Step 0 (interval splitting and the forward co-state equation). Let φ:[0,T]→R be continuous and t∈[0,T]. We claim
∫[0,t]φds+∫[t,T]φds=∫[0,T]φds,
where the first two integrals are the Lebesgue integrals of the restrictions of φ (continuous by claim 1 of restriction stability, hence measurable and integrable by claim 3 of the toolkit) and the conventions ∫[0,0]=0, ∫[T,T]=0 are in force. For t=0 and t=T the identity is trivial (zero extension, claim 2 of the toolkit, identifies the remaining integral with ∫[0,T]φ). For 0<t<T: by claim 2 of the toolkit, ∫[0,t]φ=∫[0,T]1[0,t]φ and ∫[t,T]φ=∫[0,T]1[t,T]φ. Pointwise on [0,T], 1[0,t]+1[t,T]=1+1{t}, so 1[0,t]φ+1[t,T]φ=φ+1{t}φ; the function 1{t}φ vanishes off the set {t}=[t,t], which is λ[0,T]-null (a degenerate closed interval has Lebesgue measure zero by the Lebesgue measure theorem, and the toolkit's measure is the restriction of Lebesgue measure), so its integral is 0 by claim 2 of the null-set integral lemma. The claim follows by linearity of the integral.
Indeed, by clause 2 of the co-state definition, Ptγ=−∂γGˉ(ST)+∫tTφsγds with φsγ=∑δ∂γbˉδ(Ss,As)Psδ−∂γLˉ(Ss,As)=−∂γHs(Ss,As), a continuous function of s (asserted there), the integral being the Riemann integral of the restriction; at t=T this gives the second identity of (⋆). By claim 3 of the toolkit the Riemann integral equals the Lebesgue integral over [t,T], and by the splitting just proved, Ptγ−P0γ=∫[t,T]φγ−∫[0,T]φγ=−∫[0,t]φγ=∫[0,t]∂γHs(Ss,As)ds.
By the joint measurability lemma, the maps (t,ω)↦1Ω0Σtγ and (t,ω)↦1Ω0αtj are measurable with respect to B[0,T]⊗F; the maps (t,ω)↦1Ω∖Ω0(ω)Stγ and (t,ω)↦1Ω∖Ω0(ω)Atj are measurable as products of an indicator of a measurable rectangle-factor and a continuous (hence measurable) deterministic map, by measurability of continuous functions of measurable maps; so Σ~γ and α~j are product-measurable. At every point, (Σ~t,α~t)∈Δl×A: on Ω0 by the facts recorded above, off Ω0 because (St,At)∈Δl×A. The map (t,x,a)↦Ht(x,a) on [0,T]×(U∩Uc)×V is sequentially continuous (finite sums of products of the continuous Lˉ, bˉδ — continuous by the extension definitions and part (i) of the regularity lemma — and the continuous t↦Ptδ), so by the composition lemma the map (t,ω)↦Ht(Σ~t,α~t) is product-measurable; likewise (t,ω)↦L(Σ~t,α~t) (L being sequentially continuous on Δl×Rm by clause 1 of the cost-data definition), and the deterministic t↦Ht(St,At) and t↦∂γHt(St,At) are continuous, hence measurable. Since 1Ω0Dt=1Ω0(Ht(Σ~t,α~t)−Ht(St,At)−∑γ∂γHt(St,At)(Σ~tγ−Stγ)) and 1Ω0L(Σt,αt)=1Ω0L(Σ~t,α~t) pointwise, both maps in the assertion are product-measurable (products and sums of product-measurable maps, by the composition lemma). Each ΣTγ is a random variable (clause (iv) of the existence theorem) and Gˉ is continuous on Uc⊇Δl, so DG is a random variable by the composition lemma.
For the bounds, let (t,ω) be a point with Σt∈Δl and αt∈A. Then ∣Ht(Σt,αt)∣≤∣Lˉ(Σt,αt)∣+∑δ∣Ptδ∣∣bˉδ(Σt,αt)∣≤CLG+CP⋅2(l−1)B, using Lˉ=L, bˉ=b and the drift bound recorded above; the same bound holds for ∣Ht(St,At)∣. Both coordinates Σtγ and Stγ lie in [0,1], so ∣ytγ∣≤1 and ∑γ∣∂γHt(St,At)ytγ∣≤C∂. Hence ∣Dt∣≤2(CLG+2(l−1)BCP)+C∂=CD. Likewise, at every ω (using ΣT∈Δl, Gˉ=G on Δl, and (⋆)): ∣DG∣≤2CLG+∑γ∣PTγ∣∣yTγ∣≤2CLG+CP=CDG. Both membership statements hold at every point of [0,T]×Ω, respectively Ω, by the facts recorded at the outset.
