Tools. We use: from Constants, Coordinate Functions, Sums and Products of Ck Functions on a Euclidean Open Set, claim 1 (partial derivatives of sums, scalar multiples and products of two functions), claim 2 (constants and coordinate functions are smooth, that is, by that definition, of class Ck for every k) and claim 3 (sums, scalar multiples and products of Ck functions are Ck); the definition of the class C1 in C^k Maps on a Euclidean Open Set, by which a C1 function has partial derivatives everywhere which are themselves continuous, and by which a C2 function has partial derivatives of class C1; Composition of Continuous Euclidean Maps (composition of maps continuous at a point and at its image is continuous at the point); claim 1 of Euclidean Continuity Agrees with Metric Continuity for Real-Valued Functions (for real-valued maps on a subset of a Euclidean space, Euclidean continuity at a point and metric continuity relative to the subset agree); claim 5 of Continuity of Sums and Products of Real-Valued Functions on a Metric Space (sums, products and scalar multiples of continuous real-valued maps are continuous); claim 1 of Restriction Stability of Continuity and of the Derivative (the restriction of a continuous map to a subset is continuous relative to the subset); claim 1 of Componentwise Estimates, Transpose Identities, and Indefinite Riemann Integrals together with the identity d(x,y)=∣x−y∣ recorded in its setting, giving the estimate d(x,y)≤∑i∣xi−yi∣ for the Euclidean distance on Rn and in particular ∣yi∣≤∣y∣≤∑i∣yi∣; claim 2 of Euclidean Space is Open in Itself, and Ck Maps are Continuous (class Ck implies class C1); claim 3 of Semicontinuity and Continuity Under Composition with a Continuous Map (the composition of a continuous map into a metric space with a continuous real function on its image set is continuous, in the metric sense); claim 2 of Jump Representation and Positive Semidefiniteness of the Aggregate Fluctuation Covariance (the quadratic form of Θ is ∑(σ,γ′)∈LΣσβ(σ,γ′,Σ,α)(xγ′−xσ)2, the sum running over all ordered pairs of distinct states, hence nonnegative); Continuous Real-Valued Functions on a Compact Interval are Bounded (a continuous real function on a compact interval is bounded); claims 1, 3 and 4 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval (λ[0,u]([0,u])=u; a continuous function on a compact interval is a square-integrable random variable on the normalised interval, in particular B[0,u]-measurable; and a measurable f with ∫[0,u]f2dλ[0,u]<∞ has ∣f∣ integrable); Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral (linearity and monotonicity of the integral); claims 2, 3 and 7 of Properties of Finite Sums (additivity, homogeneity, and a sum with a single possibly nonzero summand); claim 2 of Comparison and Absolute Value Bounds for Finite Sums of Real Numbers (the absolute value of a finite sum is at most the sum of the absolute values); Interchange of a Finite Double Sum (interchange of a finite double sum); claims 3 and 4 of Peeling, Splitting, and Interchange for Sums over a Finite Index Set (splitting a sum over a finite index set along a partition into two nonempty blocks, and dropping terms vanishing outside a subset); and claim 4 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum, w⋅(Mz)=∑i∑jMijwizj. Sums over the finite label set L, or over subsets of it, are sums over a finite index set, independent of the enumeration by A Sum over a Finite Index Set Does Not Depend on the Enumeration, so that they may be computed along any enumeration as finite sums of Finite Sum Notation in a Field; iterating claims 1 and 3 of Constants, Coordinate Functions, Sums and Products of Ck Functions on a Euclidean Open Set along such an enumeration shows that a finite sum of Ck functions with constant coefficients is Ck, with partial derivatives the corresponding sums of partial derivatives (finite linearity).
