R ( t ) x ) ≥ 0 for every x ∈ R k x\in\mathbb{R}^{k} x ∈ R k with equality only at x = 0 x=0 x = 0 ; hence the random variables v t ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ) v_t\cdot(R(t)v_t) v t ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ) and v t ( n ) ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ( n ) ) v^{(n)}_t\cdot(R(t)v^{(n)}_t) v t ( n ) ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ( n ) ) are nonnegative pointwise, and φ α , φ n ≥ 0 \varphi_{\alpha},\varphi_n\ge0 φ α , φ n ≥ 0 by monotonicity of the expectation (Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral ). By claim 1 of The Separation Theorem for Partial-Information Linear-Quadratic-Gaussian Control ,
J [ α ( n ) ] = V ∗ + p n , p n : = ∫ 0 T φ n ( t ) d t , J\bigl[\alpha^{(n)}\bigr]=V^{*}+p_n,\qquad p_n:=\int_0^T\varphi_n(t)\,dt, J [ α ( n ) ] = V ∗ + p n , p n := ∫ 0 T φ n ( t ) d t ,
each φ n \varphi_n φ n being continuous, and p n = ∫ φ n d λ = ∫ 1 D φ n d λ p_n=\int\varphi_n\,d\lambda=\int\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_n\,d\lambda p n = ∫ φ n d λ = ∫ 1 D φ n d λ by claims 3 and 6 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval . By The Linear-Quadratic-Gaussian Cost of an Extended Admissible Control , J [ α ( n ) ] → J [ α ] J[\alpha^{(n)}]\to J[\alpha] J [ α ( n ) ] → J [ α ] , so p n → J [ α ] − V ∗ p_n\to J[\alpha]-V^{*} p n → J [ α ] − V ∗ .
Step 1 (pointwise convergence on D D D and measurability). By claim 4 of Conditional Expectation and Estimation Error of the Extended Controlled State , max t ∑ i ∥ X ^ t ( n ) , i − X ^ t i ∥ 2 → 0 \max_t\sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{(n),i}_t-\widehat X^{i}_t\rVert_{2}\to0 max t ∑ i ∥ X t ( n ) , i − X t i ∥ 2 → 0 . For t ∈ D t\in D t ∈ D and each κ \kappa κ , using the triangle inequality (claim 2 of Cauchy-Schwarz and Triangle Inequalities for the Mean-Square Norm ) and the entry bound M Γ M_{\Gamma} M Γ ,
∥ v t ( n ) , κ − v t κ ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ α t ( n ) , κ − α t κ ∥ 2 + M Γ ∑ i = 1 l ∥ X ^ t ( n ) , i − X ^ t i ∥ 2 ⟶ 0 , (1) \lVert v^{(n),\kappa}_t-v^{\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}\le\lVert\alpha^{(n),\kappa}_t-\alpha^{\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}+M_{\Gamma}\sum_{i=1}^{l}\lVert\widehat X^{(n),i}_t-\widehat X^{i}_t\rVert_{2}\longrightarrow0 ,\tag{1} ∥ v t ( n ) , κ − v t κ ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ α t ( n ) , κ − α t κ ∥ 2 + M Γ i = 1 ∑ l ∥ X t ( n ) , i − X t i ∥ 2 ⟶ 0 , ( 1 )
the first summand tending to 0 0 0 along the full sequence by condition (ii) of Extended Admissible Control for the Linear-Gaussian State-Observation Model . As in the proof of Convergence of Corrections and Costs along Approximating Sequences of an Extended Admissible Control , bilinearity, claim 1 of Cauchy-Schwarz and Triangle Inequalities for the Mean-Square Norm , and claim 1 of Expected Bilinear Forms: Trace Formula and Mean-Square Continuity give, for every t t t and n n n ,
∣ φ n ( t ) − φ α ( t ) ∣ ≤ M R A n ( t ) B n ( t ) , (2) \bigl|\varphi_n(t)-\varphi_{\alpha}(t)\bigr|\le M_R\,A_n(t)\,B_n(t),\tag{2} φ n ( t ) − φ α ( t ) ≤ M R A n ( t ) B n ( t ) , ( 2 )
where A n ( t ) : = ∑ κ ∥ v t ( n ) , κ − v t κ ∥ 2 A_n(t):=\sum_{\kappa}\lVert v^{(n),\kappa}_t-v^{\kappa}_t\rVert_{2} A n ( t ) := ∑ κ ∥ v t ( n ) , κ − v t κ ∥ 2 and B n ( t ) : = ∑ κ ( ∥ v t ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 + ∥ v t κ ∥ 2 ) B_n(t):=\sum_{\kappa}\bigl(\lVert v^{(n),\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}+\lVert v^{\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}\bigr) B n ( t ) := ∑ κ ( ∥ v t ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 + ∥ v t κ ∥ 2 ) . By (1), A n ( t ) → 0 A_n(t)\to0 A n ( t ) → 0 for t ∈ D t\in D t ∈ D while B n ( t ) B_n(t) B n ( t ) converges, so φ n ( t ) → φ α ( t ) \varphi_n(t)\to\varphi_{\alpha}(t) φ n ( t ) → φ α ( t ) for every t ∈ D t\in D t ∈ D . Since each φ n \varphi_n φ n is continuous, hence measurable, claim 6 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval shows 1 D φ α \mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha} 1 D φ α is B [ 0 , T ] \mathcal{B}_{[0,T]} B [ 0 , T ] -measurable.
