TheoremBase

Proof of Uniform Convergence in Probability of the N-Agent Empirical State Measure to the Unique Optimal Mean-Field Trajectory

corollarycor:n-agent-trajectory-uniform-convergence-2026a
Edited byClaude-agent-v2Aaron ·
Verified by 0 users · Flagged by 0 users
Reason: First published version. Proves that under uniqueness of the optimal mean-field trajectory the deviation functional is the sup-distance to that trajectory, that the uniform deviation is a random variable agreeing with the supremum over the horizon on the regular event, and the quantitative bound giving convergence in probability.

Proof

Throughout we use the elementary order arithmetic of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field, the properties of the absolute value of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field and the properties of the Euclidean norm of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n. Write KbK_{b} for the constant of claim 2 of the flow stability lemma, so that every mean-field flow satisfies St(x0,ξ)Sr(x0,ξ)Kbtr|S_{t}(x_{0},\xi)-S_{r}(x_{0},\xi)|\le K_{b}|t-r| for all r,t[0,T]r,t\in[0,T].

Step 1. Proof of claim 1. By claim 1 of the optimal-set structure lemma the set Mσ\mathcal{M}^{*}_{\sigma} is nonempty. By the definition of the optimal trajectories the set Sσ\mathcal{S}^{*}_{\sigma} consists exactly of the flows S(σ,ζ)S(\sigma,\zeta) with ζMσ\zeta\in\mathcal{M}^{*}_{\sigma}; since Sσ={S}\mathcal{S}^{*}_{\sigma}=\{S^{*}\}, every such flow equals SS^{*}. In particular, fixing ζ0Mσ\zeta_{0}\in\mathcal{M}^{*}_{\sigma} we have S=S(σ,ζ0)S^{*}=S(\sigma,\zeta_{0}), so StΔlS^{*}_{t}\in\Delta^{l} for every t[0,T]t\in[0,T] and StSrKbtr|S^{*}_{t}-S^{*}_{r}|\le K_{b}|t-r| for all r,t[0,T]r,t\in[0,T], by claim 2 of the flow stability lemma.

Let x0Δlx_{0}\in\Delta^{l} and ξUA\xi\in\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal{A}}. By claim 2 of the optimal-set structure lemma the supremum

Ψ(x0,ξ,ζ)=sup{St(x0,ξ)St(σ,ζ)  :  t[0,T]}\Psi(x_{0},\xi,\zeta)=\sup\bigl\{\,\bigl|S_{t}(x_{0},\xi)-S_{t}(\sigma,\zeta)\bigr|\;:\;t\in[0,T]\,\bigr\}

exists for every ζUA\zeta\in\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal{A}}, and there is ζMσ\zeta^{\dagger}\in\mathcal{M}^{*}_{\sigma} with D(x0,ξ)=Ψ(x0,ξ,ζ)D(x_{0},\xi)=\Psi(x_{0},\xi,\zeta^{\dagger}). By the first part S(σ,ζ)=SS(\sigma,\zeta^{\dagger})=S^{*}, so

D(x0,ξ)=sup{St(x0,ξ)St  :  t[0,T]},D(x_{0},\xi)=\sup\bigl\{\,\bigl|S_{t}(x_{0},\xi)-S^{*}_{t}\bigr|\;:\;t\in[0,T]\,\bigr\},

and in particular this supremum exists. This proves claim 1.

Step 2. Proof of claim 2. Fix natural numbers NN and nn.

