TheoremBase

Proof

Throughout, fix the common data, ZZ, and WW as in the statement, write M2=12(1+M)M_2=\tfrac12(1+M), and abbreviate st=st(N)\mathfrak{s}_t=\mathfrak{s}^{(N)}_t, at=at(N)\mathfrak{a}_t=\mathfrak{a}^{(N)}_t, ut=ut(N)u_t=u^{(N)}_t, Σt=Σt(N)\Sigma_t=\Sigma^{(N)}_t, αt=αt(N)\alpha_t=\alpha^{(N)}_t, and εtγ=εt(N),γ\varepsilon^\gamma_t=\varepsilon^{(N),\gamma}_t when NN is fixed. All pointwise inequalities between random variables below hold at every point of Ω\Omega, and expectations of nonnegative random variables are taken in [0,∞][0,\infty] with the additivity and monotonicity of the linearity and monotonicity theorem.

Step 1 (second moments and applicability). For a real a≥0a\ge0, (1−a)2≥0(1-a)^2\ge0 gives a≤12(1+a2)a\le\tfrac12(1+a^2). Applying this at each ω\omega with a=∣at∣2a=|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2 and a=∣st∣2a=|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2 and taking expectations, hypothesis (M) gives, for every NN and tt,

E[∣at∣2]≤12(1+E[∣at∣4])≤M2,E[∣st∣2]≤M2.\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2\big]\le\tfrac12\big(1+\mathbb{E}[|\mathfrak{a}_t|^4]\big)\le M_2,\qquad \mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2\big]\le M_2 .

The function t↦E[∣at∣2]t\mapsto\mathbb{E}[|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2] is measurable with well-defined Lebesgue integral over the compact interval [0,T][0,T], by part (a) of the a priori second-moment bound, and is bounded by the constant M2M_2, so A2(N)≤TM2<∞\mathcal{A}^{(N)}_2\le TM_2<\infty by the monotonicity of the interval integral. Hence the integrability hypothesis A2<∞\mathcal{A}_2<\infty of the second-order expansion holds for every NN — its remaining hypotheses (the common data, the per-NN driving system, A\mathcal{A}-valued policy, and solution, the extensions, and the convexity of the control set A\mathcal{A}), and hypotheses (H1)--(H2) of the completion-of-squares theorem, being assumed in the statement — and with it all conclusions of the expansion and of the completion-of-squares theorem.

Step 2 (the identity defining rNr_N). Conclusion (c) of the expansion gives JN=LQG[(s),(a)]+RN\mathcal{J}_N=LQG[(\mathfrak{s}),(\mathfrak{a})]+R_N, and conclusion (c) of the completion-of-squares theorem gives

LQG[(s),(a)]=E[s0⋅Z0s0]+∫[0,T]E[us⋅Rsus]ds+∫[0,T](2 E[ss⋅Zses]+∑γ,δ=1lZsγδ E[Θγδ(Σs,αs)])ds,LQG[(\mathfrak{s}),(\mathfrak{a})]=\mathbb{E}\big[\mathfrak{s}_0\cdot Z_0\mathfrak{s}_0\big]+\int_{[0,T]}\mathbb{E}\big[u_s\cdot R_su_s\big]ds+\int_{[0,T]}\Big(2\,\mathbb{E}\big[\mathfrak{s}_s\cdot Z_se_s\big]+\sum_{\gamma,\delta=1}^{l}Z^{\gamma\delta}_s\,\mathbb{E}\big[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)\big]\Big)ds,

