Proof of The Separation Theorem for Partial-Information Linear-Quadratic-Gaussian Control
theoremthm:lqg-separation-theorem-2026bFix an admissible control ; write , , and let be the estimation error, so that by claim 3 of Conditional Expectation and Estimation Error of the Controlled State: almost surely componentwise, , the covariance matrix of is , and is independent of . Throughout, a real-valued function on a subinterval of the real numbers is called continuous on when it is continuous relative to , both and the codomain carrying the metric of the real line. The integrands below are continuous in ; by claim 3 of Restricted Lebesgue Measure and Integral Toolkit on a Compact Interval each is Riemann integrable on with Riemann integral equal to its Lebesgue integral against , and linearity and monotonicity are then claim 1 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral.
Claim 1. By Completion of Squares for the Linear-Quadratic-Gaussian Cost,
Fix and decompose, componentwise and almost surely,
We apply Orthogonal Decomposition of Expected Quadratic Forms under Independence with and . Hypothesis (i): each component of is almost surely equal to a -measurable square-integrable random variable, by condition (ii) of Admissible Control for the Linear-Gaussian State-Observation Model, claim 1 of Conditional Expectation and Estimation Error of the Controlled State, and closure under finite linear combinations (claim 2 of The Closed Mean-Square Span of a Family of Random Variables). Hypothesis (ii): each has expectation . Hypothesis (iii): each is a Borel (linear) function of the tuple , so every preimage of a Borel set under a component of lies in ; hence , which is independent of . (The expectation of the quadratic form depends on only through its almost sure class, so the decomposition may be used after modification on a null set.) The lemma gives
where is the covariance matrix of . By bilinearity of the covariance (linearity of the expectation applied to its defining formula),
by the index formulas of the matrix product and transpose. Now apply the cyclic property (claim 3 of Basic Properties of the Trace) to the pair of matrices (size ) and (size ), and compute, from the definition of the feedback gain in Completion of Squares for the Linear-Quadratic-Gaussian Cost: (since is the identity, by associativity), and (transpose rules of claim 3 of Componentwise Estimates, Transpose Identities, and Indefinite Riemann Integrals and symmetry of , Invertibility of Symmetric Positive Definite Matrices), so that
Hence
Both (continuous by claim 2 of Expected Bilinear Forms: Trace Formula and Mean-Square Continuity, the components of being mean-square continuous by claim 1 of Conditional Expectation and Estimation Error of the Controlled State and claims 1-2 of Basic Properties of the Mean-Square Riemann Integral) and the trace term (entries continuous) are continuous, and the first is nonnegative at each : pointwise since is positive definite, and expectations of nonnegative random variables are nonnegative (Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral). Integrating the pointwise identity over and splitting the integral by linearity yields claim 1 with the stated .
Claim 2. The inequality is immediate from claim 1, the integrand being continuous and nonnegative and the Riemann integral monotone. If almost surely for every , the integrand vanishes identically and . Conversely suppose , i.e. for the continuous nonnegative integrand . If for some , then by continuity on a nondegenerate subinterval, and splitting the integral by additivity (claim 4 of Componentwise Estimates, Transpose Identities, and Indefinite Riemann Integrals) and monotonicity gives , a contradiction; hence . Fix and put ; then pointwise with . For every , Markov's inequality (Markov's and Chebyshev's Inequalities) gives , and taking the union over () with countable subadditivity of the measure yields almost surely. On the event where in addition is defined and , positive definiteness of would give ; hence almost surely, i.e. componentwise almost surely.
Claim 3. By claim 2 of Existence and Self-Consistency of the Closed-Loop Feedback Control, is admissible and almost surely for every ; by claim 3 there it is determined by its own observations in the stated sense. By the equality case of claim 2, .
Loading…
Prerequisites
ade21a65-3df5-4625-9c23-4df4bddc3fc0