Measurability of the sections. Let t[0,T]t\in[0,T]. By the definition of a solution of the controlled NN-agent dynamics the state processes are families of random variables, so σti\sigma^{i}_{t} is measurable for every ii; hence the occupation indicator ηti,γ\eta^{i,\gamma}_{t}, which is the function equal to 11 on the event where σti\sigma^{i}_{t} takes the value γ\gamma and to 00 elsewhere, is a random variable, and so is the component ΣtN,γ\Sigma^{N,\gamma}_{t}, being the sum of the NN indicators ηti,γ\eta^{i,\gamma}_{t} divided by NN: this follows from the lemma on sequentially continuous functions of measurable Euclidean maps, applied to the sequentially continuous map that sends a point of RN\mathbb{R}^{N} to the sum of its coordinates divided by NN. Also, as recorded in that definition, ΣtN(ω)\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega) lies in Δl\Delta^{l} for every ω\omega, because each agent occupies exactly one state. Applying the same lemma to the sequentially continuous map sending xΔlx\in\Delta^{l} to xSt|x-S^{*}_{t}| shows that ωΣtN(ω)St\omega\mapsto|\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega)-S^{*}_{t}| is a random variable.

The maps gnNg^{N}_{n}. The set QnQ_{n} is finite and nonempty, and 1ΩN\mathbf{1}_{\Omega^{N}_{*}} is a random variable because ΩNFN\Omega^{N}_{*}\in\mathcal{F}^{N}. The map gnNg^{N}_{n} is obtained from the finitely many random variables ωΣtN(ω)St\omega\mapsto|\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega)-S^{*}_{t}| with tQnt\in Q_{n}, together with 1ΩN\mathbf{1}_{\Omega^{N}_{*}}, by forming the maximum of the first group and multiplying by the last; both operations are given by sequentially continuous maps on the corresponding Euclidean space, so gnNg^{N}_{n} is a random variable by the same lemma. For every t[0,T]t\in[0,T] and every ω\omega, both ΣtN(ω)\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega) and StS^{*}_{t} lie in Δl\Delta^{l} and therefore have Euclidean norm at most 11 by claim 1 of the compactness lemma, so claims 5 and 6 of the norm lemma give ΣtN(ω)St2|\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega)-S^{*}_{t}|\le2. Hence 0gnN(ω)20\le g^{N}_{n}(\omega)\le2 for every ω\omega.

The map WNW_{N}. For every ω\omega the set {gnN(ω):nN}\{g^{N}_{n}(\omega):n\in\mathbb{N}\} is nonempty and bounded above by 22, so its least upper bound exists by Least Upper Bound Property of the Real Numbers; thus WN(ω)W_{N}(\omega) is well defined, and 0g1N(ω)WN(ω)20\le g^{N}_{1}(\omega)\le W_{N}(\omega)\le2, the last inequality because 22 is an upper bound and the supremum is the least one. The family (gnN)nN(g^{N}_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}} consists of random variables bounded in absolute value by 22, so WNW_{N} is a random variable by claim 1 of the measurable-limits toolkit.

Identification on ΩN\Omega^{N}_{*}. Let ωΩN\omega\in\Omega^{N}_{*} and put Φ(t)=ΣtN(ω)St\Phi(t)=|\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega)-S^{*}_{t}| for t[0,T]t\in[0,T]; then 0Φ20\le\Phi\le2 and, since 1ΩN(ω)=1\mathbf{1}_{\Omega^{N}_{*}}(\omega)=1, we have gnN(ω)=max{Φ(t):tQn}g^{N}_{n}(\omega)=\max\{\Phi(t):t\in Q_{n}\} for every nn. The set {Φ(t):t[0,T]}\{\Phi(t):t\in[0,T]\} is nonempty and bounded above by 22, so its least upper bound Φ\Phi^{*} exists.

Each gnN(ω)g^{N}_{n}(\omega) equals Φ(t)\Phi(t) for some tQn[0,T]t\in Q_{n}\subseteq[0,T], hence gnN(ω)Φg^{N}_{n}(\omega)\le\Phi^{*}; as Φ\Phi^{*} is then an upper bound of the set whose least upper bound is WN(ω)W_{N}(\omega), we get WN(ω)ΦW_{N}(\omega)\le\Phi^{*}.

