TheoremBase

Mean Deviation Bound for the Aggregate Fluctuation Covariance along a Mean-Field Trajectory Pair

Statement

Adopt the setting of the fluctuation processes of the controlled NN-agent dynamics: a transition-rate family β\beta on ll states with control set A\mathcal{A}, a nonempty subset of Euclidean space Rm\mathbb{R}^m, and rate bound BB, an observation-rate family β~\tilde{\beta}, a horizon T>0T>0, an NN-agent driving system (Ω,F,P)(\Omega,\mathcal{F},P), an observation-driven control policy hh which is A\mathcal{A}-valued, a solution on [0,T][0,T] with regular event Ω0\Omega_0, empirical state measure Σt\Sigma_t, and control αt\alpha_t, a mean-field trajectory pair (S,A)(S,A) for β\beta with horizon TT, and the fluctuation processes st=N(Σt−St)\mathfrak{s}_t=\sqrt{N}(\Sigma_t-S_t) and at=N(αt−At)\mathfrak{a}_t=\sqrt{N}(\alpha_t-A_t). Assume that β\beta admits a twice continuously differentiable extension (U,V,βˉ)(U,V,\bar{\beta}) with derivative bound KK, and that the control set A\mathcal{A} is convex. Let Θ\Theta be the aggregate fluctuation covariance of β\beta, write E\mathbb{E} for the expectation and ∣⋅∣|\cdot| for the Euclidean norm (Euclidean distance to the origin), set zs=(ss,as)∈Rl+mz_s=(\mathfrak{s}_s,\mathfrak{a}_s)\in\mathbb{R}^{l+m} under the coordinate identification of the extension definition, and set

cΘ=2 (l−1) (B+K l+m ).c_\Theta=2\,(l-1)\,\big(B+K\,\sqrt{l+m}\,\big).

Products with an infinite factor are read with the convention 0⋅∞=00\cdot\infty=0 (if cΘ=0c_\Theta=0, the rate bound forces β\beta, and hence Θ\Theta and every left-hand side below, to vanish identically). Then, for all γ,δ∈{1,…,l}\gamma,\delta\in\{1,\dots,l\}:

(a) (Pointwise deviation bound.) At every ω∈Ω\omega\in\Omega and every s∈[0,T]s\in[0,T],

∣Θγδ(Σs,αs)−Θγδ(Ss,As)∣ ≤ cΘN ∣zs∣.\big|\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)-\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(S_s,A_s)\big|\ \le\ \frac{c_\Theta}{\sqrt{N}}\,|z_s| .

(b) (Mean deviation bound.) For every s∈[0,T]s\in[0,T], with the expectation E[Θγδ(Σs,αs)]\mathbb{E}[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)] finite, and bounded and measurable as a function of ss, by clause (a) of the weighted second-moment evolution lemma (applied with the constant matrix family Zt=0Z_t=0, whose densities z˙γδ≡0\dot{z}^{\gamma\delta}\equiv0 are continuous), and with the right-hand side valued in [0,∞][0,\infty],

∣E[Θγδ(Σs,αs)]−Θγδ(Ss,As)∣ ≤ cΘN (E[∣ss∣2]+E[∣as∣2])1/2.\big|\mathbb{E}\big[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)\big]-\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(S_s,A_s)\big|\ \le\ \frac{c_\Theta}{\sqrt{N}}\,\Big(\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_s|^2\big]+\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{a}_s|^2\big]\Big)^{1/2} .

(c) (Integrated deviation bound.) The function s↦Θγδ(Ss,As)s\mapsto\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(S_s,A_s) is continuous on [0,T][0,T], relative to [0,T][0,T], both [0,T][0,T] and the codomain R\mathbb{R} carrying the metric of the real line — by continuity of compositions and continuity of sums and products along the continuous trajectory pair, the vector map s↦(Ss,As)s\mapsto(S_s,A_s) being continuous into Rl+m\mathbb{R}^{l+m} in the Euclidean sense because d((Ss,As),(St,At))≤∑γ=1l∣Ssγ−Stγ∣+∑j=1m∣Asj−Atj∣d((S_s,A_s),(S_t,A_t))\le\sum_{\gamma=1}^{l}|S^\gamma_s-S^\gamma_t|+\sum_{j=1}^{m}|A^j_s-A^j_t| by claim 1 of the componentwise estimates, each summand controlled by the componentwise continuity of the trajectory pair, and each β(σ,σ′,⋅,⋅)\beta(\sigma,\sigma',\cdot,\cdot), over ordered pairs σ≠σ′\sigma\neq\sigma', agreeing on the probability simplex-control product Δl×A\Delta^l\times\mathcal{A} with the continuous extension βˉ(σ,σ′,⋅,⋅)\bar{\beta}(\sigma,\sigma',\cdot,\cdot), and the Euclidean and metric notions of continuity agreeing for real-valued maps by claim 1 of the continuity agreement lemma — and hence, by the extreme value theorem, attains a maximum and a minimum on [0,T][0,T] and is in particular bounded there, so the function s↦∣E[Θγδ(Σs,αs)]−Θγδ(Ss,As)∣s\mapsto\big|\mathbb{E}[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)]-\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(S_s,A_s)\big| is measurable and bounded and its Lebesgue integral over [0,T][0,T] is defined and finite. With

S=∫[0,T]E[∣st∣2] dtandA2=∫[0,T]E[∣at∣2] dt\mathcal{S}=\int_{[0,T]}\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_t|^2\big]\,dt\qquad\text{and}\qquad\mathcal{A}_2=\int_{[0,T]}\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{a}_t|^2\big]\,dt

(the script S\mathcal{S} is distinct from the trajectory SS, and A2\mathcal{A}_2, as in the a priori second-moment bound, from the control set A\mathcal{A}), both well defined in [0,∞][0,\infty] with S≤4 N T\mathcal{S}\le4\,N\,T by clause (a) of the a priori second-moment bound and monotonicity of the integral, one has, in [0,∞][0,\infty],

∫[0,T]∣E[Θγδ(Σs,αs)]−Θγδ(Ss,As)∣ ds ≤ cΘN T (S+A2)1/2.\int_{[0,T]}\big|\mathbb{E}\big[\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)\big]-\Theta^{\gamma\delta}(S_s,A_s)\big|\,ds\ \le\ \frac{c_\Theta}{\sqrt{N}}\,\sqrt{T}\,\big(\mathcal{S}+\mathcal{A}_2\big)^{1/2} .

Proofs

Log in to submit a proof.

Loading...

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Loading…

Related

0 relations

Curated associations between results. These are editable and subjective — they do not replace the dependency graph, which is derived from the references in the text.

No relations recorded yet.

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…