Proof of claim 1. Fix c=(σ0,γ0). The set U×V is open in Rl+m (clause 2 of Twice Continuously Differentiable Extension of a Transition-Rate Family). The coordinate function x↦xσ0=Σσ0 is smooth on U×V (claim 2 of Constants, Coordinate Functions, Sums and Products of Ck Functions on a Euclidean Open Set), hence of class C2 (Smooth Map on a Euclidean Open Set), and βˉ(σ0,γ0,⋅,⋅) is of class C2 on U×V (clause 2 of Twice Continuously Differentiable Extension of a Transition-Rate Family); so their product ψc is of class C2 (claim 3). By the definition of the class C2, every partial derivative ∂iψc exists at every point of U×V and is of class C1 there; hence gc is defined everywhere with components ∂1ψc,…,∂lψc of class C1, and Eγη=∑cvcγ∂ηψc is defined everywhere and of class C1 by finite linearity (the coefficients vcγ∈{−1,0,1} being constants). A C1 function is continuous at every point by the definition of the class C1. For the identity, fix γ,η and x∈U×V. By Extended Aggregate State Drift,
bˉγ=σ:σ=γ∑(ψ(σ,γ)−ψ(γ,σ))on U×V,
since Σσβˉ(σ,γ,Σ,α)=ψ(σ,γ)(Σ,α) and Σγβˉ(γ,σ,Σ,α)=ψ(γ,σ)(Σ,α). By finite linearity, ∂ηbˉγ(x)=∑σ=γ(∂ηψ(σ,γ)(x)−∂ηψ(γ,σ)(x)). On the other hand, for a label c=(σ′,γ′) the coefficient vcγ is the γ-th component of δγ′−δσ′, which equals 1 if γ′=γ (then σ′=γ), equals −1 if σ′=γ (then γ′=γ), and equals 0 otherwise; the labels of the first kind form the set L+={(σ,γ):σ=γ}, those of the second kind the set L−={(γ,σ):σ=γ}, both nonempty (as l≥2) and disjoint, and the terms of the third kind vanish. By claim 4 of Peeling, Splitting, and Interchange for Sums over a Finite Index Set (terms vanishing outside L+∪L−) and then claim 3 (splitting along L+, L−), the sum Eγη(x)=∑c∈Lvcγ∂ηψc(x) equals ∑c∈L+∂ηψc(x)+∑c∈L−(−∂ηψc(x)). Rewriting the sums over L+ and L− as sums over the index set {σ:σ=γ} through the bijections σ↦(σ,γ) and σ↦(γ,σ) (if φ enumerates {σ:σ=γ} and χ is either bijection, then χ∘φ enumerates the corresponding block, and the two sums over a finite index set, computed along φ and along χ∘φ respectively, are termwise identical) and using homogeneity for the sign, this equals ∑σ=γ∂ηψ(σ,γ)(x)−∑σ=γ∂ηψ(γ,σ)(x), which is ∂ηbˉγ(x) by additivity of finite sums applied to the expression for ∂ηbˉγ(x) above.
Proof of claim 2. By condition 1 of Mean-Field Trajectory Pair, every component t↦Stγ and t↦Atj is continuous on [0,T]. Fix t∈[0,T] and ε>0. For each of the l+m components choose ϑ>0 such that the component varies by less than ε/(l+m) on the points t′∈[0,T] with ∣t′−t∣<ϑ, and let ϑ0 be the least of these ϑ; then for ∣t′−t∣<ϑ0 the Euclidean distance of (St′,At′) from (St,At) is at most ∑γ∣St′γ−Stγ∣+∑j∣At′j−Atj∣<ε (claim 1 of Componentwise Estimates, Transpose Identities, and Indefinite Riemann Integrals). Thus t↦(St,At) is continuous at t in the sense of Continuity at a Point for Maps Between Euclidean Spaces; the same argument gives the continuity of t↦St into Rl. The values lie in Δl×A and in Δl by Mean-Field Trajectory Pair, and Δl×A⊆U×V by clause 1 of Twice Continuously Differentiable Extension of a Transition-Rate Family and Δl⊆U~ by clause 1 of Twice Continuously Differentiable Extension of an Observation-Rate Family.