(b). Fix ω∈Ω0. For a real-valued B[0,T]⊗F-measurable map f, every ω-section is B[0,T]-measurable: the sections clause of the Tonelli-Fubini theorem is stated for [0,∞]-valued maps, and applies to the nonnegative parts f+=max(f,0) and f−=max(−f,0) — measurable by the composition lemma — and f=f+−f−, so the ω-section of f is the difference of the measurable ω-sections of f+ and f−; applying this to the product-measurable maps of (a) (whose ω-sections at the fixed ω∈Ω0 coincide with t↦L(Σt(ω),αt(ω)), t↦Dt(ω)) and to 1Ω0Mγ (product-measurable by part (b) of the restricted-moments lemma), all paths appearing below are measurable on [0,T]; they are bounded (by CLG, CD, and KM=2+2(l−1)BT respectively), hence Lebesgue integrable over every [0,t] by monotonicity against constants (linearity and monotonicity).
The pathwise state and deviation equations. By the displayed definition of M in the statement and 1Ω0(ω)=1: Σtγ(ω)=Σ0γ(ω)+∫[0,t]bγ(Σs(ω),αs(ω))ds+Mtγ(ω) for every t and γ; the integrand path is measurable (as the section of 1Ω0bγ(Σ⋅,α⋅), product-measurable by the composition argument of (a) applied to the sequentially continuous bˉγ) and bounded by 2(l−1)B. By clause 2 of the trajectory-pair definition and claim 3 of the toolkit, Stγ=S0γ+∫[0,t]bγ(Ss,As)ds. Subtracting, with gsγ=bγ(Σs(ω),αs(ω))−bγ(Ss,As) (measurable in s, ∣gsγ∣≤4(l−1)B):
Integration by parts. Fix γ. Apply integration by parts for indefinite Lebesgue integrals with fs=∂γHs(Ss,As) (continuous, bounded by C∂, integrable), u0=P0γ — so that ut=Ptγ by (⋆) — and with gs=gsγ, v0=y0γ(ω) — so that vt=ytγ(ω)−Mtγ(ω) by (†). Part (ii) of that lemma gives
the terms ∑γPTγyTγ and ±∫∑γ∂γHyγ cancelling. By the definition of the mean-field cost and claim 3 of the toolkit, ∫[0,T]L(St,At)dt+G(ST)=JMF, so the display of (b) follows by rearrangement.
Finiteness of JN[h]. Define w=1Ω0⋅(∫[0,T]L(Σt,αt)dt+G(ΣT)), a well-defined function on Ω (the integral existing at every ω∈Ω0 as above, the value being 0 off Ω0); w equals ω↦∫[0,T]1Ω0L(Σt,αt)dt+1Ω0G(ΣT), which is a random variable: the integrand is product-measurable and bounded by (a), so writing it as a difference of its nonnegative and negative parts and applying the Tonelli clause of the Tonelli-Fubini theorem to each part shows that ω↦∫[0,T]1Ω0L(Σt,αt)dt is a difference of measurable maps, hence measurable by the composition lemma, and 1Ω0G(ΣT) is a random variable as in (a); moreover ∣w∣≤CLG(T+1). By the definition of the N-agent cost, JN[h] is the expectation of the cost variable of clause (v) of the existence theorem, an extended-real-valued variable bounded below whose expectation is well defined in (−∞,+∞]; call it w′. At every point of the probability-one event Ω0, w′ coincides with w (both are the same pathwise integral plus G(ΣT), the section being measurable at every ω∈Ω0 as shown above). For nonnegative extended-real-valued variables U,V agreeing off an event E′ of probability zero one has E[U]=E[V]: by monotone convergenceE[U1E′] is the limit of E[min(U,n)1E′]≤nE[1E′]=0, so E[U]=E[U1Ω∖E′]=E[V1Ω∖E′]=E[V]. Applying this to the nonnegative and negative parts of w′ and w (which agree off Ω∖Ω0) gives JN[h]=E[w′]=E[w], a finite real number since ∣w∣≤CLG(T+1).
