4.1 - arXiv.org

Transcription

4.1 - arXiv.org

Probabilistic interpretation for solutions of Fully
arXiv:1412.5548v1 [math.PR] 17 Dec 2014
Nonlinear Stochastic PDEs
Anis MATOUSSI∗
Université du Maine
Institut du Risque et de l’Assurance
Laboratoire Manceau de Mathématiques
e-mail: [email protected]
Dylan POSSAMAI
Université Paris-Dauphine
Wissal SABBAGH
Université du Maine
Institut du Risque et de l’Assurance
Laboratoire Manceau de Mathématiques
Abstract: In this article, we propose a wellposedness theory for a class of second order backward doubly stochastic differential equation (2BDSDE). We prove existence
and uniqueness of the solution under a Lipschitz type assumption on the generator,
and we investigate the links between our 2BDSDEs and a class of parabolic Fully nonLinear Stochastic PDes. Precisely, we show that the Markovian solution of 2BDSDEs
provide a probabilistic interpretation of the classical and stochastic viscosity solution
of Fully nonlinear SPDEs.
1. Introduction
The starting point of this work is the following parabolic Fully nonlinear stochastic partial
differential equation (FSPDE in short)
−
ˆ x, ut (x), Dut (, x), D2 ut (x)) dt + g(t, x, ut (x), Dut (x)) ◦ d←
dut (x) + h(t,
W t = 0,
(1.1)
over the time interval [0, T ], with a given final condition uT = Φ and g = g1 , · · · , gd and ˆh
←
−
are nonlinear functions. The differential term with dW t refers to the backward stochastic integral
Research partly supported by the Chair Financial Risks of the Risk Foundation sponsored by Société
Générale, the Chair Derivatives of the Future sponsored by the Fédération Bancaire Française, and the
Chair Finance and Sustainable Development sponsored by EDF and Calyon
∗
1
A. Matoussi, D. Possamai, W. Sabbagh/
2
with respect to a finite-dimensional Brownian motion on Ω, F , P, (Wt )t≥0 . We use the backward
notation because our approach is based on the doubly stochastic framework introduced by Pardoux
and Peng [22].
In the case where g is identically null, the equation (1.1) becomes a Fully nonlinear PDE, Soner,
Touzi and Zhang [31] studied this class of equations in the context of second order backward
stochastic differential equations. Soner, Touzi and Zhang [31] provided a wellposedness theory for
2BSDEs under uniform Lipschitz conditions similar to those of Pardoux and Peng [23]. Their key
idea was to reinforce the condition that the 2BSDE must hold P− a.s. for every probability measure
P in a non- dominated class of mutually singular measures (see Section 2 for precise definitions).
The theory being very recent, the literature remains rather limited. However, we refer the interested
reader to Possamai [27] and Possamai and Zhou [29] who respectively extended these wellposedness
results to generators with linear and quadratic growth.
Pardoux and Peng [22] (see also [2]) have introduced backward doubly stochastic differential equation (BDSDE in short) to give the Feynman-Kac’s formula for semilinear SPDEs, i.e. mainly one
has in (1.1),
ˆ x, ut (x), Dut (, x), D2 ut (x)) = Lut (x) + f (t, x, Dut (, x))
h(t,
where L is a second order diffusion operator and f is a nonlinear function. Matoussi and Scheutzow
[20] have extend this BDSDE to a class of BDSDE where the nonlinear noise term is given by
Itô-Kunita’s stochastic integral. This allows to give a probabilistic interpretation of classical and
Sobolev’s solutions of semilinear parabolic stochastic partial differential equations driven by a
nonlinear space-time noise.
Buckdahn and Ma [3, 4] have introduced the rigorous notion of stochastic viscosity solution for
semilinear SPDE and then they gave the probabilistic interpretation of such equation via BDSDE
where the intensity of the noise g in the SPDE (1.1) does not depend on the gradient of the solution.
They used the so-called Doss-Sussmann transformation and stochastic diffeomorphism flow technics
to convert the semilinear SPDEs to PDEs with random coefficients. This transformation permits
to remove the martingale term from the SPDE’s. Lions and Souganidis have introduced also a
closed form notion of stochastic viscosity solution for SPDE’s in some notes [17, 18, 19].
Our aim in this paper is to provide a complete theory of existence and uniqueness of Second order
BDSDEs (2BDSDEs) under the Lipschitz-type hypotheses on the driver. We will show that in this
context, the definition of a 2BDSDE is very similar to that of a 2BSDE. The main motivation is to
give the probabilistic interpretation of classical and stochastic viscosity of fully nonlinear SPDEs
(1.1). Similarly to Buckdahn and Ma [3, 4], we use the Doss-Sussnmann transformation to convert
fully nonlinear SPDE’s to fully nonlinear PDE’s with random coefficients, then we use the solution
of 2BDSDE to provide the Feynman-Kac’s formula.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall briefly some notations,
provide the precise definition of 2BDSDEs and show how they are connected to classical BDSDEs.
Then, in Section 3, we show a representation formula for the solution of 2BDSDEs which in turn
implies uniqueness. In section 4, we present first the link between the markovian 2BDDSE with
the associated fully nonlinear SPDEs. Then, we prove that stochastic viscosity solution of such
SPDEs is given via the solution of 2BDSDEs. Finally, we give some technical results needed for
the existence of the solution of the 2BDDSEs.
3
2. Preliminaries and Hypothesis
The inner scalar product of the space Rd (d ≥ 2) will be denoted by h., .i and the associated
Euclidean norm by k.k. In what follows let us fix a positive real number T > 0.
First of all, we shall work on the product space Ω := ΩB × ΩW where
• ΩB := {ω ∈ C([0, T ], Rd ), ω0 = 0} equipped with the uniform norm kωk∞ := sup |ωt |, B
0≤t≤T
the canonical process (Bt (ω) = ωt ), P0B the Wiener measure.
• (Wt )0≤t≤T is a standard Brownian motion independent of B and defined on
(ΩW , F W , P0W ).
W
W
Let FW = {Ft,T
}t≥0 be a retrograde complete filtration generated by W , defined by Fs,t
:=
W
W
B
B
σ{Wr − Ws , s ≤ r ≤ t} and let FT = F0,T . We also consider F = {Ft }t≥0 a forward filtration
B
B
generated by B, such that FtB := σ{Br , 0 ≤ r ≤ t} and FB
+ = {Ft+ }t≥0 the right limit of F . For
each t ∈ [0, T ], we define
W
Ft := FtB ∨ Ft,T
and Gt := FtB ∨ FTW .
Finally, we consider F = F B ⊗ F W and the probability measure P0 := P0B ⊗ P0W .
The collection F = (Ft )0≤t≤T is neither increasing nor decreasing and it does not constitute a
filtration. However, G = (Gt )0≤t≤T is a filtration.
2.1. The set of probability measures and the generator
We will say that a probability measure PB on (ΩB , F B ) is a local martingale measure if the
canonical process B is a local martingale under PB . By Karandikar [13], we know that we can give
pathwise definition of the quadratic variation hBit and its density a
ˆt .
Z t
1
Bs dBs⊤ and a
ˆt := lim (hBit − hBit−ǫ ).
hBit := Bt Bt⊤ − 2
ǫ↓0 ǫ
0
where ⊤ denotes the transposition, and the lim is componentwise.
Let P denote the set of all measure P := PB ⊗ P0W on (Ω, F B ⊗ F W ) such that
hBit is absolutely continuous in t and a
ˆ takes values in S>0
d .
where S>0
d denotes the space of all d × d real valued positive definite matrices.
This chapter concentrates on the subclass P S ⊂ P consisting of all probability measures P :=
Pα ⊗ P0W such that
Z t
0
Pα := P0B ◦ (X α )−1 where Xtα :=
α1/2
(2.1)
s dBs , t ∈ [0, T ] , PB − a.s.
0
Z T
|αt |dt < ∞ , P0B −
for some FB - progressively measurable process α taking values in S>0
with
d
0
a.s.
!
PB
Xt
is a (Ω, P)-Brownian
For any P ∈ P S , it follows from the Lévy characterization that
Wt
motion, where
Z t
PB
Xt :=
a
ˆs−1/2 dBs , t ∈ [0, T ] , P0B − a.s.
(2.2)
0
PB
P
4
PB
Remark 2.1. We denote by F (resp. FX B ) the PB -augmentation of the right-limit filtration
generated by B (resp. by X PB ). We recall from [33] that
n
o
PB
PB
P
=F
P S = PB ⊗ P0W : FX B
,
(2.3)
and every P ∈ P S satisfies the Blumenthal zero-one law and the martingale representation property.
Remark 2.2. We recall from [32] that for a fixed P ∈ P S , we have from the Blumenthal zero-one
law that EP [ξ|Gt ] = EP [ξ|Gt+ ] P − a.s. for any t ∈ [0, T ] and P-integrable ξ. In particular, this shows
that any Gt+ -measurable random variable has an Gt -measurable P-modification.
Let Ht (w, y, z, γ) : [0, T ] × Ω × R × Rd × DH → R be F- progressively measurable ,where
DH ⊂ Rd×d is a given subset containing 0.
Define the corresponding conjugate of H with respect to γ by
1
T r(aγ) − Ht (w, y, z, γ) for a ∈ S>0
d ,
γ∈DH 2
Ft (w, y, z, a) := sup
Fˆt (y, z) := Ft (y, z, ât ) and Fˆt0 := Fˆt (0, 0).
We denote by DFt (y,z) := {a, Ft (w, y, z, a) < +∞} the domain of F in a for a fixed (t, w, y, z).
We consider also a function gt (ω, y, z) : [0, T ]×Ω×R×Rd → Rl which is F- progressively measurable
and denote gt0 = gt (0, 0).
Definition 2.1. We restrict the set of probability measures in P which is the collection of all
P ∈ P S such that
ˆ ≤ aP , dt × dP − a.s. for some aP , aP ∈ S>0
aP ≤ a
d ,
h Z T
h Z T
i
i
EP
|Fˆt0 |2 dt < +∞ , EP
kgt0 k2 dt < +∞.
0
0
Definition 2.2. We say that a property holds P-quasi-surely (P-q.s. for short) if it holds P-a.s.
for all P ∈ P.
We now state our main assumptions on the functions F and g
Assumption 2.1.
(i) P is not empty, the domain DFt (y,z) = DFt is independent of (ω, y, z).
(ii) For fixed (y, z, a), F is Ft measurable in DFt , and g is Ft measurable.
