Verified by 0 users · Statement flagged by 0 users
Reason: Migrated onto the re-versioned upstream layer; redacted sum-product theorem replaced by the metric version with the Euclidean/metric continuity bridge, boundedness via the extreme value theorem, interval Lebesgue toolkit -2026b, and componentwise continuity glue for the trajectory map. · 12,028 chars · 28 deps · depth 17
Statement
Let l, m, A, β with rate bound B, (U,V,βˉ) with derivative bound K, (L,G), (W,Lˉ,Gˉ) with second-derivative bound Kc, T>0, and (S,A) be as in the definition of a stationary mean-field triple, let bˉ be the extended aggregate state drift of (U,V,βˉ), let P be a stationary co-state for these data, and adopt the partial-derivative notation ∂j∂i of the extensiondefinitions. Throughout, a real-valued function on a subinterval I of the real numbersR is called continuous on I when it is continuous relative to I, both I and the codomain R carrying the metric of the real line. Define, for t∈[0,T] and i,j∈{1,…,l+m}, the fluctuation Hessian coefficients
where the second-order partial derivatives of bˉ exist and are continuous by part (i) of the regularity of the extended aggregate state drift, and those of Lˉ and Gˉ exist and are continuous by clause 2 of the cost extension definition together with clauses 1 and 2 of the Ck definition. Each Hij is continuous on [0,T], by continuity of compositions and continuity of sums and products (both applied pointwise on [0,T], the Euclidean and metric notions of continuity for real-valued maps agreeing by claim 1 of the continuity agreement lemma, and the vector map t↦(St,At) being continuous into Rl+m in the Euclidean sense because d((Ss,As),(St,At))≤∑γ=1l∣Ssγ−Stγ∣+∑j=1m∣Asj−Atj∣ by claim 1 of the componentwise estimates, each summand being controlled by the continuity of the components in clause 1 of the trajectory-pair definition) along the continuous trajectory pair and the continuous co-state; by the extreme value theorem it attains a maximum and a minimum on [0,T], and is therefore bounded.
Let (xt)t∈[0,T] and (at)t∈[0,T] be families of Rl-valued and Rm-valued random vectors on a common probability space(Ω,F,P) (each component a random variable), and write zt=(xt,at), identified with an Rl+m-valued map with components zt1,…,ztl+m, so that xt has components xt1,…,xtl and at has components at1,…,atm (the symbol xt here is unrelated to the generic point x=(Σ,α) of the extension definitions), such that:
(i) there is an event Ω1 of probability 1 such that, for each i∈{1,…,l+m}, the map (t,ω)↦1Ω1(ω)zti(ω) on [0,T]×Ω is measurable with respect to the product σ-algebra of the trace Borel σ-algebra on [0,T] and F, where 1Ω1 is the function equal to 1 on Ω1 and 0 off Ω1;
(ii)∫[0,T]E[∣xt∣2+∣at∣2]dt<∞, where ∣⋅∣ is the Euclidean norm (Euclidean distance to the origin) and the integral is the Lebesgue integral with value in [0,∞]. Here the map (t,ω)↦1Ω1(ω)(∣xt(ω)∣2+∣at(ω)∣2) is product-measurable, being a jointly continuous, hence sequentially continuous, function of the maps of (i) by measurability of sequentially continuous functions of measurable Euclidean maps (using 1Ω12=1Ω1), so the integrand t↦E[∣xt∣2+∣at∣2] is a measurable [0,∞]-valued function of t by the Tonelli theorem, applicable here and in every use below because the trace Lebesgue measure on [0,T] (a finite measure) and P are finite, hence σ-finite, measures. The integrand is unchanged when zt is replaced by 1Ω1zt: writing N for the complement of Ω1, an event of probability zero, the functions ∣xt∣2+∣at∣2, 1Ω1(∣xt∣2+∣at∣2), and 1N(∣xt∣2+∣at∣2) are nonnegative random variables (sequentially continuous functions of random variables, again by the same lemma); the third is dominated pointwise by the [0,∞]-valued function equal to ∞ on N and 0 elsewhere, which is the increasing pointwise limit of the simple functions n1N and so has expectation 0 by monotone convergence and the integral of a simple function; hence 1N(∣xt∣2+∣at∣2) has expectation 0 by monotonicity, and additivity gives E[∣xt∣2+∣at∣2]=E[1Ω1(∣xt∣2+∣at∣2)];
Write ψt(ω)=21∑i=1l+m∑j=1l+mHij(t)zti(ω)ztj(ω) for (t,ω)∈[0,T]×Ω. Since 1Ω12=1Ω1, the map (t,ω)↦1Ω1(ω)ψt(ω) is a jointly continuous, hence sequentially continuous, function of the measurable maps (t,ω)↦t (the preimage of a Borel set B being the rectangle B×Ω) and (t,ω)↦1Ω1(ω)zti(ω) of (i), and is therefore product-measurable by measurability of sequentially continuous functions of measurable Euclidean maps; its positive and negative parts (1Ω1ψ)+ and (1Ω1ψ)− are product-measurable in turn, being its compositions with the continuous functions u↦max(u,0) and u↦max(−u,0), again by the same lemma. Fix a real number C with 21∑i=1l+m∑j=1l+m∣Hij(t)∣≤C for all t∈[0,T], which exists by the boundedness of each Hij recorded above; then ∣1Ω1ψt∣≤C1Ω1(∣xt∣2+∣at∣2) on [0,T]×Ω, since ∣ztiztj∣≤∣xt∣2+∣at∣2 for all i,j.
