TheoremBase

Proof

Throughout we use linearity and monotonicity of the integral freely. Every random variable occurring below is bounded: ∣st∣≤2N|\mathfrak{s}_{t}|\le2\sqrt{N} at every point by the solution definition (Σt\Sigma_{t} and StS_{t} lying in the probability simplex), ∣at∣|\mathfrak{a}_{t}| is bounded because αt\alpha_{t} and AtA_{t} take values in the control set, and the entries of Rt,Rt−1,WtR_{t},R_{t}^{-1},W_{t} are continuous in tt, hence bounded on [0,T][0,T], by conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem and the extreme value theorem. In particular all components of st\mathfrak{s}_{t} and at\mathfrak{a}_{t}, and hence of utu_{t}, are square-integrable, and every expectation written below is finite.

Step 1: proof of claim 1. By claim 1 of the anchored good-set clocks lemma, each σ(k)\sigma^{(k)} is a stopping time of (Gt)t∈[0,T](\mathcal{G}_{t})_{t\in[0,T]} — as well as of the system filtration — and {t<σ(k)}∈Gt\{t<\sigma^{(k)}\}\in\mathcal{G}_{t} for every t∈[0,T]t\in[0,T].

Claim 0. By the solution definition, each Gt\mathcal{G}_{t} is the σ\sigma-algebra generated by the observation processes up to time tt together with every event of F\mathcal{F} of probability zero. The regular event Ω0\Omega_{0} has probability 11, so its complement Ω∖Ω0\Omega\setminus\Omega_{0} is an event of F\mathcal{F} of probability zero and therefore belongs to G0\mathcal{G}_{0}; a σ\sigma-algebra being closed under complementation, Ω0∈G0\Omega_{0}\in\mathcal{G}_{0}.

We show Gk∈GtkG_{k}\in\mathcal{G}_{t_{k}} by induction on kk. For k=0k=0: G0=Ω0∈G0G_{0}=\Omega_{0}\in\mathcal{G}_{0} by claim 0. Assume Gk∈GtkG_{k}\in\mathcal{G}_{t_{k}} for some k≤K−1k\le K-1. Then Gk∈Gtk+1G_{k}\in\mathcal{G}_{t_{k+1}}, a filtration being nondecreasing and tk≤tk+1t_{k}\le t_{k+1}; and {σ(k)≥tk+1}∈Gtk+1\{\sigma^{(k)}\ge t_{k+1}\}\in\mathcal{G}_{t_{k+1}} by claim 1 of the stopping-time toolkit applied to the filtration (Gt)t∈[0,T](\mathcal{G}_{t})_{t\in[0,T]}, of which σ(k)\sigma^{(k)} is a stopping time. A σ\sigma-algebra being closed under intersection, Gk+1=Gk∩{σ(k)≥tk+1}∈Gtk+1G_{k+1}=G_{k}\cap\{\sigma^{(k)}\ge t_{k+1}\}\in\mathcal{G}_{t_{k+1}}, completing the induction.

Finally, let k≤K−1k\le K-1 and t≥tkt\ge t_{k}. Then Gk∈Gtk⊆GtG_{k}\in\mathcal{G}_{t_{k}}\subseteq\mathcal{G}_{t} and {t<σ(k)}∈Gt\{t<\sigma^{(k)}\}\in\mathcal{G}_{t}, so Tk(t)=Gk∩{t<σ(k)}∈Gt\mathcal{T}_{k}(t)=G_{k}\cap\{t<\sigma^{(k)}\}\in\mathcal{G}_{t}.

Step 2: proof of claim 2. Fix tt. By conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem, RtR_{t} is symmetric and, under (H1), symmetric positive definite, hence invertible with Rt−1R_{t}^{-1} symmetric: from RtRt−1=IR_{t}R_{t}^{-1}=I and the transpose identity (MM′)T=M′TMT(MM')^{T}=M'^{T}M^{T} of claim 3 of the componentwise toolkit we get (Rt−1)TRt=(Rt−1)TRtT=(RtRt−1)T=I(R_{t}^{-1})^{T}R_{t}=(R_{t}^{-1})^{T}R_{t}^{T}=(R_{t}R_{t}^{-1})^{T}=I, so, right-multiplying this identity by Rt−1R_{t}^{-1}, (Rt−1)T=(Rt−1)TRtRt−1=Rt−1(R_{t}^{-1})^{T}=(R_{t}^{-1})^{T}R_{t}R_{t}^{-1}=R_{t}^{-1}. Hence