(iii) We have the following uniform Lipschitz-type property in y and z: There exist constants
C > 0 and 0 ≤ α < 1 such that ∀(y, y ′ , z, z ′, t, ω) ∈ R × R × Rd × Rd × [0, T ] × Ω,
|Fˆt (ω, y, z) − Fˆt (ω, y ′ , z ′ )| ≤ C |y − y ′ | + kˆ
a1/2 (z − z ′ )k
kgt (ω, y, z) − gt (ω, y ′ , z ′ )k2 ≤ C|y − y ′ |2 + αk(z − z ′ )k2
(iv) There exists a consatnt λ ∈ [0, 1[ such that
(1 − λ)ˆ
a ≥ αId .
(v) F is uniformly continuous in ω for the k.k∞ norm.
(vi) g is uniformly continuous in ω for the k.k∞ norm.
5
2.2. The Spaces and Norms
For the formulation of the second order BDSDEs, we will use the same spaces and norms introduced
in the second order BSDEs [31].
For p ≥ 1, Lp denotes the space of all FT -measurable scalar r.v. ξ with
kξkpLp := sup EP [|ξ|p ] < +∞.
P∈P
Hp denotes the space of all Ft - measurable Rd -valued processes Z with
h Z T
p2 i
1/2
< +∞.
kZkpHp := sup EP
|ˆ
at Zt |2 dt
P∈P
p
D denotes the space of all
FtB+
0
W
Ft,T
-
measurable R-valued processes Y with
i
h
P -q.s. càdlàg paths, and kY kpDp := sup EP sup |Yt |p < +∞.
∨
P∈P
p
0≤t≤T
I denotes the space of all Ft - measurable R-valued processes K null at 0 with
i
h
P -q.s. càdlàg paths, and nondecreasing paths, and kKkpIp := sup EP (KT )p < +∞.
P∈P
′
For each ξ ∈ L1 , P ∈ P and t ∈ [0, T ] denote EH,P
[ξ] := ess supP EPt [ξ] where
t
P′ ∈P(t+ ,P)
P(t+ , P) := {P′ := P′B ⊗ P0W ∈ P ; P′B = PB on FtB+ }.
Here EPt [ξ] := EP [ξ|Gt ] = EP [ξ|FtB ∨ FTW ], P − a.s.. Then
h we define for each pp i≥ 2,
Lp := {ξ ∈ Lp : kξkLp < +∞} where kξkpLp := sup EP ess supP EH,P
[|ξ|2 ] 2 .
t
0≤t≤T
P∈P
Finally, we denote by U Cb (Ω) the collection of all bounded and uniformly continuous maps ξ :
Ω → R with respect to the k.k∞ -norm, and we let Lp be the closure of U Cb (Ω) under the norm
k.kLp , for every p ≥ 2.
2.3. Formulation
We shall consider the following second order backward doubly stochastic differential equation
(2BDSDE for short)
Z T
Z T
Z T
←
−
ˆ
Yt = ξ +
Fs (Ys , Zs )ds +
gs (Ys , Zs )dW s −
Zs dBs +KT − Kt ,
(2.4)
t
t
t
0 ≤ t ≤ T, P − q.s.
We note that the integral with respect to {Wt } is a "backward Itô integral" (see [14], Page 111-112)
and the integral with respect to {Bt } is a standard forward Itô integral.
For any P ∈ P, G-stopping time τ , and Gτ -measurable random variable ξ ∈ L2 (P), let (y P , z P ) :=
(y P (τ, ξ), z P (τ, ξ)) denote the unique solution to the following BDSDE (existence and uniqueness
have been proved under our assumptions by Pardoux and Peng [22])
Z τ
Z τ
Z τ
−
P
P P
P P ←
ˆ
yt = ξ +
Fs (ys , zs )ds +
gs (ys , zs )dW s −
zsP dBs 0 ≤ t ≤ T, P − a.s.
(2.5)
t
t
t
6
Definition 2.3. For ξ ∈ L2 , we say (Y, Z) ∈ D2 × H2 is a solution to the 2BDSDE (2.4) if
• YT = ξ, P − q.s.
• For each P ∈ P, the process K P defined below has nondecreasing paths, P − a.s.:
Z t
Z t
Z t
←
−
KtP := Y0 − Yt −
Fˆs (Ys , Zs )ds −
gs (Ys , Zs )dW s +
Zs dBs ,
0
0
0
(2.6)
0 ≤ t ≤ T, P − a.s.
• The family {K P , P ∈ P} defined in (2.6) satisfies the following minimum condition:
′
′
KtP = ′ess inf P EPt [KTP ] P − a.s. for all P ∈ P, t ∈ [0, T ].
(2.7)
P ∈P(t+ ,P)
Moreover, if the family {K P , P ∈ P} can be aggregated into a universal process K, we call (Y, Z, K)
a solution of 2BDSDE (2.4).
2.4. Connection with standard BDSDEs
Let H be the following linear function of γ:
Ht (y, z, γ) =
1
Id : γ − ft (y, z),
2
where Id is the identity matrix in Rd .
Then, DFt (w) = {Id }, Fˆt (y, z) = ft (y, z) and P = {P0 }. In this case, the minimum condition (2.7)
implies
0 = K0 = EP0 [KT ] and thus K = 0, P0 − a.s.
since Kt is nondecreasing. Hence, the 2BDSDE (2.4) is equivalent to the following BDSDE:
Yt = ξ +
Z
T
fs (Ys , Zs )ds +
Z
T
←
−
T
Zs dBs , 0 ≤ t ≤ T, P0 − a.s.
(2.8)
t
t
t
Z
In addition to Assumption 2.1, we will assume
Assumption 2.2. The processes Fˆ 0 and g 0 satisfy the following integrability conditions
φ2
:=
sup EP ess supP EH,P
[
t
P∈P
ψ2
:=
sup EP
P∈P
0≤t≤T
hZ
0
T
Z
|gs0 |2+ε ds
T
0
i
|Fˆs0 |2+ε ds]
< +∞,
< +∞, for ε > 0.
(2.9)
(2.10)
In the proof of the a priori esimates for the solution of the 2BDSDE (2.4) we need to have L2+ε
estimates for (y P , z P ), then we add the following assumption on g
Assumption 2.3. There exist c > 0 and 0 ≤ β < 1 such that for all (t, y, z) ∈ [0, T ] × R × Rd
gt gt∗ (y, z) ≤ c(IdRk + yy ∗ ) + β zz ∗ .
7
3. Uniqueness of the solution and other properties
3.1. Representation and uniqueness of the solution
The aim of this section is to prove the uniquness of solution for 2BDSDEs (2.4), which is a direct
consequence from representation theorem. But, since in our 2BDSDEs (2.4) we have the extra
backward integral we shall handle with the difficulties coming from this term. That’s why, the
followig lemma is needed.
Lemma 3.1. The minimum condition (2.7) implies that
h ′
i
P
P′
P′
K
−
K
= 0.
inf
E
T
t
′
+
P ∈P(t ,P)
Proof. Indeed, fix some P ∈ P and some P′ ∈ P(t+ , P) and observe first that (2.7) implies that
′
KtP = KtP , P − a.s. Hence, taking expectation under P in (2.7), we obtain readily
′
′
P
P
P
P′
P
]
= 0.
(3.1)
ess
inf
−
K
E
Et [KT
t
′
+
P ∈P(t ,P)
Then, we know (see [32]) that the family P(t+ , P) is upward directed. Therefore, by classical
results, there is a sequence (Pn )n≥0 ⊂ P(t+ , P) such that
′
′
n
′
n
n
ess inf P EPt [KTP − KtP ] = lim ↓ EPt [KTP − KtP ].
n→+∞
P′ ∈P(t+ ,P)
Using this in (3.1) and then the monotone convergence theorem under the fixed measure P, we
obtain
P
P′
P′
P′
0 = EP ′ess inf
E
[K
−
K
]
t
T
t
P ∈P(t+ ,P)
n
n
n
= EP lim ↓ EPt [KTP − KtP ]
n→+∞
h n
i
n
n
= lim ↓ EP EPt [KTP − KtP ]
n→+∞
h n
i
n
n
n
= lim ↓ EP EPt [KTP − KtP ]
n→+∞
i
h n
n
n
= lim ↓ EP KTP − KtP
n→+∞
′i
′
′ h
≥ ′ inf
EP KTP − KtP .
P ∈P(t+ ,P)
′
Since K P is a non-decreasing process, the result follows.
We can now show as in Theorem 4.4 of [32] that the solution to 2BDSDE (2.4) can be represented
as a supremum of solutions to BDSDE (2.5).
Theorem 3.1. Let assumptions 2.1 and 2.2 hold. Assume ξ ∈ L2 and that (Y, Z, K) is a solution
to 2BDSDE (2.4). Then, for any P ∈ P and 0 ≤ t1 < t2 ≤ T,
′
Yt1 = ess supP ytP1 (t2 , Yt2 ), P − a.s.
P′ ∈P(t+
1 ,P)
Consequently, the 2BDSDE (2.4) has at most one solution in D2 × H2 .
(3.2)
8
Proof. Let first assume that (Y, Z, K) is a solution to 2BDSDE (2.4) and (3.2) is true then
′
Yt = ess supP ytP (T, ξ) , t ∈ [0, T ], P − a.s., for all P ∈ P
(3.3)
P′ ∈P(t+ ,P)
and thus Y is unique. Since we have that dhY, Bit = Zt dhBit , P − q.s., Z is unique.
Finally, the process K P is uniquely determined. We will now prove the representation (3.2).
′
(i) Fix 0 ≤ t1 < t2 ≤ T, and P ∈ P. For any P ∈ P(t+
1 , P), note that from (2.4)
Yt = Yt2 +
Z
t2
Fˆs (Ys , Zs )ds +
Z
t2
←
−
′
t2
′
′
′
Zs dBs + KtP2 − KtP , t1 ≤ t ≤ t2 , P − a.s.
t
t
t
Z
′
and that K P is nondecreasing, P − a.s.. Applying the comparison principle for BDSDE under P
′
′
, we have Yt1 ≥ ytP1 (t2 , Yt2 ), P − a.s.
′
Since P = P on Ft+1 , we get Yt1 ≥ ytP1 (t2 , Yt2 ), P − a.s and thus
′
′
Yt1 ≥ ess supP ytP1 (t2 , Yt2 ), P − a.s.
(3.4)
P′ ∈P(t+
1 ,P)
(ii) To prove the reverse inequality of representation (3.2), we use standard linearization techniques.
