Reason: First version. Proof of the asymptotic lower bound by the fluctuation LQG value: well-posedness of the Kalman covariance, the Cholesky column identity for the weight, the injection certificate applied along the Riccati adjoint direction, a blockwise Fatou argument, and assembly with the published parameter ladder.
Proof
Claim 1.
The initial covariance. By hypothesis (I) the matrix Π0 is symmetric. Suppose it were not positive semidefinite, so that x⋅(Π0x)=−2η0<0 for some x∈Rl. Put ζ=η0/(1+∑γ,δ∣xγxδ∣)>0. By hypothesis (I) and the definition of the limit of a real sequence, applied to each of the finitely many sequences (E[s0γs0δ])N≥1, there is N′ such that E[s0γs0δ]−Π0γδ≤ζ for all γ,δ and all N≥N′. For such N, by the linearity of the integral,
so every D~t is positive semidefinite. The Riccati existence theorem therefore applies on [0,T] with k there equal to l, A=E, C=Θ⋆, D=D~ and P0=Π0, and yields the unique Π with continuous entries, every Πt being symmetric and satisfying 0⪯Πt, that is, positive semidefinite.
The weight Ξ. Every Ξt is symmetric positive semidefinite with continuous entries by claim 2 of the cascade filtering lemma. Fix t. Under (H1), conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem gives that Rt is symmetric positive definite, so Rt−1 is symmetric positive definite by Invertibility of Symmetric Positive Definite Matrices, and by the Cholesky factorisation there is a real matrix Lt with m rows and m columns and Rt−1=LtLt⊤. Put Bt=WtLt, a real matrix with l rows and m columns, and let bt,1,…,bt,m∈Rl be its columns, so that (Bt)γj=bt,jγ. Then
called the column identity below. Taking M=Πt shows ∑γ,δΞtγδΠtγδ≥0, every Πt being positive semidefinite. That function of t is a finite sum of products of continuous functions, hence continuous, and therefore Lebesgue integrable on [0,T] by claim 3 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval. This proves claim 1.
Claim 2. Fix π, k, s∈[tk,tk+1], c and η>0, and put κ=c⋅(Πsc), a nonnegative real by claim 1.
Apply Adjoint Energy Identity for the Kalman Covariance Riccati Equation with a=0, b=T, k there equal to l, the data E, Θ⋆, D~, Π0 and Π of claim 1, the time s and the vector x=c. It produces an assignment λ with continuous components and λ(s)=c, and by its claim 2 the assignment u↦Πuλ(u) has continuous components and satisfies the integral equation defining ψλ; by the uniqueness in claim 3 of the variation of constants theorem, ψλ(u)=Πuλ(u) for every u. Its claim 3 then gives
c⋅ψλ(s)=c⋅(Πsc)=κandAs(λ)=κ,
the second because the energy displayed there is exactly As(λ) once ψλ=Πλ is substituted.
Suppose first κ=0. Apply (VT) with this λ and with ϵ=1, obtaining N2; for N≥N2 the data of (VT) exist, and taking ϰ=0, which satisfies (C4) because (α⋅z)2≥0=0⋅(z⋅(Iz)), they form a van Trees certificate; claim 1 of Localized Filtering Lower Bound from a van Trees Certificate is therefore available (only the presence of a certificate is used here, not its tolerance or its value) and gives
the inequality being the nonnegativity of the expectation of a nonnegative random variable. Take N3=N2.
Suppose now κ>0, and put
ϵ=min{8κ,2κ,3+2κη}>0,ϰ=κ+ϵ(κ−ϵ)2,
with ⋅ the nonnegative square root. Apply (VT) with this λ and this ϵ, obtaining N2, and let N≥N3=N2 and let d, (Y,Y), ϱ0, D, Θ, α, z be a certificate. Then
Three elementary estimates follow from 0<ϵ≤κ/8 and ϵ≤κ/2. First, (κ−3ϵ)(κ+ϵ)=κ2−2κϵ−3ϵ2≤κ2−2κϵ+ϵ2=(κ−ϵ)2, so ϰ≥κ−3ϵ. Second, ϵ≤3κ gives ϵ2≤3κϵ, hence (κ−ϵ)2=κ2−2κϵ+ϵ2≤κ2+κϵ=κ(κ+ϵ) and therefore ϰ≤κ and ϰ≤κ. Third, ϰ≥κ−3ϵ≥κ−3κ/8≥κ/4≥ϵ2, so ϰ≥ϵ.
the last step by the choice ϵ≤η/(3+2κ). This proves claim 2.
Claim 3. Fix π and η>0, and for k∈{0,…,K−1} and N≥1 define
fN(k)(s)=E[1Tknr(s)us⋅Rsus](s∈[tk,tk+1]).
Each fN(k) is nonnegative, because us⋅Rsus≥r∣us∣2≥0 by (H1), and is measurable on [tk,tk+1] by hypothesis (MS); its integral over that block is the k-th summand appearing in claim 7 of the ledger lemma.
Fix k and s∈[tk,tk+1]. The event H=Tknr(s) belongs to Gs by claim 2 of the ledger lemma, so claim 3 of the cascade filtering lemma gives
the equality by the column identity of claim 1 applied to the matrix Mγδ=E[1Hεsγεsδ] and by the linearity of the integral. Let η′>0. Applying claim 2 to each of the m vectors c=bs,j with tolerance η′/m and taking the largest of the resulting thresholds, there is N′′ such that for every N≥N′′
By Fatou's lemma, applied to the nonnegative measurable functions fN(k) on [tk,tk+1] with the restricted Lebesgue measure, and then by the monotonicity of the integral together with claim 1,
Hence for each k there is N(k) with ∫[tk,tk+1]fN(k)ds≥∫[tk,tk+1]∑γ,δΞsγδΠsγδds−η/K for every N≥N(k). Let N4 be the largest of N(0),…,N(K−1) and sum over k. Since t0=0, tK=T and tk<tk+1 for k≤K−1 (the number of blocks K being least with KT0≥T), the intervals [tk,tk+1] are adjacent with union [0,T], so by the additivity of the Lebesgue integral of a continuous function over adjacent compact intervals (Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval) the sum of the right-hand sides is ∫[0,T]∑γ,δΞsγδΠsγδds−η. This proves claim 3.
Claim 4. Let ε′′>0. By conclusion (b) of the asymptotic lower bound theorem, applied with ε′=ε′′/2, there are an admissible parameter vector π and a natural number N0 such that for every N≥N0
the blocks and near-field tracked events being those formed from π. Apply claim 3 to this π with η=ε′′/2, obtaining N4, and put N5=max(N0,N4). For N≥N5 the two displays combine to