with all integrals finite. By clause (b) of the covariance deviation lemma, each s↦E[Θγδ(Σs,αs)]s\mapsto\mathbb{E}[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)] is bounded and measurable, and by clause (c) there each s↦Θs⋆γδs\mapsto\Theta^{\star\gamma\delta}_s is continuous and bounded; the entries of s↦Zss\mapsto Z_s are continuous and bounded by CZC_Z (conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem and hypothesis (H2)). Hence s↦∑γδZsγδE[Θγδ(Σs,αs)]s\mapsto\sum_{\gamma\delta}Z^{\gamma\delta}_s\mathbb{E}[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)] and s↦∑γδZsγδΘs⋆γδs\mapsto\sum_{\gamma\delta}Z^{\gamma\delta}_s\Theta^{\star\gamma\delta}_s are bounded measurable functions with finite interval integrals — each entry s↦Zsγδs\mapsto Z^{\gamma\delta}_s, being continuous, is measurable by clause 3 of the interval toolkit, as is each s↦Θs⋆γδs\mapsto\Theta^{\star\gamma\delta}_s, and finite sums and products of measurable real functions are measurable by the arithmetic of measurable functions —, so the third integral above splits by the linearity of the interval integral, with s↦2E[ss⋅Zses]s\mapsto2\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}_s\cdot Z_se_s], the difference of integrable functions, integrable. Subtracting ∫[0,T]∑γδZsγδΘs⋆γδ ds\int_{[0,T]}\sum_{\gamma\delta}Z^{\gamma\delta}_s\Theta^{\star\gamma\delta}_s\,ds from both sides of the identity of the statement, we conclude that rNr_N is well defined and

rN=RN+∫[0,T]2 E[ss⋅Zses] ds+∫[0,T]∑γ,δ=1lZsγδ(E[Θγδ(Σs,αs)]−Θs⋆γδ)ds  =:  RN+IIN+IIIN.r_N=R_N+\int_{[0,T]}2\,\mathbb{E}\big[\mathfrak{s}_s\cdot Z_se_s\big]\,ds+\int_{[0,T]}\sum_{\gamma,\delta=1}^{l}Z^{\gamma\delta}_s\Big(\mathbb{E}\big[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)\big]-\Theta^{\star\gamma\delta}_s\Big)ds\;=:\;R_N+\mathrm{II}_N+\mathrm{III}_N .

Step 3 (RNR_N vanishes). Let ωL,ωb,ωG\omega_L,\omega_b,\omega_G and ρt\rho_t be as in the expansion theorem, and set ω∞=2Kc+6 l K CP\omega_\infty=2K_c+6\,l\,K\,C_P, so that ωL(u)+CP ωb(u)≤ω∞\omega_L(u)+C_P\,\omega_b(u)\le\omega_\infty and ωG(u)≤2Kc\omega_G(u)\le2K_c for every u≥0u\ge0 by conclusion (a) there. Fix δ>0\delta>0. At every point of [0,T]×Ω[0,T]\times\Omega, either ρt≤δ\rho_t\le\delta, and then (ωL(ρt)+CPωb(ρt))(∣st∣2+∣at∣2)≤(ωL(δ)+CPωb(δ))(∣st∣2+∣at∣2)\big(\omega_L(\rho_t)+C_P\omega_b(\rho_t)\big)\big(|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2+|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2\big)\le\big(\omega_L(\delta)+C_P\omega_b(\delta)\big)\big(|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2+|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2\big) since the moduli are nondecreasing, or ρt>δ\rho_t>\delta, and then, because ∣st∣2+∣at∣2=Nρt2>Nδ2|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2+|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2=N\rho_t^2>N\delta^2 and (x+y)2≤2x2+2y2(x+y)^2\le2x^2+2y^2,

(ωL(ρt)+CPωb(ρt))(∣st∣2+∣at∣2)≤ω∞ (∣st∣2+∣at∣2)2Nδ2≤2 ω∞Nδ2(∣st∣4+∣at∣4).\big(\omega_L(\rho_t)+C_P\omega_b(\rho_t)\big)\big(|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2+|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2\big)\le\omega_\infty\,\frac{\big(|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2+|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2\big)^2}{N\delta^2}\le\frac{2\,\omega_\infty}{N\delta^2}\big(|\mathfrak{s}_t|^4+|\mathfrak{a}_t|^4\big).