Fix P ∈ P, for every P′ ∈ P(t+
1 , P), denote:
′
′
δY := Y − y P (t2 , Yt2 ) and δZ := Z − z P (t2 , Yt2 )
By the Lipschitz Assumption 2.1(iii), there exist (Ft )-measurable bounded processes λ, η, γ, β such
that
Z t2
Z t2
Z t2
′
′
←
−
δZs dBs + KtP2 − KtP
(γ
δY
+
β
δZ
)
d
W
−
(λs δYs + ηs a
ˆ1/2
δZ
)ds
+
δYt =
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
t
t
t
′
t ≤ t2 , P − a.s.
(3.5)
Define:
Mt := exp
Z
0
t
ηs a
ˆs−1/2 dBs +
Z
t
λs ds −
0
1
2
Z
0
t
|ηs |2 ds ,
′
(3.6)
t1 ≤ t ≤ t2 , P − a.s
By Integration by parts we have
−1/2
d(Mt δYt ) = Mt (δZt + δYt ηt a
ˆt
′
←
−
)dBt − Mt βt δZt dW t − Mt dKtP
(3.7)
so, we compute that:
EP [δYt1 ] = EP
′
Mt−1
1
Z
t2
t1
Mt dKtP
′
≤ EP
′
′
′
P
P
)
−
K
sup (Mt−1
M
)(K
t
t1
t2
1
t1 ≤t≤t2
′
by the nondecrease of K P and where we used the fact that since δYt1 is Ft+ -measurable, its
1
′
expectation is the same under P and P . By the boundedness of λ, η, γ, β, for every p ≥ 1 we have,
′
′
Mt )p + sup (Mt1 Mt−1 )p ] ≤ Cp , t1 ≤ t ≤ t2 , P − a.s
EP [ sup (Mt−1
1
t1 ≤t≤t2
t1 ≤t≤t2
(3.8)
9
Then it follows from the Hölder inequality that:
2/3
1/3 ′
′
′
′
′
P 3/2
3
P
P
)
]
−
K
M
)
]
E
[(K
EP [ sup (Mt−1
EP [Yt1 − ytP1 (t2 , Yt2 )] ≤
t
t1
t2
1
t1 ≤t≤t2
′
′
′
′
′
′
≤ C EP [KtP2 − KtP1 ]EP [(KtP2 − KtP1 )2 ]
′
1/3
From the definition of K P , we have
′
EP [(KtP2 − KtP1 )2 ] ≤ C(kY kpD2 + kZkpH2 + φ2 + ψ 2 ) < ∞.
′
sup
′
(3.9)
P′ ∈P(t+
1 ,P)
Then, by taking the infimum in P(t+
1 , P) in the last inequality and using (3.9) and the result of
Lemma 3.1, we obtain
i
h
′
P
P
)
≤ 0.
inf
E
(t
,
Y
−
y
Y
2
t
t
2
t
1
1
′
+
P ∈P(t1 ,P)
But we clearly have
#
"
i
h
′
′
P P
P
P
E Yt1 − yt1 (t2 , Yt2 ) ≥ E Yt1 − ess sup yt1 (t2 , Yt2 ) .
P
inf
P′ ∈P(t+
1 ,P)
Hence
P′ ∈P(t+
1 ,P)
"
′
#
EP Yt1 − ess supP ytP1 (t2 , Yt2 ) ≤ 0.
P′ ∈P(t+
1 ,P)
Since the quantity under the expectation is positive P-a.s. by Step 1, we deduce that it is actually equal to 0, P − a.s., which is the desired result.
As an immediate consequence of the representation formula (3.2) together with the comparison
principle for BDSDEs, we have the following comparison principle for 2BDSDEs.
Theorem 3.2. Let (Y, Z) and (Y ′ , Z ′ ) be the solutions of 2BDSDEs with terminal conditions ξ
′
and ξ ′ and generators Fˆ and Fˆ ′ respectively (with the corresponding functions H and H ), and
let (y P , z P ) and (y ′P , z ′P ) the solutions of the associated BDSDEs. Assume that they both verify
Assumptions 2.1 and 2.2, and that we have P − q.s.
′
ξ ≤ ξ ′ , Fˆ (yt′P , zt′P ) ≤ Fˆ (yt′P , zt′P ).
Then Y ≤ Y ′ , P − q.s.
3.2. A priori estimates
In this section, we show some a priori estimates which will be useful in the sequel.
Theorem 3.3. Let Assumptions 2.1 and 2.2 hold.
(i) Assume ξ ∈ L2 and that (Y, Z) ∈ D2 × H2 is a solution to the 2BDSDE (2.4). Then, there
exist a constant C such that
kY k2D2 + kZk2H2 + sup EP [|KTP |2 ] ≤ C(kξk2L2 + φ2 + ψ 2 ).
P∈P
(3.10)
10
(ii) Assume ξ i ∈ L2 and that (Y i , Z i ) ∈ D2 × H2 is a corresponding solution to the 2BDSDE
(2.4), i = 1, 2. Denote δξ := ξ 1 −ξ 2 , δY := Y 1 −Y 2 , δZ := Z 1 −Z 2 , and δK P := K 1,P −K 2,P .
Then, there exist a constant C such that
kδY kD2 ≤ CkδξkL2
+ sup E [ sup |δKtP |2 ] ≤ CkδξkL2 kξ 1 kL2 + kξ 2 kL2
kδZk2H2
P
0≤t≤T
P∈P
+ (φ2 )1/2 + (ψ 2 )1/2 .
(3.11)
′
Proof. (i) Fix P ∈ P, for every P′ ∈ P(t+ , P), we apply Itô’s formula to |ytP |2 to obtain
′
|ytP |2
|ξ|2 + 2
=
−
2
Z
Z
T
t
T
′
′
ysP zsP dBs −
t
Z
′
′
Fˆs (ysP , zsP )ysP ds + 2
Z
T
t
T
′ ←
′
′
−
gs (ysP , zsP )ysP dW s
t
Z
′
P 2
|ˆ
a1/2
s zs | ds +
T
t
′
′
|gs (ysP , zsP )|2 ds.
Then, by taking expectation and from the Lipschitz Assumption 2.1(iii) we have
′
′
CEP |ξ|2 +
′
EP [|ytP |2 ] ≤
P
+
CE
′
Z
T
t
′
Z
T
t
(|gs0 |2
Cε−1 EP |ξ|2 +
≤
(ε − 1)EP
+
′
′
′
′
′
′
P
P 2
P
|ˆ
a1/2
a1/2
|ysP |(|Fˆs0 | + |ysP | + |ˆ
s zs | ds
s zs |)ds − E
+
Z
t
Z
T
t
′
|ysP |2 )ds
T
′
P
+ αE
′
Z
T
′
|zsP |2 ds
t
(|ysP |2 + |Fˆs0 |2 + |gs0 |2 )ds
′
′
P
P 2
|ˆ
a1/2
s zs | ds + αE
Z
T
t
′
|zsP |2 ds ,
λ
and the Assumption 2.1(iv), we get
2
Z T
Z T
Z
′
′
′
′
λ P′ T 1/2 P′ 2 P
P 2
P
2
0 2
0 2
ˆ
E [|yt | ] + E
(|Fs | + |gs | )ds +
|ysP |2 ds .
|ˆ
as zs | ds ≤ CE |ξ| +
2
t
t
t
and, by setting ε =
It then follows, using Gronwall’s lemma, that
P
E
′
′
[|ytP |2 ]
P
≤C E
′
|ξ|
2
P
+ E
′
Z
t
T
(|Fˆs0 |2 ds
+
P
E
′
′
Z
t
T
(|gs0 |2 ds
′
P − a.s. for all P ∈ P(t+ , P), t ∈ [0, T ].
11
Now, for every P ∈ P, we have
′ 2
ess supP |ytP | ]
EP [ sup |Yt |2 ] = EP [ sup
0≤t≤T
0≤t≤T P′ ∈P(t+ ,P)
≤ EP sup EH,P
[|ξ| +
t
+ |
Z
0
0≤t≤T
T
←
−
gs0 dW s |
Z
+|
T
Z
T
0
|Fˆs0 |ds +
αs ysP
0
′
Z
T
0
←
−
dW s | + |
Z
T
βs zsP
0
≤ C EP sup EH,P
[|ξ|2 ] + EP sup EH,P
[
t
t
0≤t≤T
+ C EP sup EH,P
[
t
0≤t≤T
Z
+ C EP sup EH,P
[|
t
0≤t≤T
0≤t≤T
T
′
|ysP |ds]
0
Z
T
2 ′
′
P
a1/2
(λs |ysP | + µs |ˆ
s zs |)ds
′
←
−
dW s | + |
Z
0
|Fˆs0 |2 ds]
+ EP sup EH,P
[
t
0≤t≤T
Z
≤ C kξk2L2 + φ2 + ψ 2 + sup EP sup |ytP |2+ǫ + sup EP (
H
H
Z
0≤t≤T
P∈P
T
0
0≤t≤T
0
T
′
zsP dBs |]
0
T
←
− 2 gs0 dW s |]
+ EP sup EH,P
[|
t
and, by the definition of the norms, we get
kY k2D2
Z
P∈P
T
0
′
P
|ˆ
a1/2
s zs |ds]
Z
T
′
zsP dBs |]
0
′
P 2
|ˆ
a1/2
s zs | ds)
where we used that
′
2
sup EP sup ( ess supP EPt [|A|]2 ≤ C sup EP |A|2+ǫ 2+ǫ
P∈P
0≤t≤T P′ ∈P(t+ ,P)
2 2 2 2+ǫ
2
,
,
∀ǫ > 0.
P∈P
Finally, we obtain
kY k2D2 ≤ C(kξk2L2 + φ2 + ψ 2 ).