Now Eγη is continuous at every point of U×V (claim 1), so t↦Eγη(St,At) is continuous at every t in the Euclidean sense by Composition of Continuous Euclidean Maps, hence continuous on [0,T] in the metric sense by claim 1 of Euclidean Continuity Agrees with Metric Continuity for Real-Valued Functions; and Eγη(St,At)=∂ηbˉγ(St,At)=(Et)γη by claim 1 and the definition of Et. For Θ: let Θˉγδ:U×V→R be given by the formulas of Aggregate Fluctuation Covariance with βˉ in place of β, that is, Θˉγγ=∑σ=γ(ψ(σ,γ)+ψ(γ,σ)) and Θˉγδ=−ψ(γ,δ)−ψ(δ,γ) for γ=δ. Each Θˉγδ is of class C2 by claim 1 and finite linearity, hence continuous at every point of U×V, and it agrees with Θγδ on Δl×A because βˉ agrees with β there (clause 1 of Twice Continuously Differentiable Extension of a Transition-Rate Family). Hence t↦Θγδ(St,At)=Θˉγδ(St,At) is continuous on [0,T] as before, and equals (Θt⋆)γδ by definition. For the observation data: by claim (i) of Regularity and Derivative Bounds of the Extended Aggregate Observation Drift, b~ˉυ is of class C2 on the open set U~, so b~ˉυ is of class C1 (claim 2 of Euclidean Space is Open in Itself, and Ck Maps are Continuous) and each ∂γb~ˉυ is of class C1 (definition of the class C2), hence both are continuous at every point of U~ (definition of the class C1); composing with t↦St as before, t↦∂γb~ˉυ(St)=(E~t)υγ and t↦b~ˉυ(St) are continuous on [0,T], and the latter equals b~υ(St) because b~ˉ agrees with b~ on Δl (same claim), with values in [b,∞) by (OC). Restrictions to [0,s] are continuous on [0,s] by claim 1 of Restriction Stability of Continuity and of the Derivative; a continuous function on the compact interval [0,s] is bounded by Continuous Real-Valued Functions on a Compact Interval are Bounded and measurable by claim 3 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval.
Proof of claim 3. By claim 2 the restrictions u↦Eγη(Su,Au) to [0,s] are continuous on [0,s]; so the assignment E⋆ has continuous entries, which is the hypothesis of the setting of Variation of Constants with Bounded Measurable Forcing and the Two-Parameter Fundamental Solution with k=l and horizon s in the role of its T. That setting furnishes a real number Φˉ≥0 (its constant of the same name) with ∥ΦE(t,u)∥rs≤Φˉ2 for all t,u∈[0,s] (its claim 1), and ∣My∣≤∥M∥rs∣y∣ for its row-sum vector norm (as recorded in its setting); hence ∣ΦE(t,u)y∣≤Φˉ2∣y∣.
Proof of claim 4. Each component λγ is continuous on [0,T], hence bounded by some Cγ≥0 (Continuous Real-Valued Functions on a Compact Interval are Bounded); with Λ=∑γCγ we get ∣λ(u)∣≤∑γ∣λγ(u)∣≤Λ (claim 1 of Componentwise Estimates, Transpose Identities, and Indefinite Riemann Integrals). Consider the setting of Variation of Constants with Bounded Measurable Forcing and the Two-Parameter Fundamental Solution with k=l, horizon T and the assignment r↦Er in the role of its coefficient matrix (written A there), whose entries are continuous on [0,T] by claim 2. The forcing g(r)=Θr⋆λ(r) has components gγ(r)=∑δ(Θr⋆)γδλδ(r) (Matrix-Vector Product), finite sums of products of functions continuous on [0,T] (claim 2 and the hypothesis on λ), hence continuous on [0,T] by claim 5 of Continuity of Sums and Products of Real-Valued Functions on a Metric Space, hence bounded (Continuous Real-Valued Functions on a Compact Interval are Bounded) and measurable (claim 3 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval); so g is bounded measurable in the sense of that lemma. With ξ=0, claim 2 of that lemma furnishes a map, which we call ψλ, with continuous, hence bounded measurable, components satisfying ψλ(u)=∫[0,u](Erψλ(r)+Θr⋆λ(r))dr for all u∈[0,T], and claim 3 of that lemma states that every bounded measurable z satisfying