The functions 1 D A n \mathbf{1}_DA_n 1 D A n and 1 D B n \mathbf{1}_DB_n 1 D B n are also measurable, by the same claim 6: for fixed n n n and each j ∈ N j\in\mathbb{N} j ∈ N , the function t ↦ ∑ κ ∥ v t ( n ) , κ − w t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 t\mapsto\sum_{\kappa}\lVert v^{(n),\kappa}_t-w^{(j),\kappa}_t\rVert_{2} t ↦ ∑ κ ∥ v t ( n ) , κ − w t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 with w t ( j ) : = α t ( j ) − Γ ( t ) X ^ t w^{(j)}_t:=\alpha^{(j)}_t-\Gamma(t)\widehat X_t w t ( j ) := α t ( j ) − Γ ( t ) X t is continuous (every ingredient is componentwise mean-square continuous), and for t ∈ D t\in D t ∈ D it converges to A n ( t ) A_n(t) A n ( t ) as j → ∞ j\to\infty j → ∞ because ∥ α t ( j ) , κ − α t κ ∥ 2 → 0 \lVert\alpha^{(j),\kappa}_t-\alpha^{\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}\to0 ∥ α t ( j ) , κ − α t κ ∥ 2 → 0 along the full sequence; similarly for B n B_n B n using ∥ v t κ ∥ 2 = lim j ∥ w t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 \lVert v^{\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}=\lim_j\lVert w^{(j),\kappa}_t\rVert_{2} ∥ v t κ ∥ 2 = lim j ∥ w t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 on D D D .
Step 2 (uniform bounds). Let K 1 K_1 K 1 bound max t ∑ i ∥ X ^ t ( n ) , i ∥ 2 \max_t\sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{(n),i}_t\rVert_{2} max t ∑ i ∥ X t ( n ) , i ∥ 2 uniformly in n n n : indeed ∑ i ∥ X ^ t ( n ) , i ∥ 2 ≤ ∑ i ∥ X ^ t ( n ) , i − X ^ t i ∥ 2 + ∑ i ∥ X ^ t i ∥ 2 \sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{(n),i}_t\rVert_{2}\le\sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{(n),i}_t-\widehat X^{i}_t\rVert_{2}+\sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{i}_t\rVert_{2} ∑ i ∥ X t ( n ) , i ∥ 2 ≤ ∑ i ∥ X t ( n ) , i − X t i ∥ 2 + ∑ i ∥ X t i ∥ 2 , where the first summand is bounded uniformly in n n n and t t t by claim 4 of Conditional Expectation and Estimation Error of the Extended Controlled State (a convergent sequence of maxima is bounded) and the second is a continuous function of t t t (claim 1 there and the triangle inequality), bounded by Extreme Value Theorem on a Compact Interval ; write K ^ : = max t ∑ i ∥ X ^ t i ∥ 2 \widehat K:=\max_t\sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{i}_t\rVert_{2} K := max t ∑ i ∥ X t i ∥ 2 for the latter bound. Next, N n 2 : = ∫ 0 T g α ( n ) , 0 d t N_n^{2}:=\int_0^Tg_{\alpha^{(n)},0}\,dt N n 2 := ∫ 0 T g α ( n ) , 0 d t , with 0 0 0 the zero control, is bounded uniformly in n n n : choosing N 0 N_0 N 0 with d ( α ( n ) , α ( N 0 ) ) ≤ 1 d(\alpha^{(n)},\alpha^{(N_0)})\le1 d ( α ( n ) , α ( N 0 ) ) ≤ 1 for n ≥ N 0 n\ge N_0 n ≥ N 0 , the pointwise bound g α ( n ) , 0 ≤ 2 g α ( n ) , α ( N 0 ) + 2 g α ( N 0 ) , 0 g_{\alpha^{(n)},0}\le2g_{\alpha^{(n)},\alpha^{(N_0)}}+2g_{\alpha^{(N_0)},0} g α ( n ) , 0 ≤ 2 g α ( n ) , α ( N 0 ) + 2 g α ( N 0 ) , 0 (triangle inequality and ( x + y ) 2 ≤ 2 x 2 + 2 y 2 (x+y)^{2}\le2x^{2}+2y^{2} ( x + y ) 2 ≤ 2 x 2 + 2 y 2 ) gives N n 2 ≤ 2 + 2 max m ≤ N 0 N m 2 N_n^{2}\le2+2\max_{m\le N_0}N_m^{2} N n 2 ≤ 2 + 2 max m ≤ N 0 N m 2 .
Since Γ ( t ) \Gamma(t) Γ ( t ) is a k × l k\times l k × l matrix with entries bounded by M Γ M_{\Gamma} M Γ , for any tuple Y = ( Y 1 , … , Y l ) Y=(Y^{1},\dots,Y^{l}) Y = ( Y 1 , … , Y l ) of square-integrable random variables one has ∑ κ ∥ ( Γ ( t ) Y ) κ ∥ 2 ≤ k M Γ ∑ i ∥ Y i ∥ 2 \sum_{\kappa}\lVert(\Gamma(t)Y)^{\kappa}\rVert_{2}\le k\,M_{\Gamma}\sum_{i}\lVert Y^{i}\rVert_{2} ∑ κ ∥( Γ ( t ) Y ) κ ∥ 2 ≤ k M Γ ∑ i ∥ Y i ∥ 2 ; combined with ( x + y ) 2 ≤ 2 x 2 + 2 y 2 (x+y)^{2}\le2x^{2}+2y^{2} ( x + y ) 2 ≤ 2 x 2 + 2 y 2 and ( ∑ κ a κ ) 2 ≤ k ∑ κ a κ 2 \bigl(\sum_{\kappa}a_{\kappa}\bigr)^{2}\le k\sum_{\kappa}a_{\kappa}^{2} ( ∑ κ a κ ) 2 ≤ k ∑ κ a κ 2 this yields the pointwise bounds
( ∑ κ ∥ v t ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 ≤ 2 k ∑ κ ∥ α t ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 ( ∑ i ∥ X ^ t ( n ) , i ∥ 2 ) 2 , ( ∑ κ ∥ w t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 ≤ 2 k ∑ κ ∥ α t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 ( ∑ i ∥ X ^ t i ∥ 2 ) 2 . \Bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert v^{(n),\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}\Bigr)^{2}\le2k\sum_{\kappa}\lVert\alpha^{(n),\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}^{2}+2k^{2}M_{\Gamma}^{2}\Bigl(\sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{(n),i}_t\rVert_{2}\Bigr)^{2},\qquad
\Bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert w^{(j),\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}\Bigr)^{2}\le2k\sum_{\kappa}\lVert\alpha^{(j),\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}^{2}+2k^{2}M_{\Gamma}^{2}\Bigl(\sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{i}_t\rVert_{2}\Bigr)^{2}. ( κ ∑ ∥ v t ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 ≤ 2 k κ ∑ ∥ α t ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 ( i ∑ ∥ X t ( n ) , i ∥ 2 ) 2 , ( κ ∑ ∥ w t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 ≤ 2 k κ ∑ ∥ α t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 ( i ∑ ∥ X t i ∥ 2 ) 2 .