ΞtT=(WtRt−1WtT)T=Wt (Rt−1)T WtT=Ξt,\Xi_{t}^{T}=\bigl(W_{t}R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\bigr)^{T}=W_{t}\,(R_{t}^{-1})^{T}\,W_{t}^{T}=\Xi_{t},

using the transpose identity twice and (WT)T=W(W^{T})^{T}=W; so Ξt\Xi_{t} is symmetric. For positive semidefiniteness, let x∈Rlx\in\mathbb{R}^{l} and put y=WtTx∈Rmy=W_{t}^{T}x\in\mathbb{R}^{m}. By the transpose identity of claim 3 of the componentwise toolkit,

x⋅Ξtx=x⋅Wt(Rt−1y)=(WtTx)⋅(Rt−1y)=y⋅Rt−1y ≥ 0,x\cdot\Xi_{t}x=x\cdot W_{t}\bigl(R_{t}^{-1}y\bigr)=\bigl(W_{t}^{T}x\bigr)\cdot\bigl(R_{t}^{-1}y\bigr)=y\cdot R_{t}^{-1}y\ \ge\ 0,

the last inequality because Rt−1R_{t}^{-1} is symmetric positive definite, being the inverse of a symmetric positive definite matrix by the lemma on inverses of positive definite matrices. Continuity and boundedness of the entries of Ξt\Xi_{t} follow from those of WtW_{t} and Rt−1R_{t}^{-1}, recorded in conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem, together with continuity of sums and products and the extreme value theorem.

Step 3: proof of claim 3. Fix tt and H∈Gt\mathcal{H}\in\mathcal{G}_{t}. Square-integrability of the components of st\mathfrak{s}_{t} and at\mathfrak{a}_{t} was recorded in the preamble, and the almost-sure Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}-measurability of the components of at\mathfrak{a}_{t} is the observation-adaptedness lemma. Write s^t\hat{\mathfrak{s}}_{t} for the tuple with components E[stγ∣Gt]\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}^{\gamma}_{t}\mid\mathcal{G}_{t}], so that st=s^t+εt\mathfrak{s}_{t}=\hat{\mathfrak{s}}_{t}+\varepsilon_{t}, and set

ct=at+Rt−1WtTs^t,so thatut=ct+Rt−1WtTεtc_{t}=\mathfrak{a}_{t}+R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\hat{\mathfrak{s}}_{t},\qquad\text{so that}\qquad u_{t}=c_{t}+R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}

by linearity of the matrix-vector product. Each component of ctc_{t} is square-integrable and almost surely equal to a Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}-measurable square-integrable random variable: this holds for the components of at\mathfrak{a}_{t} as just recalled, for those of s^t\hat{\mathfrak{s}}_{t} by the existence and uniqueness theorem for conditional expectation, and is preserved by the fixed linear combinations with the constant coefficients (Rt−1WtT)jγ(R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T})^{j\gamma}.

Expanding the symmetric bilinear form x⋅Rtyx\cdot R_{t}y at ut=ct+Rt−1WtTεtu_{t}=c_{t}+R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t},

ut⋅Rtut=ct⋅Rtct+2 ct⋅Rt(Rt−1WtTεt)+(Rt−1WtTεt)⋅Rt(Rt−1WtTεt).u_{t}\cdot R_{t}u_{t}=c_{t}\cdot R_{t}c_{t}+2\,c_{t}\cdot R_{t}\bigl(R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr)+\bigl(R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr)\cdot R_{t}\bigl(R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr).

For the third term, RtRt−1=IR_{t}R_{t}^{-1}=I and the transpose identity give (Rt−1WtTεt)⋅Rt(Rt−1WtTεt)=(Rt−1WtTεt)⋅(WtTεt)=εt⋅WtRt−1WtTεt=εt⋅Ξtεt\bigl(R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr)\cdot R_{t}\bigl(R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr)=\bigl(R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr)\cdot\bigl(W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr)=\varepsilon_{t}\cdot W_{t}R_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}=\varepsilon_{t}\cdot\Xi_{t}\varepsilon_{t}, the middle equality moving WtTW_{t}^{T} across the pairing by the transpose identity and using the symmetry of the dot product. For the second term, RtRt−1=IR_{t}R_{t}^{-1}=I gives 2 ct⋅(WtTεt)=2 (Wtct)⋅εt2\,c_{t}\cdot\bigl(W_{t}^{T}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr)=2\,\bigl(W_{t}c_{t}\bigr)\cdot\varepsilon_{t} by the transpose identity. Hence, multiplying by 1H\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}} and taking expectations,

E[1Hut⋅Rtut]=E[1H ct⋅Rtct]+2∑γ=1lE[1H (Wtct)γ εtγ]+E[1H εt⋅Ξtεt].\mathbb{E}\bigl[\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}u_{t}\cdot R_{t}u_{t}\bigr]=\mathbb{E}\bigl[\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}\,c_{t}\cdot R_{t}c_{t}\bigr]+2\sum_{\gamma=1}^{l}\mathbb{E}\bigl[\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}\,(W_{t}c_{t})^{\gamma}\,\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t}\bigr]+\mathbb{E}\bigl[\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}\,\varepsilon_{t}\cdot\Xi_{t}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr].