(3.12)
H
For the estimate for Z, we apply Itô’s formula to |Y |2 under each P ∈ P and from the Lipschitz
Assumption 2.1(iii) we have:
P
E
hZ
0
T
2
|ˆ
a1/2
s Zs | ds
i
≤
≤
Z
h
2
E |Y0 | +
T
P
0
Z
h
CEP |ξ|2 +
hZ
T
0
T
2
|ˆ
a1/2
s Zs | ds
EP
≤
Z
h
CE |ξ|2 +
0
+
P
CEP
hZ
0
T
0
≤
+
T
|Ys |(|Fˆs0 | + |Ys | + |ˆ
a1/2
s Zs |)ds +
i
(|gs0 |2 + |Ys |2 )ds + αEP
εEP
0
0≤s≤T
T
0
i
T
hZ
T
|Zs |2 ds
0
|Fˆs0 |2 ds +
2
P 2
|ˆ
a1/2
+ αEP
s Zs | ds + |KT |
hZ
0
T
Z
i
T
0
Z
|Ys |dKsP
i
|Ys |dKsP
i
T
0
i
Z
h
Cε−1 EP |ξ|2 + sup |Ys |2 +
hZ
Z
|Ys |(|Fˆs0 | + |Ys | + |ˆ
a1/2
s Zs |)ds +
|gs (Ys , Zs )|2 ds
+
i
T
0
|gs0 |2 ds
i
|Zs |2 ds ,
i
for any ε ∈ (0, 1]. But by the definition of KTP , it is clear that
Z T
Z
h
i
h
2
|ˆ
a1/2
Z
|
ds
+
EP |KTP |2 ≤ C0 EP |ξ|2 + sup |Ys |2 +
s
s
0≤s≤T
0
T
|Fˆs0 |2 ds +
0
for some constant C0 independent of ε. Then,
Z
hZ T
i
h
2
−1 P
2
2
EP
|ˆ
a1/2
Z
|
ds
≤
Cε
E
|ξ|
+
sup
|Y
|
+
(
s
s
s
0≤s≤T
0
+ (ε + C0 ε + 1 − λ)EP
hZ
0
12
T
0
Z
0
|Fˆs0 |ds)2 +
T
i
|gs0 |2 ds ,
T
i
Z
T
0
|gs0 |2 ds
(3.13)
i
2
|ˆ
a1/2
s Zs | ds .
λ
, this provides
2(1 + C0 )
Z
hZ T
h
i
2
2
2
P
EP
|ξ|
+
sup
|Y
|
+
|ˆ
a1/2
Z
|
ds
≤
CE
s
s
s
Choosing ε :=
0≤s≤T
0
T
0
|Fˆs0 |2 ds +
Z
0
T
i
|gs0 |2 ds .
By (3.12), we have
kZk2H2 ≤ C(kξk2L2 + φ2 + ψ 2 ).
(3.14)
(ii) First, we can follow the same proof of (i) to obtain that there exist a constant C depending
ˆ such that for all P
only on T and the Lipschitz constant of Fˆ and H
EP [|ytP,1 − ytP,2 |2 ] ≤ Ckδξk2L2 .
(3.15)
Then by definition of our norms, we get from (3.15) and (3.2) that
(3.16)
kδY kD2 ≤ CkδξkL2 .
Applying Itô formula to |δY |2 , under each P ∈ P, leads to
Z T
Z
hZ T
i
h
2
P
2
1/2
EP
|ˆ
a1/2
δZ
|
ds
≤
CE
|δξ|
+
|δY
|(|δY
|
+
|ˆ
a
δZ
|)ds
+
s
s
s
s
s
s
0
+
CEP
hZ
0
T
0
≤
+
|δYs |2 ds
0
i
T
|δYs |dδKsP
i
h
i
CEP |δξ|2 + sup |δYs |2 + sup |δYs |2 [KT1,P − KT2,P ]
1 P
E
2
hZ
0
0≤s≤T
T
0≤s≤T
i
2
|ˆ
a1/2
δZ
|
ds
.
s
s
The estimate for δZ is now obvious from the above inequality and the estimates of (i). Finally the
estimate for the difference of the increasing processes is obvious by definition.
4. A direct existence argument
As we have shown in Theorem 3.1, if there is a solution to the 2BDSDE (2.4), it will be represented
as a supremum of solutions to standard BDSDEs. However, since we are working under a family
of non-dominated probability measures, we are not able to use the classical technics of BSDEs. So,
Soner, Touzi and Zhang [32] overcame this problem by constructing the solution pathwise using
the so-salled regular conditional probability distribution.
13
4.1. Notations
For the convenience of the reader, we recall below some of the notations introduced in [32].
• For 0 ≤ t ≤ T , we denote ΩtB := {ω ∈ C([t, T ], Rd ); ω(t) = 0} the shifted canonical space; B t the
t
shifted canonical process; PB,t
the shifted Wiener measure; FB
the shifted filtration generated by
0
Bt.
• For 0 ≤ t ≤ T , we denote Ωt := {ω := (ω B , ω W ) s.t. ω B ∈ ΩtB , ω W ∈ ΩW }.
t
Exactly as in Section 2, we can define the set P S , by restricting to the shifted space Ωt
• For 0 ≤ s ≤ t ≤ T and ω ∈ Ωs , define the shifted path ω t := (ω B,t , ω W ) ∈ Ωt such that
ωrB,t := ωrB − ωtB ,
∀r ∈ [t, T ]
• For 0 ≤ s ≤ t ≤ T and ω B ∈ ΩsB , ω
˜ B ∈ ΩtB define the concatenation path by
(ω B ⊗t ω
˜ B )(r)
ωrB 1[s,t) (r) + (ωtB + ω
˜ rB )1[t,T ] (r),
:=
∀r ∈ [s, T ].
• For 0 ≤ s ≤ t ≤ T and FTs -measurable random variable ξ on Ωs , for each (ω B , ω W ) ∈ Ωs , define
B
the shifted FTt -measurable random variable ξ t,ω on Ωt by
B
˜ B , ω W ),
ξ t,ω (˜
ω B , ω W ) := ξ(ω B ⊗t ω
∀(˜
ω B , ω W ) ∈ Ωt .
Similarly, for an Fs -progressively measurable process X on [s, T ] and (t, ω) ∈ [s, T ]×Ωs , the shifted
process {Xrt,ω , r ∈ [t, T ]} is Ft - progressively measurable.
• For a G-stopping time τ , we use the following simplification
ω ⊗τ ω
˜ := ω ⊗τ (ω) ω
˜ , ξ τ,ω := ξ τ (ω),ω , X τ,ω := X τ (ω),ω .
• We define our "shifted" functions:
B
Fˆst,ω ((˜
ω B , ω W ), y, z) :=
B
gst,ω ((˜
ω B , ω W ), y, z) :=
Fs ((ω B ⊗t ω
˜ B , ω W ), y, z, âts (˜
ω ))
∀(s, ω
˜ ) ∈ [t, T ] × Ωt
gs ((ω B ⊗t ω
˜ B , ω W ), y, z) ∀(s, ω
˜ ) ∈ [t, T ] × Ωt
Then note that since F and g are assumed to be uniformly continuous in ω under the L∞ norm,
t
then so are Fˆst,ω and gst,ω . Notice that this implies that for any P ∈ P S
h Z T
i
P
E
|Fˆst,ω (0, 0)|2 ds < +∞ ,
t
EP
h Z
t
T
|gst,ω (0, 0)|2 ds
i
< +∞
for some ω if and only if it holds for all ω ∈ Ω.
• Finally, we extend Definition 2.1 in the shifted spaces
t
Definition 4.1. P t consists of all P := Pt ∈ P S such that
aP ≤ a
ˆt ≤ aP , ds × dP − a.e on [t, T ] × Ωt . for some aP , aP ∈ S>0
d
h Z T
h Z T
i
i
EP
|Fˆst,ω (0, 0)|2 ds < +∞ , EP
|gst,ω (0, 0)|2 ds < +∞ for all ω ∈ Ω
t
t
• By Stroock and Varadhan [35], there exist an r.c.p.d. Pω
τ on GT such that for a given ω ∈ Ω,
t
G-stopping time τ , P ∈ P and every bounded GT -measurable random variable ξ
ω
EPτ [ξ](ω) = EPτ [ξ], for P − a.e. ω.
τ (ω)
τ,ω
Furthermore, Pω
on GT
τ naturally induces a probability measure P
.
14
4.2. Existence when ξ is in UCb (Ω)
When ξ is in UCb (Ω), we know that there exists a modulus of continuity function ρ for ξ, F and g
in ω. Then, for any 0 ≤ t ≤ s ≤ T, (y, z) ∈ R × Rd and ω, ω ′ ∈ Ω, ω
˜ ∈ Ωt ,
B
|ξ t,ω (˜
ω B , ω W ) − ξ t,ω
′,B
(˜
ω B , ω W )| ≤ ρ(kω B − ω ′,B kt ),
B
′,B
|Fˆst,ω ((˜
ω B , ω W ), y, z) − Fˆst,ω ((˜
ω B , ω W ), y, z)| ≤ ρ(kω B − ω ′,B kt )
B
|gst,ω ((˜
ω B , ω W ), y, z − gst,ω
′,B
((˜
ω B , ω W ), y, z)| ≤ ρ(kω B − ω ′,B kt ).
We add the following assumption
Assumption 4.1.
Z
Λt (ω) := sup EP |ξ t,ω |2 +
P∈P t
t
T
|Fˆst,ω (0, 0)|2 ds +
Z
t
T
|gst,ω (0, 0)|2 ds
for all (t, ω) ∈ [0, T ] × Ω.
1/2
< ∞,
To prove existence, we define the following value process Vt for every ω B
B
0
Vt (ω B , ·) := ess supPW YtP,t,ω (T, ξ)(·) , P0W − a.s. with P := PB ⊗ P0W ,
(4.1)
P∈P t
where, for any (t1 , w) ∈ [0, T ] × Ω, P ∈ P t1 , t2 ∈ [t1 , T ], and any Ft2 -measurable η ∈ L2 (P), we
B
B
B
B
1 ,ω
1 ,ω
, where (y P,t1 ,ω , z P,t1 ,ω ) is the solution of the following BDSDE
(t2 , η) := ytP,t
denote YtP,t
1
1
on the shifted space Ωt1 under P,
Z t2
Z t2
B
B
B
B
B
B
zrP,t1 ,ω (ω W )dBrt1
Fˆrt1 ,ω (yrP,t1 ,ω , zrP,t1 ,ω )(ω W )dr −
ysP,t1 ,ω (ω W ) = η t1 ,ω +
s
s
Z t2
B
B
B
←
−
grt1 ,ω (yrP,t1 ,ω , zrP,t1 ,ω )(ω W )dW r , for P0W − a.e. ω W ∈ ΩW .
(4.2)
+
s
The following Lemma allows to give a link between BDSDEs on the shifted spaces.
