(a) Since X2≤1+X4 pointwise, X is square-integrable; X2 is square-integrable because E[(X2)2]=E[X4]<∞; 1D is square-integrable, being bounded, with ∥1D∥2=P(D)1/2; and 1DX is square-integrable since (1DX)2≤X2. Claim 1 of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality applied to 1D and 1DX gives, using 1D2=1D,
E[1DX]=E[1D⋅(1DX)]≤P(D)1/2E[1DX2]1/2,
and applied to 1D and X2 gives E[1DX2]≤P(D)1/2E[X4]1/2. Combining, E[1DX]≤P(D)1/2(P(D)1/2E[X4]1/2)1/2=P(D)3/4E[X4]1/4. The nonnegative random variable 1DX has finite expectation, hence is integrable.
(b)Joint measurability. Write B[0,T]⊗F for the product σ-algebra. The map (t,ω)↦1Ω0(ω)Σtγ(ω) is B[0,T]⊗F-measurable by part (b) of the joint measurability lemma, and so is (t,ω)↦1Ω0(ω)Σ0γ(ω): it is the composition of the projection (t,ω)↦ω, which is measurable because the preimage of E∈F is the rectangle [0,T]×E, with the random variable 1Ω0Σ0γ. Next, by the definition of the aggregate state drift and the definition of the empirical state measure,
a finite linear combination of the maps that condition 2 of the definition of a solution asserts to be B[0,T]⊗F-measurable; it is therefore measurable by measurability of sums and scalar multiples, and it is bounded in absolute value by 2(l−1)B by part (a) of the martingale decomposition theorem. Call this map Xs(ω). Consider the constant filtrationFt=F (t∈[0,T]). The family X=(Xs)s∈[0,T] is progressively measurable with respect to it: for each t, the restriction of X to [0,t]×Ω is measurable with respect to B[0,t]⊗F, because it is the composition X∘ι of X with the inclusion ι:[0,t]×Ω→[0,T]×Ω, and ι is measurable from B[0,t]⊗F to B[0,T]⊗F: the preimage ι−1(B×E)=(B∩[0,t])×E of a rectangle with B∈B[0,T] and E∈F is a rectangle of B[0,t]⊗F, and such rectangles generate the product σ-algebra by its definition, so the generator criterion of the definition of a measurable function applies. Hence by claim 4 of the progressive measurability toolkit the family Yt(ω)=∫[0,t]Xs(ω)ds is progressively measurable with continuous paths, and by claim 1 of the same toolkit (t,ω)↦Yt(ω) is B[0,T]⊗F-measurable. Since 1Ω0(ω)Mtγ(ω)=1Ω0(ω)Σtγ(ω)−1Ω0(ω)Σ0γ(ω)−Yt(ω) (the factor 1Ω0 being already contained in the integrand of Y), the first assertion of (b) follows from measurability of sums. The bound ∣1Ω0Mtγ∣≤1+2(l−1)BT=KM−1≤KM holds since Σtγ,Σ0γ∈[0,1] and ∣Yt∣≤2(l−1)BT.
Paths and the random variable I. The map (t,ω)↦1Ω0(ω)∣Mt(ω)∣=(∑γ(1Ω0Mtγ)2)1/2 is a continuous function of jointly measurable maps, hence jointly measurable by measurability of continuous functions of measurable maps, nonnegative, and bounded by lKM; likewise (t,ω)↦1Ω0∣Mt∣4. By the Tonelli theorem (the trace Lebesgue measure on [0,T] and P being finite, hence σ-finite, measures), for every ω the section t↦1Ω0(ω)∣Mt(ω)∣ is measurable, and ω↦∫[0,T]1Ω0(ω)∣Mt(ω)∣dt is a measurable [0,∞]-valued map, bounded by lKMT by monotonicity; this map is I, which is therefore a random variable with 0≤I≤lKMT, and for ω∈Ω0 its integrand is ∣Mt(ω)∣ while for ω∈/Ω0 it vanishes identically, which gives the two descriptions of I in the statement. (The map (t,ω)↦1Ω0(ω)∣Mt(ω)∣, being nonnegative and real-valued and measurable into the real line, is also measurable into [0,∞] in the sense of the integral of a nonnegative function, as the Tonelli theorem requires; the same remark applies to 1Ω0∣Mt∣4 below.)
Fourth moments. By part (c) of the moment bounds for the aggregate compensated counters, for every t∈[0,T], E[∣NMt∣4]≤cM(Bt/N+(Bt)2)≤cMκT, since N≥1 and t≤T; as ∣NMt∣4=N2∣Mt∣4, this gives E[∣Mt∣4]≤cMκTN−2. For I: at ω∈Ω0, claim 4 of the integral toolkit with f=∣M⋅(ω)∣ and g=1 gives (∫[0,T]∣Mt∣dt)2≤T∫[0,T]∣Mt∣2dt, and with f=∣M⋅(ω)∣2 and g=1 gives (∫[0,T]∣Mt∣2dt)2≤T∫[0,T]∣Mt∣4dt (all these path functions being bounded and measurable by the above); hence I(ω)4≤T3∫[0,T]∣Mt(ω)∣4dt on Ω0, while I=0 off Ω0. Therefore, by monotonicity and the Tonelli theorem applied to 1Ω0∣Mt∣4,
(c) Each Mtγ is a random variable by part (b) of the martingale decomposition theorem, so ∣Mt∣ is a nonnegative random variable by the composition lemma, with E[∣Mt∣4]<∞ by (b). Part (a) with X=∣Mt∣ gives E[1D∣Mt∣]≤P(D)3/4(cMκTN−2)1/4=(cMκT)1/4N−1/2P(D)3/4, and part (a) with X=I gives E[1DI]≤P(D)3/4(T4cMκTN−2)1/4=T(cMκT)1/4N−1/2P(D)3/4.
(d) Since ∣Mt∣≥ϵ if and only if ∣Mt∣4≥ϵ4, Markov's inequality applied to the nonnegative random variable ∣Mt∣4 with a=ϵ4 gives P(∣Mt∣≥ϵ)≤E[∣Mt∣4]ϵ−4≤cMκTϵ−4N−2; the bound for I follows in the same way from E[I4]≤T4cMκTN−2. ■