(c). By (a) the map (t,ω)↦1Ω0Dt is product-measurable and bounded by CD; on the finite product of ([0,T],B[0,T],λ[0,T]) and the probability space, the Tonelli clause of the Tonelli-Fubini theorem applied to the absolute value shows the map is integrable for the product measure (its integral being at most CD⋅T), so the Fubini clause applies: t↦E[1Ω0Dt] is measurable and (being bounded by CD) bounded, and
∫[0,T]E[1Ω0Dt]dt=E[1Ω0∫[0,T]Dtdt].
Next, E[1Ω0Mtγ]=0 for every t and γ: the constant function T is a stopping time of (Ftsys)t∈[0,T] (claim 1 of the stopping-time toolkit), so claim 4 of the covariation lemma with τ≡T, r=0, D=Ω gives E[1Ω0Mmin(t,T)γ]=E[1Ω0Mmin(0,T)γ], and M0γ=0 identically (the defining display at t=0, with the convention ∫[0,0]=0). Applying the same Tonelli-then-Fubini step to the bounded product-measurable map (t,ω)↦∂γHt(St,At)1Ω0Mtγ (bounded by C∂KM with KM=2+2(l−1)BT of part (b) of the restricted-moments lemma, which also provides the product-measurability of 1Ω0Mγ; note 1Ω0(ω)∫[0,T]∑γ∂γHt(St,At)Mtγ(ω)dt=∫[0,T]∑γ∂γHt(St,At)1Ω0(ω)Mtγ(ω)dt at every ω∈Ω0, and both sides vanish off Ω0, with RM extended by 0 there) then gives E[1Ω0∫[0,T]∑γ∂γHt(St,At)Mtγdt]=∫[0,T]∑γ∂γHt(St,At)E[1Ω0Mtγ]dt=0, and E[1Ω0RM]=−∑γPTγE[1Ω0MTγ]+0=0.
Multiply the identity of (b) by 1Ω0, take expectations (every term is a bounded random variable by (a) and the above), and use: E[w]=JN[h]; E[1Ω0]JMF=JMF and, for any bounded random variable X, E[1Ω0X]=E[X] (the difference 1Ω∖Ω0X vanishes off a null event); E[y0γ]=E[Σ0γ]−S0γ=ζNγ/N. This yields
and multiplying by N gives (c), the factor N passing inside the integral and the expectations by linearity.
(d). Fix ω∈Ω and t∈[0,T]; then (Σt(ω),αt(ω))∈Δl×A by the facts recorded at the outset. By part (b) of the first-order lemma (its hypotheses — A compact and, for part (b), convex — hold),
By conclusion (d) of the growth lemma under (A), (H1), (U) — the function there being a↦Ht(St,a), as identified in the first-order lemma — Ht(St,αt)−Ht(St,At)≥r0∣αt−At∣2. From (r0∣αt−At∣−(C1/r0)∣yt∣)2≥0 one gets C1∣yt∣∣αt−At∣≤2r0∣αt−At∣2+2r0C12∣yt∣2. Combining,
and multiplying by N, with N∣αt−At∣2=∣at∣2 and N∣yt∣2=∣st∣2, gives the running bound. For the terminal bound, at every ω: ΣT∈Δl, so the second display of part (b) of the first-order lemma gives ∣DG∣≤2lKc∣yT∣2, whence NDG≥−2lKc∣sT∣2.
(e). By the joint measurability lemma and the composition lemma, (t,ω)↦1Ω0∣at∣2 and (t,ω)↦1Ω0∣st∣2 are product-measurable; they are bounded (for the fixed N) by 4RA2N and 4N respectively, where RA is a bound for the norms of points of the compact, hence bounded, set A (Heine-Borel) and ∣st∣≤2N as in the coordinate argument of (a). By Tonelli-Fubini, t↦E[1Ω0∣at∣2] and t↦E[1Ω0∣st∣2] are measurable and bounded, so all integrals in (e) exist and are finite. By (d) and monotonicity of the expectation, for every t,
and E[1Ω0NDG]≥−2lKcE[1Ω0∣sT∣2]. Integrating the first inequality over [0,T] (monotonicity and linearity of the interval integral) and inserting both into the identity of (c) yields