Adding the two bounds and taking expectations, using Step 1 and (M),

E[(ωL(ρt)+CPωb(ρt))(∣st∣2+∣at∣2)]≤2M2(ωL(δ)+CPωb(δ))+4 ω∞MNδ2 ;\mathbb{E}\Big[\big(\omega_L(\rho_t)+C_P\omega_b(\rho_t)\big)\big(|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2+|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2\big)\Big]\le2M_2\big(\omega_L(\delta)+C_P\omega_b(\delta)\big)+\frac{4\,\omega_\infty M}{N\delta^2}\,;

the integral over [0,T][0,T] of the left-hand side is well defined and finite by conclusion (b) of the expansion, and is at most TT times the constant right-hand side by monotonicity. Similarly, since d(ΣT,ST)=N−1/2∣sT∣d(\Sigma_T,S_T)=N^{-1/2}|\mathfrak{s}_T|,

E[ωG(d(ΣT,ST))∣sT∣2]≤ωG(δ) M2+2Kc MNδ2.\mathbb{E}\Big[\omega_G\big(d(\Sigma_T,S_T)\big)|\mathfrak{s}_T|^2\Big]\le\omega_G(\delta)\,M_2+\frac{2K_c\,M}{N\delta^2}.

By conclusion (c) of the expansion,

∣RN∣ ≤ l+m2 T(2M2(ωL(δ)+CPωb(δ))+4ω∞MNδ2)+l2(ωG(δ)M2+2KcMNδ2).|R_N|\ \le\ \frac{l+m}{2}\,T\Big(2M_2\big(\omega_L(\delta)+C_P\omega_b(\delta)\big)+\frac{4\omega_\infty M}{N\delta^2}\Big)+\frac{l}{2}\Big(\omega_G(\delta)M_2+\frac{2K_cM}{N\delta^2}\Big).

Given ε′′>0\varepsilon''>0, conclusion (a) of the expansion provides δ>0\delta>0 with ωL(δ)+CPωb(δ)\omega_L(\delta)+C_P\omega_b(\delta) and ωG(δ)\omega_G(\delta) so small that the δ\delta-terms sum to at most ε′′/2\varepsilon''/2, and then N1N_1 with the 1/N1/N-terms at most ε′′/2\varepsilon''/2 for N≥N1N\ge N_1; hence ∣RN∣≤ε′′|R_N|\le\varepsilon'' for N≥N1N\ge N_1, and (RN)(R_N) has limit 00.

Step 4 (IIN\mathrm{II}_N and IIIN\mathrm{III}_N vanish). By the componentwise estimate ∣xγ∣≤∣x∣|x^\gamma|\le|x| of the componentwise calculus toolkit and ∣Zsγδ∣≤CZ|Z^{\gamma\delta}_s|\le C_Z, at every point ∣ss⋅Zses∣≤∑γ,δCZ∣ssγ∣∣esδ∣≤CZ l2 ∣ss∣∣es∣|\mathfrak{s}_s\cdot Z_se_s|\le\sum_{\gamma,\delta}C_Z|\mathfrak{s}^\gamma_s||e^\delta_s|\le C_Z\,l^2\,|\mathfrak{s}_s||e_s|, so by conclusion (b) of the completion-of-squares theorem, ∣ss⋅Zses∣≤CZl2ce N−1/2∣ss∣(∣ss∣2+∣as∣2)|\mathfrak{s}_s\cdot Z_se_s|\le C_Zl^2c_e\,N^{-1/2}|\mathfrak{s}_s|\big(|\mathfrak{s}_s|^2+|\mathfrak{a}_s|^2\big). Pointwise, (∣s∣−∣s∣2)2≥0(|\mathfrak{s}|-|\mathfrak{s}|^2)^2\ge0 gives ∣s∣3≤12(∣s∣2+∣s∣4)|\mathfrak{s}|^3\le\tfrac12(|\mathfrak{s}|^2+|\mathfrak{s}|^4), and (∣s∣−∣a∣2)2≥0(|\mathfrak{s}|-|\mathfrak{a}|^2)^2\ge0 gives ∣s∣∣a∣2≤12(∣s∣2+∣a∣4)|\mathfrak{s}||\mathfrak{a}|^2\le\tfrac12(|\mathfrak{s}|^2+|\mathfrak{a}|^4); hence with Step 1 and (M), E[∣ss∣(∣ss∣2+∣as∣2)]≤M2+M=:M3\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_s|(|\mathfrak{s}_s|^2+|\mathfrak{a}_s|^2)\big]\le M_2+M=:M_3 for every ss. Therefore ∣2 E[ss⋅Zses]∣≤2 E[∣ss⋅Zses∣]≤2CZl2ceM3N−1/2|2\,\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}_s\cdot Z_se_s]|\le2\,\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_s\cdot Z_se_s|\big]\le2C_Zl^2c_eM_3N^{-1/2} for every ss (monotonicity, and ±X≤∣X∣\pm X\le|X|), so by monotonicity of the interval integral ∣IIN∣≤2TCZl2ceM3 N−1/2|\mathrm{II}_N|\le2TC_Zl^2c_eM_3\,N^{-1/2}, and (IIN)(\mathrm{II}_N) has limit 00. For IIIN\mathrm{III}_N: with cΘc_\Theta as in the covariance deviation lemma, its clause (b) and Step 1 give, for every ss,

