Reason: First published proof of lem:l2-interval-complete-2026a.
Proof
Write λ=λ[0,T], B=B[0,T] and PT=T−1λ, so that ([0,T],B,PT) is a probability space and, by claim 7 of the inner-product lemma, a map w:[0,T]→Rd lies in L2([0,T];Rd) exactly when each component wi is a square-integrable random variable on that probability space, in which case
∥[w]∥L22=Ti=1∑d∥wi∥22.(†)
Claim 1. Let (ξn)n∈N be a Cauchy sequence in (L2([0,T];Rd),dL2), and for each n choose a representative un∈L2([0,T];Rd) with ξn=[un].
Fix i∈{1,…,d}. Since (un−um)i=uni−umi, identity (†) applied to un−um gives
all terms of the sum being nonnegative. Given a real ε>0, choosing N with dL2(ξn,ξm)<εT for n,m≥N therefore yields ∥uni−umi∥2<ε for n,m≥N; that is, (uni)n is Cauchy in mean square. By mean-square completeness, applied on ([0,T],B,PT) with the sub-σ-algebra taken to be B itself, there is a square-integrable random variable Xi on that space with ∥uni−Xi∥2→0.
Define u:[0,T]→Rd by u(t)=(X1(t),…,Xd(t)). Its components are the square-integrable random variables Xi, so u∈L2([0,T];Rd) by (†). Applying (†) to un−u,
a finite sum of d real sequences each with limit 0, hence with limit 0. So ξn→[u] in (L2([0,T];Rd),dL2). Every Cauchy sequence converges, so the space is complete.
Claim 2. Put wn=un−u, which lies in L2([0,T];Rd) by claim 2 of the inner-product lemma, and εn=∥[wn]∥L2, so εn→0 by hypothesis.
Choice of subsequence. Construct n1<n2<… recursively: having chosen n1<⋯<nj−1 (with no constraint when j=1), use εn→0 to pick nj>nj−1 with εnj≤4−j.
A Chebyshev bound. For each j the function ∣wnj∣2 is B-measurable by claim 1 of the inner-product lemma, so
Countable subadditivity. If E1,E2,⋯∈B, put Fj=Ej∖⋃i<jEi∈B; these are pairwise disjoint with ⋃jFj=⋃jEj and Fj⊆Ej. Since λ is a measure, additivity applied to Ej=Fj∪(Ej∖Fj) gives λ(Fj)≤λ(Ej), and countable additivity gives λ(⋃jEj)=∑jλ(Fj).
The exceptional set. Let N=⋂J≥1⋃j≥JAj, a member of B. Fix J≥1. By the previous paragraph, λ(⋃j≥JAj) is the sum of the nonnegative series ∑j≥Jλ(Fj) whose partial sums satisfy, for every K≥J,
hence the sum itself is at most 344−J. Since N⊆⋃j≥JAj, monotonicity of λ gives λ(N)≤344−J for every J≥1. As 4−J has limit 0, λ(N)=0.
Convergence off N. Let t∈[0,T]∖N. By the definition of N there is J with t∈/Aj for every j≥J, that is ∣wnj(t)∣2≤4−j, so ∣unj(t)−u(t)∣=∣wnj(t)∣≤2−j for all j≥J. Given a real η>0, choose j0≥J with 2−j0<η; then ∣unj(t)−u(t)∣≤2−j≤2−j0<η for every j≥j0. Hence (unj(t))j converges to u(t) in Rd.