Adopt the setting of the fluctuation processes of the controlled N N N -agent dynamics : a transition-rate family β \beta β on l l l states with control set A \mathcal{A} A , a nonempty subset of Euclidean space R m \mathbb{R}^m R m , and rate bound B B B , an observation-rate family β ~ \tilde{\beta} β ~ , a horizon T > 0 T>0 T > 0 , an N N N -agent driving system ( Ω , F , P ) (\Omega,\mathcal{F},P) ( Ω , F , P ) , an observation-driven control policy h h h which is A \mathcal{A} A -valued , a solution on [ 0 , T ] [0,T] [ 0 , T ] with regular event Ω 0 \Omega_0 Ω 0 , empirical state measure Σ t \Sigma_t Σ t , and control α t \alpha_t α t , a mean-field trajectory pair ( S , A ) (S,A) ( S , A ) for β \beta β with horizon T T T , and the fluctuation processes s t = N ( Σ t − S t ) \mathfrak{s}_t=\sqrt{N}(\Sigma_t-S_t) s t = N ( Σ t − S t ) and a t = N ( α t − A t ) \mathfrak{a}_t=\sqrt{N}(\alpha_t-A_t) a t = N ( α t − A t ) . Assume that β \beta β admits a twice continuously differentiable extension ( U , V , β ˉ ) (U,V,\bar{\beta}) ( U , V , β ˉ ) with derivative bound K K K , and assume that A \mathcal{A} A is convex ; the bound Λ \Lambda Λ below is warranted by clauses (i) and (ii) of the regularity and derivative bounds of the extended aggregate state drift . Let b b b be the aggregate state drift of β \beta β , let M t = ( M t γ ) γ ∈ { 1 , … , l } M_t=(M^\gamma_t)_{\gamma\in\{1,\dots,l\}} M t = ( M t γ ) γ ∈ { 1 , … , l } be as in the martingale decomposition , write E \mathbb{E} E for the expectation , ∣ ⋅ ∣ |\cdot| ∣ ⋅ ∣ for the Euclidean norm (Euclidean distance to the origin), and 1 Ω 0 \mathbf{1}_{\Omega_0} 1 Ω 0 for the function equal to 1 1 1 on Ω 0 \Omega_0 Ω 0 and 0 0 0 off Ω 0 \Omega_0 Ω 0 , set g s = N ( b ( Σ s , α s ) − b ( S s , A s ) ) g_s=\sqrt{N}\,(b(\Sigma_s,\alpha_s)-b(S_s,A_s)) g s = N ( b ( Σ s , α s ) − b ( S s , A s )) as in the a priori second-moment bound , set
Λ = l ( B + K ) l ( l + m ) , \Lambda=l\,(B+K)\,\sqrt{l\,(l+m)}, Λ = l ( B + K ) l ( l + m ) ,
and let c M = 6 l 2 ( 2 ( l − 1 ) ) 4 c_M=6\,l^2\,\big(2(l-1)\big)^4 c M = 6 l 2 ( 2 ( l − 1 ) ) 4 be the constant of the moment bounds for the aggregate compensated counters .
(a) (Well-definedness.) The maps ( t , ω ) ↦ 1 Ω 0 ( ω ) ∣ s t ( ω ) ∣ 4 (t,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_0}(\omega)|\mathfrak{s}_t(\omega)|^4 ( t , ω ) ↦ 1 Ω 0 ( ω ) ∣ s t ( ω ) ∣ 4 , ( t , ω ) ↦ 1 Ω 0 ( ω ) ∣ a t ( ω ) ∣ 4 (t,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_0}(\omega)|\mathfrak{a}_t(\omega)|^4 ( t , ω ) ↦ 1 Ω 0 ( ω ) ∣ a t ( ω ) ∣ 4 , and ( t , ω ) ↦ 1 Ω 0 ( ω ) ∣ g t ( ω ) ∣ 4 (t,\omega)\mapsto\mathbf{1}_{\Omega_0}(\omega)|g_t(\omega)|^4 ( t , ω ) ↦ 1 Ω 0 ( ω ) ∣ g t ( ω ) ∣ 4 are measurable with respect to the product σ \sigma σ -algebra of the trace Borel σ \sigma σ -algebra on [ 0 , T ] [0,T] [ 0 , T ] and F \mathcal{F} F , by the joint measurability of the state and control together with measurability of sequentially continuous functions of measurable Euclidean maps . Consequently, by the Tonelli theorem , the functions t ↦ E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] t\mapsto\mathbb{E}[|\mathfrak{s}_t|^4] t ↦ E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] , t ↦ E [ ∣ a t ∣ 4 ] t\mapsto\mathbb{E}[|\mathfrak{a}_t|^4] t ↦ E [ ∣ a t ∣ 4 ] , and t ↦ E [ ∣ g t ∣ 4 ] t\mapsto\mathbb{E}[|g_t|^4] t ↦ E [ ∣ g t ∣ 4 ] (unchanged by the 1 Ω 0 \mathbf{1}_{\Omega_0} 1 Ω 0 modification, Ω 0 \Omega_0 Ω 0 having probability 1 1 1 ) are measurable [ 0 , ∞ ] [0,\infty] [ 0 , ∞ ] -valued functions on [ 0 , T ] [0,T] [ 0 , T ] , with E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] ≤ 16 N 2 \mathbb{E}[|\mathfrak{s}_t|^4]\le16\,N^2 E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] ≤ 16 N 2 and E [ ∣ g t ∣ 4 ] ≤ 256 l 2 N 2 ( l − 1 ) 4 B 4 \mathbb{E}[|g_t|^4]\le256\,l^2\,N^2\,(l-1)^4\,B^4 E [ ∣ g t ∣ 4 ] ≤ 256 l 2 N 2 ( l − 1 ) 4 B 4 finite for every t t t , and the Lebesgue integral
A 4 = ∫ [ 0 , T ] E [ ∣ a t ∣ 4 ] d t \mathcal{A}_4=\int_{[0,T]}\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{a}_t|^4\big]\,dt A 4 = ∫ [ 0 , T ] E [ ∣ a t ∣ 4 ] d t
is well defined with value in [ 0 , ∞ ] [0,\infty] [ 0 , ∞ ] (the subscripted A 4 \mathcal{A}_4 A 4 is distinct from the control energy A 2 \mathcal{A}_2 A 2 of the second-moment bound and from the control set A \mathcal{A} A ).
(b) (Three-term estimate.) For every t ∈ [ 0 , T ] t\in[0,T] t ∈ [ 0 , T ] , with the right-hand side valued in [ 0 , ∞ ] [0,\infty] [ 0 , ∞ ] ,
E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] ≤ 27 E [ ∣ s 0 ∣ 4 ] + 27 c M ( B t + ( B t ) 2 ) + 54 T 3 Λ 4 ∫ [ 0 , t ] ( E [ ∣ s s ∣ 4 ] + E [ ∣ a s ∣ 4 ] ) d s . \mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_t|^4\big]\ \le\ 27\,\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_0|^4\big]+27\,c_M\,\big(B\,t+(B\,t)^2\big)+54\,T^3\,\Lambda^4\int_{[0,t]}\Big(\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_s|^4\big]+\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{a}_s|^4\big]\Big)\,ds . E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] ≤ 27 E [ ∣ s 0 ∣ 4 ] + 27 c M ( B t + ( B t ) 2 ) + 54 T 3 Λ 4 ∫ [ 0 , t ] ( E [ ∣ s s ∣ 4 ] + E [ ∣ a s ∣ 4 ] ) d s .
(c) (A priori bound.) For every t ∈ [ 0 , T ] t\in[0,T] t ∈ [ 0 , T ] , with the exponential function ,
E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] ≤ ( 27 E [ ∣ s 0 ∣ 4 ] + 27 c M ( B T + ( B T ) 2 ) + 54 T 3 Λ 4 A 4 ) exp ( 54 T 3 Λ 4 t ) , \mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_t|^4\big]\ \le\ \Big(27\,\mathbb{E}\big[|\mathfrak{s}_0|^4\big]+27\,c_M\,\big(B\,T+(B\,T)^2\big)+54\,T^3\,\Lambda^4\,\mathcal{A}_4\Big)\,\exp\big(54\,T^3\,\Lambda^4\,t\big), E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] ≤ ( 27 E [ ∣ s 0 ∣ 4 ] + 27 c M ( B T + ( B T ) 2 ) + 54 T 3 Λ 4 A 4 ) exp ( 54 T 3 Λ 4 t ) ,
where the right-hand side is interpreted as + ∞ +\infty + ∞ when A 4 = + ∞ \mathcal{A}_4=+\infty A 4 = + ∞ . In particular, if A 4 < ∞ \mathcal{A}_4<\infty A 4 < ∞ , then sup { E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] : t ∈ [ 0 , T ] } \sup\{\mathbb{E}[|\mathfrak{s}_t|^4]:t\in[0,T]\} sup { E [ ∣ s t ∣ 4 ] : t ∈ [ 0 , T ]} is finite, with a bound depending on N N N only through E [ ∣ s 0 ∣ 4 ] \mathbb{E}[|\mathfrak{s}_0|^4] E [ ∣ s 0 ∣ 4 ] and A 4 \mathcal{A}_4 A 4 .