∣∑γ,δ=1lZsγδ(E[Θγδ(Σs,αs)]−Θs⋆γδ)∣ ≤ CZ l2 cΘN(2M2)1/2,\Big|\sum_{\gamma,\delta=1}^{l}Z^{\gamma\delta}_s\Big(\mathbb{E}\big[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)\big]-\Theta^{\star\gamma\delta}_s\Big)\Big|\ \le\ C_Z\,l^2\,\frac{c_\Theta}{\sqrt{N}}\big(2M_2\big)^{1/2},

so ∣IIIN∣≤TCZl2cΘ(2M2)1/2N−1/2|\mathrm{III}_N|\le TC_Zl^2c_\Theta(2M_2)^{1/2}N^{-1/2}, and (IIIN)(\mathrm{III}_N) has limit 00. Combining Steps 3--4 with the triangle inequality, (rN)(r_N) has limit 00. Together with the finiteness assertions of Step 2 this proves conclusion (a).

Step 5 (filtering bound). Fix NN and tt, and write K=Rt−1WtT\mathcal{K}=R_t^{-1}W_t^T, a real matrix with mm rows and ll columns with entries bounded by CKC_K (conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem). Each component of st\mathfrak{s}_t is bounded: every coordinate of the empirical state measure and of StS_t lies in [0,1][0,1], both lying in the probability simplex at every ω\omega, so ∣stγ∣≤N|\mathfrak{s}^\gamma_t|\le\sqrt{N} at every ω\omega, and bounded random variables are square-integrable by monotonicity. Each component of at\mathfrak{a}_t satisfies E[(atj)2]≤E[∣at∣2]≤M2\mathbb{E}[(\mathfrak{a}^j_t)^2]\le\mathbb{E}[|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2]\le M_2 (componentwise estimate and Step 1), hence is square-integrable, and is almost surely equal to a Gt(N)\mathcal{G}^{(N)}_t-measurable square-integrable random variable by claim 2 of the observation-adaptedness lemma, applied with the mean-field trajectory pair (S,A)(S,A) of the common data. Set X=−KstX=-\mathcal{K}\mathfrak{s}_t componentwise, so Xi=−∑γ=1lKiγstγX^i=-\sum_{\gamma=1}^{l}\mathcal{K}^{i\gamma}\mathfrak{s}^\gamma_t is square-integrable by the closure properties of the square-integrability definition, and Y=atY=\mathfrak{a}_t; then Y−X=utY-X=u_t componentwise, and E[ut⋅Rtut]=E[(Y−X)⋅(Rt(Y−X))]\mathbb{E}[u_t\cdot R_tu_t]=\mathbb{E}[(Y-X)\cdot(R_t(Y-X))], the entry pairing of the completion-of-squares theorem and the index formula of the conditional mean-square optimality lemma being the identical double sum. Each RtR_t is symmetric positive definite (conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem), hence positive semidefinite, so that lemma applies with k=mk=m, G=Gt(N)\mathcal{G}=\mathcal{G}^{(N)}_t, and weight RtR_t: fixing conditional expectations μγ\mu^\gamma of stγ\mathfrak{s}^\gamma_t given Gt(N)\mathcal{G}^{(N)}_t, so that εtγ=stγ−μγ\varepsilon^\gamma_t=\mathfrak{s}^\gamma_t-\mu^\gamma — each μγ\mu^\gamma being Gt(N)\mathcal{G}^{(N)}_t-measurable and square-integrable by the defining conditions of the conditional-expectation definition, so that each εtγ\varepsilon^\gamma_t is square-integrable by the closure properties of the square-integrability definition — and conditional expectations μXi\mu_X^i of XiX^i,