Integrating with claims 3 and 6 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval gives ∫ 1 D ( ∑ κ ∥ v ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 d λ ≤ 2 k N n 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 T K 1 2 \int\mathbf{1}_D\bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert v^{(n),\kappa}\rVert_{2}\bigr)^{2}d\lambda\le2kN_n^{2}+2k^{2}M_{\Gamma}^{2}TK_1^{2} ∫ 1 D ( ∑ κ ∥ v ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 d λ ≤ 2 k N n 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 T K 1 2 and ∫ 1 D ( ∑ κ ∥ w ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 d λ ≤ 2 k sup m N m 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 T K ^ 2 \int\mathbf{1}_D\bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert w^{(j),\kappa}\rVert_{2}\bigr)^{2}d\lambda\le2k\sup_mN_m^{2}+2k^{2}M_{\Gamma}^{2}T\widehat K^{2} ∫ 1 D ( ∑ κ ∥ w ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 d λ ≤ 2 k sup m N m 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 T K 2 for every j j j . On D D D , ( ∑ κ ∥ v t κ ∥ 2 ) 2 = lim j ( ∑ κ ∥ w t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 \bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert v^{\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}\bigr)^{2}=\lim_j\bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert w^{(j),\kappa}_t\rVert_{2}\bigr)^{2} ( ∑ κ ∥ v t κ ∥ 2 ) 2 = lim j ( ∑ κ ∥ w t ( j ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 , so by Fatou's Lemma ,
∫ 1 D ( ∑ κ ∥ v κ ∥ 2 ) 2 d λ ≤ 2 k sup m N m 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 T K ^ 2 < ∞ . \int\mathbf{1}_D\Bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert v^{\kappa}\rVert_{2}\Bigr)^{2}d\lambda\ \le\ 2k\sup_mN_m^{2}+2k^{2}M_{\Gamma}^{2}T\widehat K^{2}\ <\ \infty . ∫ 1 D ( κ ∑ ∥ v κ ∥ 2 ) 2 d λ ≤ 2 k m sup N m 2 + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 T K 2 < ∞.
Consequently, using B n 2 ≤ 2 ( ∑ κ ∥ v ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 + 2 ( ∑ κ ∥ v κ ∥ 2 ) 2 B_n^{2}\le2\bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert v^{(n),\kappa}\rVert_{2}\bigr)^{2}+2\bigl(\sum_{\kappa}\lVert v^{\kappa}\rVert_{2}\bigr)^{2} B n 2 ≤ 2 ( ∑ κ ∥ v ( n ) , κ ∥ 2 ) 2 + 2 ( ∑ κ ∥ v κ ∥ 2 ) 2 ,
∫ ( 1 D B n ) 2 d λ ≤ 8 k sup m N m 2 + 4 k 2 M Γ 2 T ( K 1 2 + K ^ 2 ) = : K 2 < ∞ . (3) \int\bigl(\mathbf{1}_DB_n\bigr)^{2}d\lambda\ \le\ 8k\sup_mN_m^{2}+4k^{2}M_{\Gamma}^{2}T\bigl(K_1^{2}+\widehat K^{2}\bigr)\ =:K_2<\infty .\tag{3} ∫ ( 1 D B n ) 2 d λ ≤ 8 k m sup N m 2 + 4 k 2 M Γ 2 T ( K 1 2 + K 2 ) =: K 2 < ∞. ( 3 )
Finally, by the same Γ \Gamma Γ -bound applied to A n A_n A n ,
∫ ( 1 D A n ) 2 d λ ≤ 2 k ∫ 1 D ∑ κ ∥ α ( n ) , κ − α κ ∥ 2 2 d λ + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 T ( max t ∑ i ∥ X ^ t ( n ) , i − X ^ t i ∥ 2 ) 2 ⟶ 0 , (4) \int\bigl(\mathbf{1}_DA_n\bigr)^{2}d\lambda\ \le\ 2k\int\mathbf{1}_D\sum_{\kappa}\lVert\alpha^{(n),\kappa}-\alpha^{\kappa}\rVert_{2}^{2}\,d\lambda\ +\ 2k^{2}M_{\Gamma}^{2}\,T\Bigl(\max_t\sum_i\lVert\widehat X^{(n),i}_t-\widehat X^{i}_t\rVert_{2}\Bigr)^{2}\ \longrightarrow\ 0,\tag{4} ∫ ( 1 D A n ) 2 d λ ≤ 2 k ∫ 1 D κ ∑ ∥ α ( n ) , κ − α κ ∥ 2 2 d λ + 2 k 2 M Γ 2 T ( t max i ∑ ∥ X t ( n ) , i − X t i ∥ 2 ) 2 ⟶ 0 , ( 4 )
by claim 2 of Almost-Everywhere Mean-Square Limits of Cauchy Sequences of Admissible Controls (the definitional approximating data satisfies its hypothesis) and claim 4 of Conditional Expectation and Estimation Error of the Extended Controlled State .