The cross term vanishes. Fix γ\gamma and put Ψ=1H(Wtct)γ\Psi=\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}(W_{t}c_{t})^{\gamma}, a square-integrable random variable. Each component of ctc_{t} is almost surely equal to a Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}-measurable square-integrable random variable, so, choosing such representatives and forming the same fixed linear combination, there is a Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}-measurable square-integrable Ψ′\Psi' with Ψ=Ψ′\Psi=\Psi' almost surely — here 1H\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}} is itself Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}-measurable and bounded, H\mathcal{H} belonging to Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}, and square-integrability of Ψ′\Psi' follows from that of Ψ\Psi by the lemma on almost sure equality and square-integrability. By the defining property of the conditional expectation E[stγ∣Gt]\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}^{\gamma}_{t}\mid\mathcal{G}_{t}] — that E[(stγ−E[stγ∣Gt]) Ψ′]=0\mathbb{E}[(\mathfrak{s}^{\gamma}_{t}-\mathbb{E}[\mathfrak{s}^{\gamma}_{t}\mid\mathcal{G}_{t}])\,\Psi']=0 for every square-integrable Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}-measurable Ψ′\Psi', as in the existence and uniqueness theorem — we get E[Ψ′εtγ]=0\mathbb{E}[\Psi'\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t}]=0. Since Ψ=Ψ′\Psi=\Psi' almost surely, the products Ψεtγ\Psi\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t} and Ψ′εtγ\Psi'\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t} agree almost surely and are both integrable, so their expectations coincide and E[1H(Wtct)γεtγ]=0\mathbb{E}[\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}(W_{t}c_{t})^{\gamma}\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t}]=0. Summing over γ\gamma, the cross term is 00.

Conclusion. The first term is nonnegative: RtR_{t} is positive semidefinite by conclusion (a) of the completion-of-squares theorem (indeed positive definite under (H1)), so ct⋅Rtct≥0c_{t}\cdot R_{t}c_{t}\ge0 pointwise, and 1H≥0\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}\ge0. Therefore

E[1Hut⋅Rtut] ≥ E[1H εt⋅Ξtεt]=∑γ,δ=1lΞtγδ E[1Hεtγεtδ],\mathbb{E}\bigl[\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}u_{t}\cdot R_{t}u_{t}\bigr]\ \ge\ \mathbb{E}\bigl[\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}\,\varepsilon_{t}\cdot\Xi_{t}\varepsilon_{t}\bigr]=\sum_{\gamma,\delta=1}^{l}\Xi^{\gamma\delta}_{t}\,\mathbb{E}\bigl[\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t}\varepsilon^{\delta}_{t}\bigr],

the last equality by linearity and the definition of the entry pairing. The right-hand side is nonnegative because Ξt\Xi_{t} is positive semidefinite by claim 2, so εt⋅Ξtεt≥0\varepsilon_{t}\cdot\Xi_{t}\varepsilon_{t}\ge0 pointwise. (The same conclusion, in the abstract setting of a single quadratic form, is claim 2 of the restricted conditional mean-square optimality lemma; the direct computation above is given because the present situation involves the two distinct matrices RtR_{t} and Ξt\Xi_{t} and the intermediate linear map Rt−1WtTR_{t}^{-1}W_{t}^{T}.)

Independence of the choice. Let MγM^{\gamma} and M′γM'^{\gamma} both be conditional expectations of stγ\mathfrak{s}^{\gamma}_{t} given Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}, with errors εtγ=stγ−Mγ\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t}=\mathfrak{s}^{\gamma}_{t}-M^{\gamma} and εt′γ=stγ−M′γ\varepsilon'^{\gamma}_{t}=\mathfrak{s}^{\gamma}_{t}-M'^{\gamma}. By the uniqueness clause of the existence and uniqueness theorem, Mγ=M′γM^{\gamma}=M'^{\gamma} almost surely for each γ\gamma, hence εtγ=εt′γ\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t}=\varepsilon'^{\gamma}_{t} almost surely, hence 1Hεtγεtδ=1Hεt′γεt′δ\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}\varepsilon^{\gamma}_{t}\varepsilon^{\delta}_{t}=\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{H}}\varepsilon'^{\gamma}_{t}\varepsilon'^{\delta}_{t} almost surely for all γ,δ\gamma,\delta (a finite intersection of events of probability 11 having probability 11). Both products are integrable, being bounded, so their expectations agree, and the middle quantity of claim 3 is unchanged.

Step 4: proof of claim 4. Let k≤K−1k\le K-1 and t∈[tk,T]t\in[t_{k},T]. By claim 1 the event Tk(t)=Gk∩{t<σ(k)}\mathcal{T}_{k}(t)=G_{k}\cap\{t<\sigma^{(k)}\} belongs to Gt\mathcal{G}_{t}, and 1Tk(t)=1Gk1{t<σ(k)}\mathbf{1}_{\mathcal{T}_{k}(t)}=\mathbf{1}_{G_{k}}\mathbf{1}_{\{t<\sigma^{(k)}\}}; claim 3 applied with H=Tk(t)\mathcal{H}=\mathcal{T}_{k}(t) gives the assertion. ■\blacksquare

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…