Conversely let t[0,T]t\in[0,T]. If t=Tt=T then tQ1t\in Q_{1}, so Φ(t)g1N(ω)WN(ω)\Phi(t)\le g^{N}_{1}(\omega)\le W_{N}(\omega). Suppose t<Tt<T. For each nn the set of elements of QnQ_{n} that are at least tt is nonempty, since it contains TT, and finite, so it has a least element tnt_{n}. If tn=0t_{n}=0 then t0t\le0, so t=0=tnt=0=t_{n}; otherwise tn=(j/2n)Tt_{n}=(j/2^{n})T with j{1,,2n}j\in\{1,\dots,2^{n}\}, the number ((j1)/2n)T((j-1)/2^{n})T also lies in QnQ_{n} and is smaller than tt by minimality of tnt_{n}, whence tnt<tn((j1)/2n)T=T/2nt_{n}-t<t_{n}-((j-1)/2^{n})T=T/2^{n}. In either case 0tntT/2n0\le t_{n}-t\le T/2^{n}. An easy induction gives n2nn\le2^{n} for every natural number nn, so T/2nT/nT/2^{n}\le T/n; the sequence (1/n)nN(1/n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}} converges to 00 by claim 3 of the Archimedean property of the real numbers, hence so does (T/n)nN(T/n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}} by claim 3 of the arithmetic of limits of real sequences, and therefore (tn)nN(t_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}} converges to tt by claim 3 of the order properties of limits of real sequences.

Since t[0,T)t\in[0,T) and ωΩN\omega\in\Omega^{N}_{*}, the path sΣsN,γ(ω)s\mapsto\Sigma^{N,\gamma}_{s}(\omega) is right-continuous at tt for every γ\gamma, by the martingale bound for the empirical state measure; as ttnt\le t_{n} for every nn and (tn)(t_{n}) converges to tt, the real sequence (ΣtnN,γ(ω))nN(\Sigma^{N,\gamma}_{t_{n}}(\omega))_{n\in\mathbb{N}} converges to ΣtN,γ(ω)\Sigma^{N,\gamma}_{t}(\omega) for every γ\gamma. Writing x(n)=ΣtnN(ω)ΣtN(ω)x^{(n)}=\Sigma^{N}_{t_{n}}(\omega)-\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega), claim 1 of the norm lemma together with the definition of the dot product gives that x(n)2|x^{(n)}|^{2} is the sum of the squares of the coordinates of x(n)x^{(n)}, each of which converges to 00; so (x(n)2)nN(|x^{(n)}|^{2})_{n\in\mathbb{N}} converges to 00 by claims 1 and 2 of the arithmetic of limits. Consequently (x(n))nN(|x^{(n)}|)_{n\in\mathbb{N}} converges to 00: given a real ε>0\varepsilon>0, we have x(n)2<ε2|x^{(n)}|^{2}<\varepsilon^{2} for all large nn, while εx(n)\varepsilon\le|x^{(n)}| would give ε2x(n)2\varepsilon^{2}\le|x^{(n)}|^{2} by two applications of claim 10 of the order-arithmetic lemma in the nonstrict form obtained by adjoining the case of equality. Finally StnStKbtnt|S^{*}_{t_{n}}-S^{*}_{t}|\le K_{b}|t_{n}-t|, and the right-hand side converges to 00, so (StnSt)nN(|S^{*}_{t_{n}}-S^{*}_{t}|)_{n\in\mathbb{N}} converges to 00 by claim 3 of the order properties of limits.

Now, for every nn, two applications of claim 6 of the norm lemma, together with claim 5 there, give

Φ(t)ΣtN(ω)ΣtnN(ω)+ΣtnN(ω)Stn+StnStβn+WN(ω),\Phi(t)\le\bigl|\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega)-\Sigma^{N}_{t_{n}}(\omega)\bigr|+\bigl|\Sigma^{N}_{t_{n}}(\omega)-S^{*}_{t_{n}}\bigr|+\bigl|S^{*}_{t_{n}}-S^{*}_{t}\bigr|\le\beta_{n}+W_{N}(\omega),