By the Tonelli theorem applied to the product-measurable map of (ii), Φ(ω)=∫[0,T]1Ω1(ω)(∣xt(ω)∣2+∣at(ω)∣2)dt defines a measurable [0,∞]-valued function of ω; for ω∈Ω1 the section being integrated is exactly t↦∣xt(ω)∣2+∣at(ω)∣2, since 1Ω1(ω)=1. Let Ω2=Ω1∩{ω∈Ω:Φ(ω)<∞}; by (i) alone Ω2 is an event, and by (ii) it has probability 1: E[Φ] equals the finite quantity of (ii) by the Tonelli theorem, while for every natural numbern we have Φ≥n1{Φ=∞} pointwise, so E[Φ]≥nP(Φ=∞) by monotonicity and the integral of a simple function, which forces P(Φ=∞)=0. At each ω∈Ω2 the section t↦ψt(ω) is measurable, being the difference of the sections at ω of (1Ω1ψ)+ and (1Ω1ψ)− (sections of product-measurable [0,∞]-valued maps are measurable, as in the Tonelli theorem), and it is Lebesgue integrable over [0,T], being measurable with ∫[0,T]∣ψt(ω)∣dt≤CΦ(ω)<∞ by monotonicity and the definition of integrability.
The fluctuation linear-quadratic cost of the pair ((x),(a)) relative to the stationary mean-field triple (S,A,P) and the chosen extensions is the real number
LQG[(x),(a)]=E[I]+E[21γ=1∑lδ=1∑lFγδxTγxTδ],
where I is the random variable that vanishes off Ω2 and at each ω∈Ω2 equals the Lebesgue integral ∫[0,T]ψt(ω)dt of the preceding paragraph, and both expectations are expectations on (Ω,F,P). Both expectations are well defined and finite. Indeed, by the Tonelli theorem the integrals over [0,T] of (1Ω1ψ)+ and (1Ω1ψ)− define measurable [0,∞]-valued functions of ω, each at most CΦ pointwise by monotonicity, hence finite at every ω∈Ω2; for each of the two, the function equal to it on Ω2 and to 0 off Ω2 is a random variable, Ω2 being an event, and I is the difference of these two random variables. Moreover ∣I∣≤CΦ pointwise and E[Φ]<∞, so I is integrable and E[I] is defined and finite, again by monotonicity. The terminal random variable 21∑γ=1l∑δ=1lFγδxTγxTδ is measurable by measurability of continuous functions of measurable maps, and its absolute value is at most 21(∑γ,δ∣Fγδ∣)∣xT∣2, which has finite expectation by (iii); so it is integrable and its expectation is defined and finite, by monotonicity once more. Finally, the value of LQG[(x),(a)] does not depend on the admissible choice of Ω1: if Ω1′ is another event as in (i), with associated Ω2′ and I′, then Ω2∩Ω2′ has probability 1 and the two prescriptions agree there, so the nonnegative random variable ∣I−I′∣ vanishes off an event of probability zero and has expectation 0 by the domination argument of (ii), whence ∣E[I]−E[I′]∣=E[I−I′]≤E[∣I−I′∣]=0 by the basic integral laws.
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.