Lemma 4.1. Fix some PB ∈ PS . For PB -a.e. ω B ∈ ΩB , the following inequality holds
B
Pt,ω ⊗P0W
yt B
P ⊗P0W
(ω W ) = yt B
(ω B , ω W ), t ∈ [0, T ], for P0W − a.e. ω W ∈ ΩW ,
We point out that for classical 2BSDEs, Soner, Touzi and Zhang have proved in Lemma 4.6
[32] a regularity result for the value process, precisely the uniform continuity with respect to the
trajectory ω B and this is crucial to prove their dynamic programming principle (Proposition 4.7
in [32]).
Since in our context, the value process V defined in (4.1) is a random field depending on two
source of randomness, we prove the following regularity result which is weaker than Lemma 4.6
[32].
Lemma 4.2.
0
EPW
h
2 i
Vt (ω B,1 ·) − Vt (ω B,2 ·)
≤ ρ2 kω B,1 − ω B,2 kt .
In particular, this implies that the map ω B 7−→ Vt (ω B , ·) is uniformly continuous in probability (with
respect to P0W ), which implies that there is a P0W -version, which we still denote V for simplicity
such that Vt is Ft -measurable.
15
Proof. The estimate is an easy consequence of classical a priori estimates for BDSDEs, using in
particular the uniform continuity in ω of both F and g. As for the existence of measurable version,
this is a classical result (see for instance Dellacherie and Meyer [8]).
Now, we present the main result concerning the dynamic programming principle in our context. We follow the new approach (work in progress) of Possamai, Xiaolu and Zhou [28] where
they proved existence result for 2BSDEs with only measurable parameters. Their proof is based
on dynamic programming principle without regularity on the terminal condition and the generator.
We are now in position to show the following dynamic programming principle in our context as
in [28].
Theorem 4.1. Under the Assumptions 2.1, 2.2 and for ξ ∈ U C b (Ω), we have for all 0 ≤ t1 ≤
t2 ≤ T and for all ω = (ω B , ω W ) ∈ Ω
B
B
1 ,ω
(t2 , Vtt21 ,ω (·)), P0W − a.e. ω W ∈ ΩW
Vt1 (ω B , ·) = ess supYtP,t
1
(4.3)
P∈P t1
Proof. For simplicity we will omit the dependence of Y with respect to (t, ω B ) thanks to Lemma
4.1. Then, the dynamic programming principle (DPP in short) is a direct consequence of the
comparison principle, once we have the measurability result given in Lemma 4.2. First, for every
P ∈ P t , we have
P0W − a.s.
YtP1 (T, ξ) = YtP1 (t2 , YtP2 ),
It follows by the comparison principle that
Vt1 (ω) := ess sup YtP1 (T, ξ) = ess sup YtP1 (t2 , YtP2 ) ≤ ess sup YtP1 (t2 , VtP2 ).
P∈P t1
P∈P t1
P∈P t1
Next, for every ε > 0, by the measurable selection theorem together with concatenation technique,
we can construct, for every P ∈ P t1 , a new probability Qε ∈ P t1 , such that
YtQ1ε (t2 , YtQ2ε ) ≥ YtP1 (t2 , Vt2 ) − ε.
It follows that
Vt1 (ω) = ess sup YtQ1 (t2 , YtQ2 ) ≥ ess sup YtP1 (t2 , VtP2 ) − ε.
P∈P t1
P∈P t1
And hence the other inequality of the DPP holds true by the arbitrariness of ε > 0.
Next, we introduce the right limit of the V which is clearly Ft -measurable:
Vt+ :=
lim
Vr .
r∈Q∩(t,T ],r↓t
Lemma 4.3. Under the Assumptions 2.1, 2.2 , we have
Vt+ =
and thus V + is càdlàg P t − q.s.
Proof.
lim
Vr ,
P t − q.s.
(4.4)
16
Thanks to the dynamic programming principle for V and regularity results for the value process
V + , we have the following decomposition for V + .
Proposition 4.1. Under the Assumptions 2.1, 2.2, the process V + defined by (4.4) verify for all
0 ≤ t ≤ s ≤ T , the following decomposition
Z T
Z T
Z T
−
erP )ds +
erP )d←
erP dBr + K
e TP − K
e sP , P − a.s.
Vs+ = ξ +
Fˆr (Vr+ , Z
gr (Vr+ , Z
Wr −
Z
s
s
s
Proof. We introduce first the following RBDSDE with lower obstacle V + under each P ∈ P t ,

Z T
Z T
Z T
−

P
P eP
P eP ←

e
ˆ
e
e
esP dBs + K
e TP − K
e tP

Y
=
ξ
+
F
(
Y
,
Z
)ds
+
g
(
Y
,
Z
)d
W
−
Z
s
s
s
 t
s
s
s
s


t
t
t

YetP ≥ Vt+ , 0 ≤ t ≤ T, P − a.s


Z T




e P− = 0, P − a.s.

(YesP− − Vs+− )dK
s
0
For our best knowledge, there are no results in the literature for the existence and uniqueness of
such RBDSDE with càdlàg obstacle. The proofs of these results are postponed to section 6.5 in
the Appendix for completeness.
As mentioned in Remark 4.9 in [32], and for a fixed P ∈ P t , we shall use the solution of the above
RBDSDEs and the notion of Fˆ -weak doubly supermartingale whis is introduced in the Appendix.
This notion is a natural extension of nonlinear f -supermartingale introduced first by Peng [25] in
the context of standard BSDEs.
For this end, we argue by contradiction and suppose that Ye P is not equal P − a.s. to V + . Then we
can assume without loss of generality that Ye0P > V0+ , P − a.s. For each ε > 0, define the following
G-stopping time :
τ ε := inf{t ≥ 0, YetP ≤ Vt+ + ε}
e P is identically equal to 0 in
Then Ye P is strictly above the obstacle before τ ε , and therefore K
ε
[0, τ ]. Hence, we have for all 0 ≤ t ≤ s ≤ T
YesP = YeτPε +
Z
τε
s
erP )dr +
Fˆr (YerP , Z
Z
τε
s
−
erP )d←
Wr −
gr (YerP , Z
Z
τε
s
Let us now define the following BDSDE on [0, τ ε ]
ys+,P
=
Vτ+ε
+
Z
s
τε
Fˆr (yr+,P , zr+,P)dr +
Z
s
τε
←
−
gr (yr+,P , zr+,P)dW r
−
Z
erP dBr ,
Z
s
P − a.s.
τε
zr+,P dBr ,
P − a.s.
By comparison theorem and the standard a priori estimates, we obtain that
E[Ye0P ] ≤ E[y0+,P ] + CE |Vτ+ε − YeτPε | ≤ E[y0+,P ] + Cε,
by definition of τ ε .
Moreover, we can show similarly to the proof of Lemma 4.3 (see also the arguments in Step 1 of
the proof of Theorem 4.5 in [32] page 328-329) that V + is a strong Fˆ doubly supermatingale under
each P ∈ P t . Thus, we obtain particularly that y0+,P ≤ V0+ which in turn implies
E[Ye0P ] ≤ E[V0+ ] + Cε,
17
hence a contradiction by arbitrariness of ε. Therefore, we have obtained the following decomposition
Vs+ = ξ +
Z
T
s
eP )dr +
Fˆr (Vr+ , Z
r
Z
s
T
−
eP )d←
gr (Vr+ , Z
Wr −
r
Z
s
T
eP dBr + K
eP − K
e P,
Z
r
T
s
P − a.s., ∀P ∈ P t
We next prove a representation for V + similar to (3.2) .
Proposition 4.2. Assume that Assumptions 2.1, 2.2 hold. Then we have
′
Vt+ = ess supP YtP (T, ξ),
P − a.s., ∀P ∈ P t
(4.5)
′
P ∈P(t+,P)
Proof. The proof for the representations is the same as the proof of proposition 4.10 in [32], since
we have a stability result for BDSDEs under our assumptions.
4.3. Existence result in the general case
We are now in position to state the main result of this section.
Theorem 4.2. Let ξ ∈ L2 and assume that Assumptions 2.1, 2.2 hold. Then:
1. There exists a unique solution (Y, Z) ∈ D2 × H2 of the 2BDSDE (2.4).
2. Moreover, if in addition we choose to work under either of the following model of the theory
(i) Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory with axiom of choice (ZFC) plus the Continuum Hypothesis
(CH).
(ii) ZFC plus the negation of CH plus Martin’s axiom.
Then there exists a unique solution (Y, Z, K) ∈ D2 × H2 × I2 of the 2BDSDE (2.4).
Proof. The proof is divided in three steps. In the first one we prove that the value process V +
defined by (4.4) is the solution of our 2BDSDE in the case when ξ belongs in U Cb (Ω) and show
the aggregation result for the solution. Then, in the second step we verify the minimality condition
for the increasing process. Finally, we deal with the general case.
Step 1: Existence and aggregation results for ξ belongs in U Cb (Ω)
As we have mentioned above, the natural candidate for the Y solution for our 2BDSDE is given by
Yt = Vt+ :=
lim
Vr , where V is the value process defined by (4.1). First, we know that V +
is a càdlàg process defined pathwise and using the same notations in Proposition 4.1 our solution
Y verifies
Z t
Z t
Z t
−
+ eP ←
eP )ds −
eP dBs − K
e P , P − a.s., ∀P ∈ P t .
Vt+ = V0+ −
Fbs (Vs+ , Z
g
(V
,
Z
)d
W
+
Z
s s
s
s
s
s
t
0
+
0
0
We note that V is a càdlàg generalized semimartingale (studied by Pardoux and Protter in
[24] and Pardoux and Peng [22]). Therefore, we can adapt Karandikar’s results obtained for càdlàg
e which aggregates the family {Z
eP, P ∈
semimartingale in our context to define a universal process Z
t
P }.
eP
Concerning the fact that we can aggregate the family K
18
, it can be deduced as follows. We
Rt
es )ds. In
have from (4.4) that V + is defined pathwise, and so is the Lebesgue integral 0 Fbs (Vs+ , Z
order to give a pathwise definition of the two stochastic integrals, we would like to use the recent
results of Nutz [21]. However, the proof in this paper relies on the notion of medial limits, which
may or may not exist depending on the model of set theory chosen. They exists in the model (i)
above, which is the one considered by Nutz, but we know from [11] (see statement 22O(l) page 55)
that they also do in the model (ii). Therefore, provided we work under either one of these models,
Z t
Z t
−
esP )d←
es dBs and
gs (Vs+ , Z
W s can also be defined pathwise. We can
the stochastic integrals
Z
therefore define pathwise
0
P∈P t
0
e t := V + − Vt+ −
K
0
Z
t
0
es )ds −
Fbs (Vs+ , Z
e is an aggregator for the family
and K
eP
K
P∈P t
Z
t
0
−
esP )d←
Ws +
gs (Vs+ , Z
Z
0
t
es dBs ,
Z
, that is to say that it coincides P − a.s. with
e P , for every P ∈ P t . Thus, the triplet (Y, Z,
e K)
e satisfy the equation (2.4) and from the a priori
K
e K)
e belongs to D2 × H2 × I2 . It remains to prove the
estimates in Theorem 3.1 we get that (Y, Z,
e
minimality condition (5.7) for the increasing process K.
eP
Step 2: The minimality condition of K
Now, we have to check that the minimum condition (2.7) holds. We follow the arguments in the
′
proof of Theorem 3.1. For t ∈ [0, T ], P ∈ P t and P′ ∈ P(t+, P), we denote δY := V + − y P (T, ξ)
′
e − z P (T, ξ) and we introduce the process M of (3.6). We first observe that the non
and δZ := Z
′
e P implies that
decrease of K
′
′
′
P
e tP ] ≥ 0.
e TP − K
EPt [K
ess inf
′
+
P ∈P(t ,P)
h
′
′
′ i
eP − K
e P ] ≤ 0.