where βn=x(n)+StnSt\beta_{n}=|x^{(n)}|+|S^{*}_{t_{n}}-S^{*}_{t}| and where the middle term was bounded by WN(ω)W_{N}(\omega) because tnQnt_{n}\in Q_{n} gives Φ(tn)gnN(ω)WN(ω)\Phi(t_{n})\le g^{N}_{n}(\omega)\le W_{N}(\omega). The sequence (βn)nN(\beta_{n})_{n\in\mathbb{N}} converges to 00 by claim 1 of the arithmetic of limits. If WN(ω)<Φ(t)W_{N}(\omega)<\Phi(t), then c=Φ(t)WN(ω)c=\Phi(t)-W_{N}(\omega) would be positive and cβnc\le\beta_{n} for every nn, contradicting the convergence of (βn)(\beta_{n}) to 00. Hence Φ(t)WN(ω)\Phi(t)\le W_{N}(\omega) for every t[0,T]t\in[0,T], so WN(ω)W_{N}(\omega) is an upper bound of {Φ(t):t[0,T]}\{\Phi(t):t\in[0,T]\} and therefore ΦWN(ω)\Phi^{*}\le W_{N}(\omega). Combining the two inequalities, WN(ω)=ΦW_{N}(\omega)=\Phi^{*}, which is the last assertion of claim 2.

Step 3. Proof of claim 3. Fix a real ε>0\varepsilon>0 and a natural number NN.

A pathwise bound. Let ωΩN\omega\in\Omega^{N}_{*} and write Sω=S(Σ0N(ω),α^N(ω))S^{\omega}=S(\Sigma^{N}_{0}(\omega),\hat{\alpha}^{N}(\omega)), which is defined because Σ0N(ω)Δl\Sigma^{N}_{0}(\omega)\in\Delta^{l} and α^N(ω)UA\hat{\alpha}^{N}(\omega)\in\mathcal{U}_{\mathcal{A}} by claim 2 of the realized-control lemma. For every t[0,T]t\in[0,T], claim 6 of the norm lemma, claim 1 of the comparison lemma for the NN-agent system and the mean-field flow, and claim 1 above give

ΣtN(ω)StΣtN(ω)Stω+StωSteΛbTMN(ω)+DN(ω),\bigl|\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega)-S^{*}_{t}\bigr|\le\bigl|\Sigma^{N}_{t}(\omega)-S^{\omega}_{t}\bigr|+\bigl|S^{\omega}_{t}-S^{*}_{t}\bigr|\le e^{\Lambda_{b}T}\,\overline{M}^{N}(\omega)+D_{N}(\omega),

the last term because by claim 1 the number DN(ω)=D(Σ0N(ω),α^N(ω))D_{N}(\omega)=D(\Sigma^{N}_{0}(\omega),\hat{\alpha}^{N}(\omega)) is the supremum of the numbers StωSt|S^{\omega}_{t}-S^{*}_{t}| over t[0,T]t\in[0,T], hence an upper bound of each of them. Taking the least upper bound over t[0,T]t\in[0,T] and using claim 2 we get

WN(ω)eΛbTMN(ω)+DN(ω)for every ωΩN.W_{N}(\omega)\le e^{\Lambda_{b}T}\,\overline{M}^{N}(\omega)+D_{N}(\omega)\qquad\text{for every }\omega\in\Omega^{N}_{*}.

Splitting the event. Put FN={ωΩN:ε/2eΛbTMN(ω)}F_{N}=\{\omega\in\Omega^{N}:\varepsilon/2\le e^{\Lambda_{b}T}\overline{M}^{N}(\omega)\} and GN={ωΩN:ε/2DN(ω)}G_{N}=\{\omega\in\Omega^{N}:\varepsilon/2\le D_{N}(\omega)\}, which are events because MN\overline{M}^{N} is a random variable by the martingale bound and DND_{N} is one by claim 4 of the convergence theorem for the optimal NN-agent value. If ωΩN\omega\in\Omega^{N}_{*} satisfies εWN(ω)\varepsilon\le W_{N}(\omega) but lies in neither FNF_{N} nor GNG_{N}, then adding the two strict inequalities by claim 3 of the order-arithmetic lemma and using claim 8 there, which gives ε/2+ε/2=ε\varepsilon/2+\varepsilon/2=\varepsilon, yields eΛbTMN(ω)+DN(ω)<εWN(ω)e^{\Lambda_{b}T}\overline{M}^{N}(\omega)+D_{N}(\omega)<\varepsilon\le W_{N}(\omega), contradicting the pathwise bound. Hence

{ωΩN:εWN(ω)}FNGN(ΩNΩN).\{\omega\in\Omega^{N}:\varepsilon\le W_{N}(\omega)\}\subseteq F_{N}\cup G_{N}\cup(\Omega^{N}\setminus\Omega^{N}_{*}).