the same equation equals ψλ; this is the existence and uniqueness asserted. The bound M is obtained from the continuous components exactly as Λ was. The restrictions ϖ and ψˉ have continuous components on [0,s] (claim 1 of Restriction Stability of Continuity and of the Derivative), hence bounded measurable ones, with the same pointwise bounds. For u∈[0,s] the displayed equation for ψλ(u) involves only the values of ψλ, λ, Er and Θr⋆ for r∈[0,u]⊆[0,s], where ψλ(r)=ψˉr, λ(r)=ϖr, Er=E(Sr,Ar) (claim 2) and Θr⋆=Θ(Sr,Ar) (definition); this is the displayed equation for ψˉu. Finally, the setting of Variation of Constants with Bounded Measurable Forcing and the Two-Parameter Fundamental Solution is also instantiated with horizon s, coefficient matrix E⋆ (claim 3) and the forcing r↦Θ(Sr,Ar)ϖr on [0,s], the restriction of g, which is bounded measurable on [0,s] because the components of g are continuous on [0,T], so that their restrictions are continuous on [0,s] (claim 1 of Restriction Stability of Continuity and of the Derivative), hence bounded and measurable there; ψˉ is bounded measurable and satisfies the equation of its claim 3 with ξ=0, and so does any other bounded measurable solution z on [0,s]; by that claim both equal the map furnished by its claim 2, hence z=ψˉ.
Proof of claim 5. For t∈[0,T], υ∈{1,…,l~} and γ∈{1,…,l} write ρυ(t)=b~υ(St)≥b>0 and eυγ(t)=∂γb~ˉυ(St), functions on [0,T] which are continuous by claim 2, so that (Θ~t⋆)υυ′=1{υ=υ′}ρυ(t) and (E~t)υγ=eυγ(t). Fix t, and let Θ~t♭ be the matrix with l~ rows and columns and entries (Θ~t♭)υυ′=1{υ=υ′}/ρυ(t). By Product of Real Matrices, (Θ~t⋆Θ~t♭)υυ′′=∑υ′1{υ=υ′}ρυ(t)1{υ′=υ′′}/ρυ′(t); the only possibly nonzero summand is the one with υ′=υ, equal to 1{υ=υ′′}ρυ(t)/ρυ(t)=1{υ=υ′′} (claim 7 of Properties of Finite Sums); so Θ~t⋆Θ~t♭=Il~, and symmetrically Θ~t♭Θ~t⋆=Il~. Hence Θ~t⋆ is invertible with inverse Θ~t♭ (Inverse Matrix and Invertible Real Square Matrix, the inverse being unique by Uniqueness of the Matrix Inverse). Next, E~t⊤ has l rows and l~ columns with (E~t⊤)γυ=eυγ(t) (Transpose of a Real Matrix), and (Θ~t♭E~t)υδ=∑υ′1{υ=υ′}eυ′δ(t)/ρυ(t)=eυδ(t)/ρυ(t) (claim 7 again); therefore D~t=E~t⊤(Θ~t♭E~t) has l rows and l columns with
(D~t)γδ=υ=1∑l~eυγ(t)ρυ(t)eυδ(t)=D~γδ(St),
which is visibly symmetric in (γ,δ). For z∈Rl, claim 4 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum gives z⋅(D~tz)=∑γ∑δ(D~t)γδzγzδ; inserting the displayed formula, homogeneity moves the factor zγzδ inside the sum over υ, Interchange of a Finite Double Sum (applied first to the innermost pair of indices (δ,υ) and then to the pair (γ,υ)) brings the sum over υ outside, homogeneity (applied twice) extracts the factor 1/ρυ(t) from the double sum over (γ,δ), and homogeneity again, applied twice, gives ∑γ∑δeυγ(t)zγeυδ(t)zδ=∑γeυγ(t)zγ(∑δeυδ(t)zδ)=(∑γeυγ(t)zγ)2; hence
z⋅(D~tz)=υ∑ρυ(t)1(γ∑eυγ(t)zγ)2=υ∑ρυ(t)(gυ(St)⋅z)2,
each summand being nonnegative as ρυ(t)>0. Finally, by claim (ii) of Regularity and Derivative Bounds of the Extended Aggregate Observation Drift, ∣eυγ(t)∣≤B~+K~ for all υ,γ,t (as St∈Δl), so by claim 2 of Comparison and Absolute Value Bounds for Finite Sums of Real Numbers and ρυ(t)≥b, ∣(D~t)γδ∣≤l~(B~+K~)2/b. For continuity: the function y↦1/y on E=[b,∞) is continuous on E relative to E, since ∣1/y−1/y′∣=∣y′−y∣/(yy′)≤∣y′−y∣/b2 for y,y′∈E (so ϑ=b2ε serves for every ε>0); the map t↦ρυ(t) is continuous on [0,T] with values in E (claim 2); so t↦1/ρυ(t) is continuous on [0,T] by claim 3 of Semicontinuity and Continuity Under Composition with a Continuous Map, and t↦(D~t)γδ=∑υeυγ(t)eυδ(t)(1/ρυ(t)) is continuous on [0,T] by claim 5 of Continuity of Sums and Products of Real-Valued Functions on a Metric Space.