E[ut⋅Rtut] ≥ E[εX⋅(RtεX)],εXi=Xi−μXi.\mathbb{E}\big[u_t\cdot R_tu_t\big]\ \ge\ \mathbb{E}\big[\varepsilon_X\cdot(R_t\varepsilon_X)\big],\qquad \varepsilon_X^i=X^i-\mu_X^i .

By the linearity of conditional expectation (part 1 of the basic properties lemma, applied finitely many times), −∑γKiγμγ-\sum_\gamma\mathcal{K}^{i\gamma}\mu^\gamma is a conditional expectation of XiX^i, so μXi=−∑γKiγμγ\mu_X^i=-\sum_\gamma\mathcal{K}^{i\gamma}\mu^\gamma almost surely by the uniqueness assertion of the existence and uniqueness theorem; hence εXi=−∑γKiγεtγ\varepsilon_X^i=-\sum_\gamma\mathcal{K}^{i\gamma}\varepsilon^\gamma_t almost surely. For square-integrable random variables φ,φ~,ψ\varphi,\tilde{\varphi},\psi with φ\varphi almost surely equal to φ~\tilde{\varphi} (the letters UU and VV being reserved for the open sets of the extension and MM for the moment bound) one has E[φψ]=E[φ~ψ]\mathbb{E}[\varphi\psi]=\mathbb{E}[\tilde{\varphi}\psi], since ∥φ−φ~∥2=0\lVert\varphi-\tilde{\varphi}\rVert_2=0 by the null-equivalence statement of the square-integrability definition and ∣E[(φ−φ~)ψ]∣≤∥φ−φ~∥2∥ψ∥2=0|\mathbb{E}[(\varphi-\tilde{\varphi})\psi]|\le\lVert\varphi-\tilde{\varphi}\rVert_2\lVert\psi\rVert_2=0 by the Cauchy--Schwarz inequality; a product both of whose factors are replaced by almost-sure equals requires two applications, one factor at a time. Applying this and the linearity of the integral entrywise,

E[εX⋅(RtεX)]=∑i,i′=1mRtii′∑γ,δ=1lKiγKi′δ E[εtγεtδ]=∑γ,δ=1l(KTRt K)γδ E[εtγεtδ],\mathbb{E}\big[\varepsilon_X\cdot(R_t\varepsilon_X)\big]=\sum_{i,i'=1}^{m}R^{ii'}_t\sum_{\gamma,\delta=1}^{l}\mathcal{K}^{i\gamma}\mathcal{K}^{i'\delta}\,\mathbb{E}\big[\varepsilon^\gamma_t\varepsilon^\delta_t\big]=\sum_{\gamma,\delta=1}^{l}\big(\mathcal{K}^T R_t\,\mathcal{K}\big)^{\gamma\delta}\,\mathbb{E}\big[\varepsilon^\gamma_t\varepsilon^\delta_t\big],

by the entry formulas for matrix products and the transpose. Since RtR_t is symmetric positive definite, Rt−1R_t^{-1} is symmetric positive definite by the invertibility lemma, and

KTRtK=(Rt−1WtT)TRt(Rt−1WtT)=WtRt−1RtRt−1WtT=WtRt−1WtT=Ξt,\mathcal{K}^TR_t\mathcal{K}=(R_t^{-1}W_t^T)^TR_t(R_t^{-1}W_t^T)=W_tR_t^{-1}R_tR_t^{-1}W_t^T=W_tR_t^{-1}W_t^T=\Xi_t,