Then, it suffices to prove that EP ess inf P EPt [K
t
T
P′ ∈P(t+ ,P)
+
We know that the family P(t , P) is upward directed. Therefore, by classical results, there is a
sequence (Pn )n≥0 ⊂ P(t+ , P) such that
i
h n
′
eP − K
e Pn .
e P′ − K
e P′ ] = lim ↓ EPn K
(4.6)
EP ess inf P EPt [K
T
t
T
t
n→+∞
P′ ∈P(t+ ,P)
On the other hand, by (3.8), we estimate by the Hölder inequality that
h
i
h n
i
1/3 Pn
n
e Pn − K
e Pn 2/3
e −K
e Pn 1/3 inf (M −1 Ms ) −1/3 K
eP − K
e Pn = EPn
inf (Mt−1 Ms )
K
EP K
t
T
t
T
t
T
t
t≤s≤T
t≤s≤T
n
≤ EP
≤ C EP
n
Pn
Pn
1/3
eT − K
e tPn EPn sup (Mt−1 Ms ) EPn K
eT − K
e tPn 2
inf (Mt−1 Ms ) K
t≤s≤T
eP
K
T
n
eP
K
T
n
t≤s≤T
2 EP
n
1/3
Pn
e −K
e Pn
inf (Mt−1 Ms ) K
T
t
t≤s≤T
Z
Pn 2 Pn h −1
Pn
e
E Mt
KT
≤C E
≤ C EP
n
2 1/3
T
t
n
EP [δYt ]
e sPn
Ms dK
1/3
.
i1/3
19
e Pn and argument of the proof of
where we have used in the last inequality the non decrease of K
Theorem 3.1 (ii). Plugging (4.7) in (4.6), we obtain
′
′
′
1/3
Pn
P
P eP
P
e
]
≤
C
lim
↓
E
[δY
]
−
K
[
K
E
EP ′ess inf
t
t
T
t
+
n→+∞
P ∈P(t ,P)
≤
C
n
ess inf P EP [δYt ]
Pn ∈P(t+ ,P)
which is the desired result.
1/3
= 0.
Step 3: Existence and aggregation results for ξ belongs in L2
For ξ ∈ L2 , there exists by definition a sequence (ξn )n≥0 ⊂ U C b (Ω) such that
lim kξn − ξm kL2 = 0 and sup kξn kL2 < +∞.
n→+∞
n≥0
Let (Y n , Z n ) ∈ D2 × H2 be the solution to 2BDSDE (2.4) with terminal condition ξn , and
Ktn,P := Y0n − Ytn −
Z
t
0
Fˆ (Ysn , Zsn )ds −
Z
0
t
←
−
g(Ysn , Zsn )dW s +
Z
t
0
Zsn dBs , 0 ≤ t ≤ T, P − a.s.
By the estimates of Theorem 3.3, we have
kY n − Y m k2D2 + kZ n − Z m k2H2 + sup EP [ sup |Ktn,P − Ktm,P |2 ]
0≤t≤T
P∈P
≤
Ckξn −
ξm k2L2
+ Ckξn − ξm kL2 kξn kL2 + kξm kL2 + (φ2 )1/2 + (ψ 2 )1/2
Extracting a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that
−→
n,m→+∞
kY n − Y m k2D2 + kZ n − Z m k2H2 + sup EP [ sup |Ktn,P − Ktm,P |2 ] ≤ 2−n
0.
(4.7)
0≤t≤T
P∈P
for all m ≥ n ≥ 0. This implies by Markov inequality that for all P and all m ≥ n ≥ 0
Z
h
P sup |Ytn − Ytm |2 + |Ktn,P − Ktm,P |2 +
0≤t≤T
Define
0
Y := lim Y n ,
n→∞
Z := lim Z n ,
n→∞
T
|Ztn − Ztm |2 dt >
1i
≤ Cn2−n .
n
K P := lim K n,P ,
n→∞
(4.8)
(4.9)
where the lim for Z is taken componentwise. It is clear that Y, Z, K P are all Ft - measurable. By
(4.8), it follows from Borel Cantelli Lemma that for all P we have P − a.s.
lim
h
sup |Ytn − Ytm |2 + |Ktn,P − Ktm,P |2 +
n→∞ 0≤t≤T
Z
0
T
i
|Ztn − Ztm |2 dt = 0.
It follows that Y is càdlàg, P-q.s., and that K P is càdlàg nondecreasing process, P − a.s. Furthermore, for all P, sending m to infinity in (4.7) and applying Fatou’s lemma under P gives us that
(Y, Z, K) ∈ D2 × H2 × I2 .
20
5. Probabilistic interpretation for Fully nonlinear SPDEs
Let φ : Rd → R be a lebesgue measurable function. In this section we denote, for any (t, x) ∈
[0, T ] × Rd
Bst,x := x + Bst for all s ∈ [t, T ],
where (Bst )s∈[t,T ] is the shifted canonical process on ΩtB .
Let us first define the following functional spaces:
W
• MW
0,T denotes all the F -stopping times τ such that 0 ≤ τ ≤ T .
W
W
• Lp (Fτ,T
; Rd ), for p ≥ 1, denotes the space of all Rd - valued Fτ,T
measurable r.v. ξ such that
p
E[|ξ| ] < +∞.
• C l,k ([0, T ] × Rd ), for k, l ≥ 0, denotes the space of all R- valued functions defined on [0, T ] ×
Rd ) which are k-times continuously differentiable in t and l-times continuously differentiable
in x.
W
• C l,k (Ft,T
, [0, T ] × Rd ), for k, l ≥ 0, denotes the space of all C l,k ([0, T ] × Rd )-valued random
W
variables ϕ that are Ft,T
⊗ B([0, T ] × Rd ) measurable.
W
• C l,k (FW , [0, T ]×Rd), for k, l ≥ 0, denotes the space of random variables ϕ ∈ C l,k (Ft,T
, [0, T ]×
d
d
W
R ) such that for fixed x ∈ R the mapping (t, ω) 7→ ϕ(t, x, ω) is F - progressively measurable.
Furthermore, for (t, x, y) ∈ [0, T ] × Rd × R, we denote ∂/∂y = Dy , ∂/∂t = Dt , D = Dx =
(∂/∂x1 , · · · , ∂/∂xd ), and D2 = Dxx = (∂x2i xj )di,j=1 . The meaning of Dxy , Dyy , etc should be clear.
The following is a slight strengthening of Assumption 2.1
Assumption 5.1.
(i) P t is not empty, the domain Dft (y,z) = Dft is independent of (w, y, z).
(ii) There exist constants C > 0, 0 ≤ α < 1 and modulus of continuity ρ with polynomial growth
′
′
′
such that for all t ∈ [0, T ], a ∈ Dft , x, x , z, z ∈ Rd , y, y ∈ R.
′
′
′
′
′
|ft (x, y, z, a) − ft (x, y , z , a)| ≤ ρ(|x − x |) + C |y − y | + ka1/2 (z − z )k ,
′
′
′
′
′
kgt (x, y, z) − gt (x, y , z )k2 ≤ ρ(|x − x |) + C|y − y |2 + αk(z − z )k2 .
(iii) The function g ∈ Cb0,2,3 ([0, T ] × Rd × R; Rl ).
We consider the 2BDSDE (2.4) in this Markovian setting with terminal condition ξ = φ(BTt,x ):
Z T
Z T
←
−
t,x
t,x
t,x
t,x
t,x
Ys
= φ(BT ) −
f (s, Br , Yr , Zr , a
ˆr )dr +
g(r, Brt,x , Yrt,x , Zrt,x ) ◦ dW r
−
Z
s
T
s
t
Zrt,x dBr + KTt,x − Kst,x , t ≤ s ≤ T, P t − q.s
(5.1)
We remark that the stochastic integral with respect to dW is the Stratonovich backward integral (see Kunita [14] page 194). Since g ∈ Cb0,2,3 ([0, T ] × Rd × R; Rl ), using the definition of the
Stratonovich backward integral, we show easily that (5.1) is equivalent to the following 2BDSDE:
Z T
Z T
←
−
t,x
t,x
t,x
t,x
t,x
ˆ
f (s, Br , Yr , Zr , a
ˆr )dr +
g(r, Brt,x , Yrt,x , Zrt,x )dW r
Ys
= φ(BT ) −
−
Z
s
T
s
t
Zrt,x dBr + KTt,x − Kst,x , t ≤ s ≤ T, P t − q.s
(5.2)
21
1
where fˆ(s, x, y, z, ˆ
as ) = f (s, x, y, z, ˆ
as ) + T r(g(s, x, y, z)Dy g(s, x, y, z)).