Proof of claim 6. By claim 4 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum, λ(r)⋅(Θr⋆λ(r))=∑γ∑δ(Θr⋆)γδλγ(r)λδ(r), a finite sum of products of functions continuous on [0,T] (claim 2 and the hypothesis on λ), hence continuous on [0,T] (claim 5 of Continuity of Sums and Products of Real-Valued Functions on a Metric Space); and it is nonnegative, since by claim 2 of Jump Representation and Positive Semidefiniteness of the Aggregate Fluctuation Covariance (applied at (Sr,Ar)∈Δl×A) it equals ∑(σ,γ′)∈LSrσβ(σ,γ′,Sr,Ar)(λγ′(r)−λσ(r))2 (a sum over all ordered pairs of distinct states), a finite sum of nonnegative terms (Srσ≥0 as Sr∈Δl, and β≥0 by Transition-Rate Family). Likewise ψλ(r)⋅(D~rψλ(r))=∑γ∑δ(D~r)γδψλγ(r)ψλδ(r) is a finite sum of products of functions continuous on [0,T] (claims 4 and 5), hence continuous; by claim 5 it equals ∑υ(gυ(Sr)⋅ψλ(r))2/ρυ(r)≥0, and since ∣gυ(Sr)⋅ψλ(r)∣=∣∑γeυγ(r)ψλγ(r)∣≤∑γ∣eυγ(r)∣∣ψλγ(r)∣≤l(B~+K~)∣ψλ(r)∣≤l(B~+K~)M (claim 2 of Comparison and Absolute Value Bounds for Finite Sums of Real Numbers, ∣ψλγ∣≤∣ψλ∣, claim (ii) of Regularity and Derivative Bounds of the Extended Aggregate Observation Drift and claim 4) and ρυ(r)≥b, its values are at most l~l2(B~+K~)2M2/b. The integrand of As(λ) is thus continuous and nonnegative on [0,T]; its restriction to [0,s] is continuous on [0,s] (claim 1 of Restriction Stability of Continuity and of the Derivative), hence bounded, say by C≥0 (Continuous Real-Valued Functions on a Compact Interval are Bounded), and B[0,s]-measurable (claim 3 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval); writing f for this restriction, f2≤C2 pointwise, so ∫[0,s]f2dλ[0,s]≤C2λ[0,s]([0,s])=C2s<∞ by monotonicity of the integral and claim 1 of that lemma, and ∣f∣=f (the integrand being nonnegative) is integrable with respect to λ[0,s] by claim 4 of that lemma; the same applies to each of its two summands separately. So As(λ) is a well-defined real number, equal by linearity of the integral to the sum of the integrals of the two summands, which are ∫[0,s]ϖr⋅(Θ(Sr,Ar)ϖr)dr and ∫[0,s]ψˉr⋅(D~(Sr)ψˉr)dr by the identities ϖr=λ(r), ψˉr=ψλ(r), Θr⋆=Θ(Sr,Ar) and D~r=D~(Sr) (claim 5) for r∈[0,s]; both integrals are nonnegative by monotonicity of the integral, their integrands being nonnegative, and so As(λ)≥0. ■