using the reverse-order law for the transpose of a product (claim 3 of the componentwise calculus toolkit), the involutivity of the transpose (immediate from its definition), and the symmetry of Rt−1R_t^{-1}. The matrix Ξt\Xi_t is symmetric, ΞtT=Wt(Rt−1)TWtT=Ξt\Xi_t^T=W_t(R_t^{-1})^TW_t^T=\Xi_t, and positive semidefinite: for x∈Rlx\in\mathbb{R}^l, x⋅(Ξtx)=(WtTx)⋅(Rt−1(WtTx))≥0x\cdot(\Xi_tx)=(W_t^Tx)\cdot\big(R_t^{-1}(W_t^Tx)\big)\ge0, using the adjoint identity of claim 3 of the toolkit (a matrix moves across the dot product as its transpose) and the positive definiteness of Rt−1R_t^{-1}. Finally ∑γδΞtγδE[εtγεtδ]=E[εt⋅(Ξtεt)]≥0\sum_{\gamma\delta}\Xi^{\gamma\delta}_t\mathbb{E}[\varepsilon^\gamma_t\varepsilon^\delta_t]=\mathbb{E}[\varepsilon_t\cdot(\Xi_t\varepsilon_t)]\ge0 by claim 1 of the expected quadratic form lemma and the pointwise nonnegativity of εt(ω)⋅(Ξtεt(ω))\varepsilon_t(\omega)\cdot(\Xi_t\varepsilon_t(\omega)) with monotonicity of the integral. If μˉγ\bar{\mu}^\gamma is another choice of conditional expectations, each μˉγ\bar{\mu}^\gamma is almost surely equal to μγ\mu^\gamma by the uniqueness assertion, so each product expectation E[εtγεtδ]\mathbb{E}[\varepsilon^\gamma_t\varepsilon^\delta_t] is unchanged, again by two applications of the almost-sure substitution above; the middle quantity is therefore independent of the choice. This proves conclusion (b).

Step 6 (lower bound). By claim 1 of the expected quadratic form lemma, E[s0⋅Z0s0]=∑γδZ0γδE[s0γs0δ]\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}_0\cdot Z_0\mathfrak{s}_0]=\sum_{\gamma\delta}Z_0^{\gamma\delta}\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}_0^\gamma\mathfrak{s}_0^\delta]. Let ε′>0\varepsilon'>0. By hypothesis (I) there is N1N_1 such that ∣E[s0(N),γs0(N),δ]−Π0γδ∣≤ε′/(2l2CZ+2)|\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}^{(N),\gamma}_0\mathfrak{s}^{(N),\delta}_0]-\Pi_0^{\gamma\delta}|\le\varepsilon'/(2l^2C_Z+2) for all γ,δ\gamma,\delta and N≥N1N\ge N_1, whence ∣E[s0⋅Z0s0]−∑γδZ0γδΠ0γδ∣≤l2CZ⋅ε′/(2l2CZ+2)≤ε′/2\big|\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}_0\cdot Z_0\mathfrak{s}_0]-\sum_{\gamma\delta}Z_0^{\gamma\delta}\Pi_0^{\gamma\delta}\big|\le l^2C_Z\cdot\varepsilon'/(2l^2C_Z+2)\le\varepsilon'/2; and by conclusion (a) there is N2N_2 with ∣rN∣≤ε′/2|r_N|\le\varepsilon'/2 for N≥N2N\ge N_2. For N≥N0=max⁡(N1,N2)N\ge N_0=\max(N_1,N_2), the identity of conclusion (a) gives

JN ≥ ∑γ,δ=1lZ0γδΠ0γδ−ε′2  +  ∫[0,T]E[us(N)⋅Rsus(N)]ds  +  ∫[0,T]∑γ,δ=1lZsγδΘs⋆γδ ds  −  ε′2,\mathcal{J}_N\ \ge\ \sum_{\gamma,\delta=1}^{l}Z^{\gamma\delta}_0\Pi^{\gamma\delta}_0-\tfrac{\varepsilon'}{2}\;+\;\int_{[0,T]}\mathbb{E}\big[u^{(N)}_s\cdot R_su^{(N)}_s\big]ds\;+\;\int_{[0,T]}\sum_{\gamma,\delta=1}^{l}Z^{\gamma\delta}_s\Theta^{\star\gamma\delta}_s\,ds\;-\;\tfrac{\varepsilon'}{2},

which is conclusion (c). □\square

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…