2
Our main objective is to establish the connection Yst,x = v(s, Bst,x ), s ∈ [t, T ], P t − q.s, where v
solves, in some sense (classical or viscosity solutions), the following fully nonlinear SPDE: for all
0≤t<T
(
←
−
du(t, x) + ˆ
h(t, x, u(t, x), Du(t, x), D2 u(t, x))dt + g(t, x, u(t, x), Du(t, x)) ◦ dW t = 0,
(5.3)
u(T, x) = φ(x)
We can write the SPDE (5.3) in the integral form in the case when {u(t, x), 0 ≤ t ≤ T, x ∈ Rd } ∈
W
C 0,2 (Ft,T
, [0, T ] × Rd ) is a classical solution, namely
u(t, x)
= φ(x) +
Z
T
ˆ x, u(t, x), Du(t, x), D2 u(t, x))dt +
h(t,
Z
T
←
−
g(t, x, u(t, x), Du(t, x)) ◦ dW t
t
t
(5.4)
We consider the case
Ht (ω, y, z, γ) = h(t, Bt (ω), y, z, γ),
where h : [0, T ] × R × Rd × Dh → R is a deterministic map. Then the corresponding conjuguate
and bi-conjuguate functions become
f (t, x, y, z, a) :=
sup
T r(aγ) − h(t, x, y, z, γ) for a ∈ Sd>0 ,
2
1
T r(aγ) − f (t, x, y, z, a) for γ ∈ Rd×d .
sup
a∈S>0 2
γ∈Dh
ˆ x, y, z, γ) :=
h(t,
1
(5.5)
(5.6)
d
ˆ is nondecreasing convex in γ. Also, h
ˆ = h if and only if h is convex
Notice that −∞ < ˆ
h ≤ h and h
and nondecreasing in γ.
5.1. A nonlinear Feynman-Kac representation formula
We define a similar notation to (2.5). Let τ be an Gt - stoppinfg time, P ∈ P t , and η a P-square
integrable Gτt - measurable random variable. We denote by (y P , z P ) := (y P,t,x (τ, η), z P,t,x(τ, η)) the
solution of the following BDSDE:
Z τ
Z τ
Z τ
←
−
zrP dBr , t ≤ r ≤ τ, P − a.s.
g(r, Brt,x , yrP , zrP )dW r −
f (r, Brt,x , yrP , zrP , a
ˆr )dr −
ysP = η −
s
s
s
Under our assumptions the above BDSDE has a unique solution.
Definition 5.1. We define the classical solution of the SPDE (5.3)as a R-valued random field
W
{u(t, x), 0 ≤ t ≤ T, x ∈ Rd } such that u(t, x) is Ft,T
-measurable for each (t, x), and whose
0,2
d
trajectories belong to C ([0, T ] × R ; R).
ˆ is continuous in its domain,
Theorem 5.1. Let Assumption 5.1 hold true. Suppose further that h
Df is independent of t and is bounded both from above and away from 0. Let {u(t, x); t ∈ [0, T ]×Rd}
be a classical solution of (5.3) with {(u, Du)(s, Bst,x ), s ∈ [t, T ]} ∈ D2 × H2 . Then:
Z s
Yst,x := u(s, Bst,x ), Zst,x := Du(s, Bst,x ), Kst,x :=
kr dr
0
22
ˆ Bs , Ys , Zs , Γs ) − 1 T r(ˆ
as Γs ) + f (s, Bs , Ys , Zs , a
ˆs ) and Γs := D2 u(s, Bst,x )
with ks := h(s,
2
is the unique solution of the 2BDSDE (5.1). Moreover, u(t, x) = Ytt,x for all t ∈ [0, T ].
Proof. It sufficies to show that (Y, Z, K) solves the 2BDSDE (5.1). For notational simplicity, we
shall write B instead of B t,x and let s = t0 < t1 < t2 < ... < tn = T ,
n−1
X
[u(ti , Bti ) − u(ti+1 , Bti+1 )] =
n−1
X
i=0
n−1
X Z ti+1
i=0
=−
+
i=0 ti
n−1
X Z ti+1
ti
+
i=0
n−1
X Z ti+1
i=0
Du(ti , Br )dBr −
n−1
X
[u(ti , Bti+1 )
i=0
n−1
X Z ti+1
[u(ti , Bti ) − u(ti , Bti+1 )] +
i=0
ti
− u(ti+1 , Bti+1 )]
1
T r(ˆ
ar D2 u(ti , Br ))dr
2
ˆ Bt , u(r, B t,x ), Du(r, Bt ), D2 u(r, Bt ))dr
h(r,
i+1
i+1
i+1
ti+1
←
−
g(r, Bti+1 , u(r, Bti+1 ), Du(r, Bti+1 )) ◦ dW s ,
ti
where we have used the Itô formula and the equation satisfied by u (5.4). Now, the transformation
from Stratonovich to Itô integral yields to
n−1
X
[u(ti , Bti ) − u(ti+1 , Bti+1 )] = −
n−1
X Z ti+1
i=0
Du(ti , Br )dBr −
ti
n−1
X Z ti+1
i=0
i=0
n−1
X Z ti+1
ˆ
h(r, Bti+1 , u(r, Bti+1 ), Du(r, Bti+1 ), D2 u(r, Bti+1 ))dr
+
←
−
g(r, Bti+1 ), u(r, Bti+1 ), Du(r, Bti+1 ))dW r
+
ti
1
T r(ˆ
ar D2 u(ti , Br ))dr
2
ti
+
−
−
i=0
n−1
X Z ti+1
i=0 ti
n−1
X Z ti+1
i=0 ti
n−1
X Z ti+1
ˆr )dr
f (r, Bti+1 , u(r, Bti+1 ), Du(r, Bti+1 ), a
ˆr )dr
f (r, Bti+1 , u(r, Bti+1 ), Du(r, Bti+1 ), a
i=0 ti
n−1
X Z ti+1
1
2
i=0
T r(g(r, Bti+1 , u(r, Bti+1 ), Du(r, Bti+1 ))Dg(r, Bti+1 , u(r, Bti+1 )), Du(r, Bti+1 ))dr.
ti
It sufficies to let the mesh size go to zero. It remains to prove the minimum condition:
P
ess inf EPt
P′ ∈P(t+,P)
′
[
Z
T
ks ds] = 0 for all t ∈ [0, T ] P ∈ P t
(5.7)
t
by which we can conclude that (Y, Z, K) is a solution of the 2BDSDE (5.1). Since φ(BT ) ∈ L2 , the
uniqueness follows from Theorems 3.1 and 3.3 (i).
To prove (5.7), we follow the same argument as in the proof of Lemma 3.1 in [10]. For every ǫ > 0,
notice that the set
1
Aǫ := {a ∈ Df : ˆ
h(t, Bt , Yt , Zt , Γt ) ≤ T r(at Γt ) − f (t, Bt , Yt , Zt , at ) + ǫ}
2
23
is not empty. Then it follows from a measurable selection argument that there exists a FtB - predictable process aǫ taking values in Df such that
ˆ Bt , Yt , Zt , Γt ) ≤ 1 T r(aǫ Γt ) − f (t, Bt , Yt , Zt , aǫ ) + ǫ
h(t,
t
t
2
We note that this in particular implies that Γt ∈ Dhˆ .
In the remainder of this proof, we show the existence of an F - progressively measurable process
Z T
ǫ
,
|αǫt |dt < ∞, such that, Pα -a.s., a
ˆ ∈ Aǫ .
αǫ with values in S>0
d
0
Let P = Pα := Pα ⊗ PW ∈ P t and t0 ∈ [0, T ] be fixed. Let
τ0ǫ := T ∧ inf{t ≥ t0 |Kt ≥ Kt0 + ǫ},
and define:
1
T r(aǫτnǫ Γt ) − f (t, Bt , Yt , Zt , aǫτnǫ ) + 2ǫ}
2
ǫ
ˆ Bt , Yt , Zt , Γt ) ≥
τn+1
:= T ∧ inf{t ≥ τnǫ |h(t,
for n ≥ 0. Since K is continuous, notice that τ0ǫ > 0, P t -q.s. Also, since B, Y, Z, Γ are all continuous
in t, τnǫ are G- stopping times and, for any fixed ω, are uniformly continuous in t.
ˆ is continuous. Then for P t -q.s.
Next, for any fixed a ∈ Df , the function f (., a) is continuous. Also h
ω ∈ Ω,
ˆ Bt (ω), Yt (ω), Zt (ω), Γt (ω)) − 1 T r(aǫ ǫ (ω)Γ( ω)t) + f (t, Bt (ω), Yt (ω), Z( ω)t, aǫ ǫ (ω))
h(t,
τn
τn
2
ǫ
ǫ
is uniformly continuous in t for t ∈ [τnǫ , T ]. Then τn+1
− τnǫ ≥ δ(ǫ, ω) > 0 whenever τn+1
< 1, where
ǫ
the constant δ(ǫ, ω) does not depend on n. This is implies that τn = 1 for n large enough. Applying
the arguments in Example 4.5 of [33] on [τ0ǫ , T ], it is easy to see that there exists an (FtB )0≤t≤T
-progressively measurable process αǫ taking values in Df such that
αǫt = αt
for t ∈ [0, τ0ǫ ] and a
ˆt =
∞
X
ǫ
aǫτnǫ 1[τnǫ ,τn+1
) (t),
n=0
ǫ
ǫ
dt × dPα
B − a.s. on [τ0 , T ] × Ω.
This implies that
ǫ
ˆ Bt , Yt , Zt , Γt ) ≤ 1 T r(ˆ
at Γt ) − f (t, Bt , Yt , Zt , a
ˆt ) + 2ǫ dt × dPα − a.s. on [τ0ǫ , T ] × Ω.
h(t,
2
ǫ
ǫ
It is obvious that Pα ∈ P t , then Pα ∈ P(t0 +, P) since τ0ǫ > t0 . Therefore,
′
ess inf P EPt0
′
P ∈P(t+
0 ,P)
hZ
T
t0
hZ
i
αǫ
kt dt ≤ ǫ + EtP0
T
τ0ǫ
i
kt dt ≤ ǫ + 2ǫ(1 − t0 ), P − a.s.
By the arbitrariness of ǫ > 0, and the nonegativity of k, this provides (5.7).
5.2. Stochastic viscosity solution for SPDE
Buckdahn and Ma [3, 4] have introduced the rigorous notion of stochastic viscosity solution for
semilinear SPDEs and then they gave the probabilistic interpretation of such equation via BDSDEs
24
where the intensity of the noise g in the SPDEs (5.3) does not depend on the gradient of the
solution. Following the classical terminology in the BSDE literature, we say that the solution of
the 2BDSDE is Markovian if it can be represented by means of a deterministic function of (t, Bt ).
In this subsection, we construct a deterministic function u, by using a probabilistic representation
in the spirit of (3.2), and show its connection with 2BDSDE (5.1). The connction between u and
the SPDE (5.3) will be also established.