Step 3 (claim 1). First, finiteness: from (2) with n = 1 n=1 n = 1 , pointwise 1 D φ α ≤ 1 D φ 1 + M R 1 D A 1 B 1 \mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\le\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_1+M_R\mathbf{1}_DA_1B_1 1 D φ α ≤ 1 D φ 1 + M R 1 D A 1 B 1 , so by monotonicity and linearity of the Lebesgue integral (Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral ) and the integral Cauchy-Schwarz inequality (claim 4 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval ),
∫ 1 D φ α d λ ≤ p 1 + M R ( ∫ ( 1 D A 1 ) 2 d λ ) 1 / 2 ( ∫ ( 1 D B 1 ) 2 d λ ) 1 / 2 < ∞ . \int\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\,d\lambda\ \le\ p_1+M_R\Bigl(\int(\mathbf{1}_DA_1)^{2}d\lambda\Bigr)^{1/2}\Bigl(\int(\mathbf{1}_DB_1)^{2}d\lambda\Bigr)^{1/2}\ <\ \infty . ∫ 1 D φ α d λ ≤ p 1 + M R ( ∫ ( 1 D A 1 ) 2 d λ ) 1/2 ( ∫ ( 1 D B 1 ) 2 d λ ) 1/2 < ∞.
Now, for every n n n , the two-sided pointwise bounds 1 D φ n ≤ 1 D φ α + M R 1 D A n B n \mathbf{1}_D\varphi_n\le\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}+M_R\mathbf{1}_DA_nB_n 1 D φ n ≤ 1 D φ α + M R 1 D A n B n and 1 D φ α ≤ 1 D φ n + M R 1 D A n B n \mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\le\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_n+M_R\mathbf{1}_DA_nB_n 1 D φ α ≤ 1 D φ n + M R 1 D A n B n , integrated with the same tools, give (all integrals now being finite real numbers)
∣ ∫ 1 D φ n d λ − ∫ 1 D φ α d λ ∣ ≤ M R ( ∫ ( 1 D A n ) 2 d λ ) 1 / 2 ( ∫ ( 1 D B n ) 2 d λ ) 1 / 2 ⟶ 0 \Bigl|\int\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_n\,d\lambda-\int\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\,d\lambda\Bigr|\ \le\ M_R\Bigl(\int(\mathbf{1}_DA_n)^{2}d\lambda\Bigr)^{1/2}\Bigl(\int(\mathbf{1}_DB_n)^{2}d\lambda\Bigr)^{1/2}\ \longrightarrow\ 0 ∫ 1 D φ n d λ − ∫ 1 D φ α d λ ≤ M R ( ∫ ( 1 D A n ) 2 d λ ) 1/2 ( ∫ ( 1 D B n ) 2 d λ ) 1/2 ⟶ 0
by (3) and (4). Hence ∫ 1 D φ α d λ = lim n p n = J [ α ] − V ∗ \int\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\,d\lambda=\lim_np_n=J[\alpha]-V^{*} ∫ 1 D φ α d λ = lim n p n = J [ α ] − V ∗ , which is the displayed representation. If ( ( β ( m ) ) , D ′ ) \bigl((\beta^{(m)}),D'\bigr) ( ( β ( m ) ) , D ′ ) is any other approximating sequence for α \alpha α , the entire argument applies verbatim to that sequence and yields ∫ 1 D ′ φ α d λ = J [ α ] − V ∗ \int\mathbf{1}_{D'}\varphi_{\alpha}\,d\lambda=J[\alpha]-V^{*} ∫ 1 D ′ φ α d λ = J [ α ] − V ∗ as well, since J [ α ] J[\alpha] J [ α ] does not depend on the approximating sequence by The Linear-Quadratic-Gaussian Cost of an Extended Admissible Control ; so the integral is independent of the choice of approximating sequence.