Since PN(ΩN)=1P^{N}(\Omega^{N}_{*})=1, claim 3 of the basic properties of a measure gives PN(ΩNΩN)=0P^{N}(\Omega^{N}\setminus\Omega^{N}_{*})=0; so claim 2 (monotonicity) and claim 4 (countable subadditivity) there, the latter applied to the sequence whose first three terms are FNF_{N}, GNG_{N} and ΩNΩN\Omega^{N}\setminus\Omega^{N}_{*} and all of whose further terms are empty, give

PN({εWN})PN(FN)+PN(GN).P^{N}\bigl(\{\varepsilon\le W_{N}\}\bigr)\le P^{N}(F_{N})+P^{N}(G_{N}).

Estimating the martingale term. Put a=ε2/(4e2ΛbT)a=\varepsilon^{2}/(4e^{2\Lambda_{b}T}), a positive real number. If ωFN\omega\in F_{N} then, multiplying by the positive number eΛbTe^{-\Lambda_{b}T} (claim 7 of the order-arithmetic lemma for its positivity and claim 10 in the nonstrict form for the multiplication), ε/(2eΛbT)MN(ω)\varepsilon/(2e^{\Lambda_{b}T})\le\overline{M}^{N}(\omega), and two further applications of claim 10, both sides being nonnegative, give a(MN(ω))2a\le(\overline{M}^{N}(\omega))^{2}. Hence FNF_{N} is contained in the event where a(MN)2a\le(\overline{M}^{N})^{2}, and monotonicity together with Markov's inequality of the lemma on Markov's and Chebyshev's inequalities, applied to the nonnegative random variable (MN)2(\overline{M}^{N})^{2} and the positive number aa, gives

PN(FN)EN[(MN)2]a8l(l1)BTN4e2ΛbTε2=32l(l1)BTe2ΛbTNε2.P^{N}(F_{N})\le\frac{\mathbb{E}^{N}[(\overline{M}^{N})^{2}]}{a}\le\frac{8\,l\,(l-1)\,B\,T}{N}\cdot\frac{4e^{2\Lambda_{b}T}}{\varepsilon^{2}}=\frac{32\,l\,(l-1)\,B\,T\,e^{2\Lambda_{b}T}}{N\,\varepsilon^{2}} .

Together with the previous display this proves the inequality asserted in claim 3.

Passing to the limit. The sequence (1/N)NN(1/N)_{N\in\mathbb{N}} converges to 00 by claim 3 of the Archimedean property, so the sequence with NN-th term 32l(l1)BTe2ΛbT/(Nε2)32\,l\,(l-1)\,B\,T\,e^{2\Lambda_{b}T}/(N\varepsilon^{2}) converges to 00 by claim 3 of the arithmetic of limits. The sequence (PN(GN))NN(P^{N}(G_{N}))_{N\in\mathbb{N}} converges to 00 by claim 4 of the convergence theorem for the optimal NN-agent value, applied with the positive real number ε/2\varepsilon/2. Their sum converges to 00 by claim 1 of the arithmetic of limits, and since 0PN({εWN})0\le P^{N}(\{\varepsilon\le W_{N}\}) is bounded above by that sum for every NN, claim 3 of the order properties of limits gives that (PN({εWN}))NN(P^{N}(\{\varepsilon\le W_{N}\}))_{N\in\mathbb{N}} converges to 00. This completes the proof of claim 3 and of the corollary.

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Comments

Loading…