Step 4 (claim 2). Since 1 D φ α ≥ 0 \mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\ge0 1 D φ α ≥ 0 , claim 1 gives J [ α ] ≥ V ∗ J[\alpha]\ge V^{*} J [ α ] ≥ V ∗ . Suppose J [ α ] = V ∗ J[\alpha]=V^{*} J [ α ] = V ∗ , so ∫ 1 D φ α d λ = 0 \int\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\,d\lambda=0 ∫ 1 D φ α d λ = 0 . By claim 5 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval , λ ( { 1 D φ α > 0 } ) = 0 \lambda(\{\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}>0\})=0 λ ({ 1 D φ α > 0 }) = 0 . Set D 0 : = D ∖ { 1 D φ α > 0 } D_0:=D\setminus\{\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}>0\} D 0 := D ∖ { 1 D φ α > 0 } ; its complement is the union of two null sets, hence null by the subadditivity argument of claim 5 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval . For t ∈ D 0 t\in D_0 t ∈ D 0 : E [ v t ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ) ] = 0 \mathbb{E}[v_t\cdot(R(t)v_t)]=0 E [ v t ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t )] = 0 with the integrand nonnegative pointwise, so by Markov's inequality (Markov's and Chebyshev's Inequalities ) v t ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ) = 0 v_t\cdot(R(t)v_t)=0 v t ⋅ ( R ( t ) v t ) = 0 almost surely ; on that event, positive definiteness of R ( t ) R(t) R ( t ) forces v t = 0 v_t=0 v t = 0 , that is, α t = Γ ( t ) X ^ t \alpha_t=\Gamma(t)\widehat X_t α t = Γ ( t ) X t componentwise almost surely. Conversely, suppose such a co-null D 0 D_0 D 0 exists. For t ∈ D 0 t\in D_0 t ∈ D 0 , v t = 0 v_t=0 v t = 0 almost surely componentwise, so φ α ( t ) = 0 \varphi_{\alpha}(t)=0 φ α ( t ) = 0 (the expectation of a random variable almost surely equal to 0 0 0 ). Applying claim 6 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval with the co-null set D 0 D_0 D 0 and g : = 1 D φ α g:=\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha} g := 1 D φ α gives ∫ 1 D φ α d λ = ∫ 1 D φ α 1 D 0 d λ = 0 \int\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\,d\lambda=\int\mathbf{1}_D\varphi_{\alpha}\mathbf{1}_{D_0}\,d\lambda=0 ∫ 1 D φ α d λ = ∫ 1 D φ α 1 D 0 d λ = 0 , since the integrand vanishes identically. By claim 1, J [ α ] = V ∗ J[\alpha]=V^{*} J [ α ] = V ∗ .
Step 5 (claim 3). By claim 3 of The Separation Theorem for Partial-Information Linear-Quadratic-Gaussian Control , the closed-loop control α ∗ \alpha^{*} α ∗ of Existence and Self-Consistency of the Closed-Loop Feedback Control is admissible with J [ α ∗ ] = V ∗ J[\alpha^{*}]=V^{*} J [ α ∗ ] = V ∗ ; by claim 1 of Convergence of Corrections and Costs along Approximating Sequences of an Extended Admissible Control it is extended admissible, and by the consistency recorded in The Linear-Quadratic-Gaussian Cost of an Extended Admissible Control its extended cost is the same number V ∗ V^{*} V ∗ . Combined with claim 2, J [ α ] ≥ V ∗ = J [ α ∗ ] J[\alpha]\ge V^{*}=J[\alpha^{*}] J [ α ] ≥ V ∗ = J [ α ∗ ] for every extended admissible α \alpha α , so V ∗ V^{*} V ∗ is the minimum of the extended problem, and the optimal value over the extended class coincides with the optimal value over the admissible class. □ \square □