We will use the shifted probability spaces defined in Section 4. We now introduce the random
function u : [0, T ] × ΩW × Rd → R given by
u(t, x) := sup ytP,t,x(T, φ(BTt,x )), for (t, x) ∈ [0, T ] × Rd .
(5.8)
P∈P t
W
By the Blumenthal zero-one law, it follows that u(t, x) is deterministic w.r.t B but still an Ft,T
adapted process.
As we have explained in the existence of the solution for 2BDSDE in the abstract setting, we
W
, [0, T ] × Rd ).
suppose that our candidate u defined by (5.8) belongs to C(Ft,T
We next state a strengthening of Assumption 2.2 in the present Markov framework.
Assumption 5.2.
(i) The function φ is uniformly continuous and bounded function on Rd .
(ii) There is a continuous positive function Λ(t, x) such that, for any (t, x):
Z T
Z T
i
h
t,x 2
t,x
t 2
P
|g(s, Bst,x , 0, 0)|2 ds ≤ Λ2 (t, x),
|f (s, Bs , 0, 0, âs )| ds +
sup E |φ(BT )| +
P∈P t
t
t
(5.9)
h
i
2
t,x
P
sup E sup Λ (s, Bs ) < ∞.
P∈P t
t≤s≤T
5.2.1. Stochastic flow and definitions
We follow Buckdahn and Ma [3]. The definition of our stochastic viscosity solution will depend
on the following stochastic flow η ∈ C(FW , [0, T ] × Rd × R) defined as the unique solution of the
stochastic differential equation (SDE):
Z T
←
−
η(t, x, y) = y +
g(s, x, η(s, x, y)) ◦ dW s , 0 ≤ t ≤ T
(5.10)
t
Under the Assumption 5.1, for fixed x the random field η(., x, .) is continuously differentiable in
the variable y; and the mapping y 7−→ η(t, x, y, ω) defines a diffeomorphism for all (t, x), P-a.s. We
denote by E(t, x, y) the y-inverse of η(t, x, y), so E(t, x, y) is the solution of the following first-order
SPDE:
Z T
←
−
E(t, x, y) = y −
Dy E(s, x, y)g(s, x, y) ◦ dW s , ∀(t, x, y), P − a.s.
(5.11)
t
We note that E(t, x, η(t, x, y)) = E(T, x, η(T, x, y)) = y, ∀(t, x, y)
ˆ g) (5.3).
We now define the notion of stochastic viscosity solution for SPDE (h,
Definition 5.2. (i) A random field u ∈ C(FW , [0, T ] × Rd ) is called a stochastic viscosity subsoˆ g), if u(T, x) ≤ (resp. ≥)φ(x), ∀x ∈ Rd ; and if for any
lution (resp. supersolution) of SPDE (h,
0
W
d
1,2
W
τ ∈ MW
(Ft,T
, [0, T ] × Rd ) satisfying
0,T , ζ ∈ L (Fτ ; R ), and any random field ϕ ∈ C
u(t, x) − η(t, x, ϕ(t, x)) ≤ (resp. ≥) 0 = u(τ, ζ) − η(τ, ζ, ϕ(τ, ζ),
25
for all (t, x) in a neighborhood of (τ, ζ), P − a.e. on the set {0 < τ < T }, it holds that
ˆ ζ, ψ(τ, ζ), Dψ(τ, ζ), D2 ψ(τ, ζ)) ≤ (resp. ≥)Dy η(τ, ζ, ϕ(τ, ζ))Dt ϕ(τ, ζ),
−h(τ,
P − a.e. on {0 < τ < T }, where ψ(t, x) , η(t, x, ϕ(t, x)).
ˆ g),
(ii) A random field u ∈ C(FW , [0, T ] × Rd ) is called a stochastic viscosity solution of SPDE (h,
if it is both a stochastic viscosity subsolution and a supersolution.
Definition 5.3. A random field u ∈ C(FW , [0, T ] × Rd) is called a ω- wsise viscosity (sub-, super-)
solution if for P − a.e.ω ∈ Ω, u(ω, ., .) is a (deterministic) viscosity (sub-, super-) solution of the
ˆ 0).
SPDE (h,
Remark 5.1. If we assume that ϕ ∈ C 1,2 (FW , [0, T ] × Rd), and that g ∈ C 0,0,3 ([0, T ] × Rd × R; Rl ),
then a straightforward computation using the Itô-Ventzell formula shows that the random field
ψ(t, x) = η(t, x, ϕ(t, x)) satisfies
←
−
dψ(t, x) = Dy η(t, x, ϕ(t, x))Dt ϕ(t, x)dt + hg(t, x, ψ(t, x)), ◦dW t i,
t ∈ [0, T ].
(5.12)
Since g(τ, ζ, ψ(τ, ζ) = g(τ, ζ, u(τ, ζ)) by defintion, it seems natural to compare
ˆ ζ, ψ(τ, ζ), Dψ(τ, ζ), D2 ψ(τ, ζ)) with Dy η(τ, ζ, ϕ(τ, ζ))Dt ϕ(τ, ζ) to characterize a viscosity soh(τ,
ˆ g).
lution of SPDE (h,
If the function g ≡ 0 in SPDE (f, g) , the flow η becomes η(t, x, y) = y, ∀(t, x, y) and ψ(t, x) =
ϕ(t, x). Thus the definition of a stocahstic viscosity solution becomes the same as that of a deterministic viscosity solution (see, e.g. Crandall, Ishii and Lions [7]).
Theorem 5.2. For (t, x) ∈ [0, T ] × Rd ,
W
u(t, x) := Ytt,x = sup ytP,t,x(T, φ(BTt,x )) ∈ C(Ft,T
, [0, T ] × Rd )
P∈P t
ˆ g), where
is a stochastic viscosity solution to SPDE (h,
u(t, x) = η(t, x, v(t, x)) , v(t, x) = E(t, x, u(t, x)) , v(t, x) := Utt,x .
˜ t,x ) is solution of the 2QBSDE.
and (U t,x , V t,x , K
Next, we give a generalized version of Itô-Ventzell formula that combines the generalized Itô
formula of Pardoux and Peng (1994) and the Itô-Ventzell formula of Ocone and Pardoux (1989).
Lemma 5.1. (Generalized Itô-Ventzell formula)
Suppose that F ∈ C 0,2 (F, [0, T ] × Rk ) is a semimartingale with spatial parameter x ∈ Rk :
F (t, x) = F (0, t) +
Z
t
G(s, x)ds +
0
Z
t
H(s, x)dBs +
0
Z
t
←
−
K(s, x)dW s ,
t ∈ [0, T ],
0
where G ∈ C 0,2 (FB , [0, T ] × Rk ), H ∈ C 0,2 (FB , [0, T ] × Rk ; Rd ) and K ∈ C 0,2 (FW , [0, T ] × Rk ; Rl ).
Let φ ∈ C(F, [0, T ]; Rk ) be a process of the form
φt = φ0 + At +
Z
0
t
γs dBs +
Z
0
t
←
−
δs dW s ,
t ∈ [0, T ],
26
where γ ∈ H2k×d , δ ∈ H2k×l and A is a continuous F-adapted process with paths of locally bounded
variation. Then, P-almost surely, it holds for all 0 ≤ t ≤ T that
Z t
Z t
Z t
←
−
F (t, φt ) =F (0, x) +
G(s, φs )ds +
H(s, φs )dBs +
K(s, φs )dW s
0
0
0
Z t
Z t
Z t
←
−
+
Dx F (s, φs )dAs +
Dx F (s, φs )γs dBs +
Dx F (s, φs )δs dW s
0
0
0
(5.13)
Z t
Z t
1
1
∗
∗
+
T r(Dxx F (s, φs )γs γs )ds −
T r Dxx F (s, φs )δs δs ds
2 0
2 0
Z t
Z t
T r Dx F (s, φs )δs∗ ds.
T r(Dx H(s, φs )γs∗ )ds −
+
0
0
5.2.2. Doss transformation
In this subsection we use the so-called Doss-Sussmann transformation to convert the fully nonlinear SPDEs (5.3) to PDEs with random coefficients. This transformation permits to remove the
martingale term from the SPDEs.
To begin with, let us note that, under Assumption 5.1 (iii), the random field η ∈ C 0,2,2 (FW , [0, T ]×
Rd ×R), thus so is E. Now for any random field ψ : [0, T ]×Rd ×Ω 7→ R, consider the transformation
introduced in Definition 5.2:
ϕ(t, x) = E(t, x, ψ(t, x)),
(t, x) ∈ [0, T ] × Rd ,
or equivalently, ψ(t, x) = η(t, x, ϕ(t, x)), (t, x), P−a.s. One can easily check that ψ ∈ C 0,p (FW , [0, T ]×
Rd ) if and only if ϕ ∈ C 0,p (FW , [0, T ] × Rd), for p = 0, 1, 2. Moreover, if ϕ ∈ C 0,2 (F W , [0, T ] × Rd),
then Dx ψ = Dx η + Dy ηDx ϕ; and
Dxx ψ = Dxx η + 2(Dxy η)(Dx ϕ)∗ + (Dyy η)(Dx ϕ)(Dx ϕ)∗ + (Dy η)(Dxx ϕ).
(5.14)
Furthermore, since E(t, x, η(t, x, y)) ≡ y, ∀(t, x, y), P − a.s., differentiating the equation up to the
second order we have (suppressing variables), for all (t, x, y) and P-almost surelt,
Dx E + Dy EDx η = 0,
Dy EDy η = 1,
∗
Dxx E + 2(Dxy E)(Dx η) + (Dyy E)(Dx η)(Dx η)∗ + (Dy E)(Dxx η) = 0,
(Dxy E)(Dy η) + (Dyy E)(Dx η)(Dy η) + (Dy E)(Dxy η) = 0,
(5.15)
(Dyy E)(Dy η)2 + (Dy E)(Dyy η) = 0.
Now, we will use the Doss transformation to transform SPDE (5.3) to PDE with random coefficients
and we obtain the following proposition where the proof is exalty the same as Proposition 3.1. in
[3].
Proposition 5.1. Let Assumptions 5.1 and 5.2 hold true. A random field u is a stochastic viscosity
ˆ g) (5.3) if and only if v(., .) = E(., ., u(., .)) is a stochastic
sub- (resp. super-) solution to SPDE (h,
˜ 0), with
viscosity solution to SPDE (h,
˜ x, y, z, γ) =
h(t,
1
ˆ x, η(t, x, y), Dx η(t, x, y) + Dy η(t, x, y)z, Dxx η(t, x, y)
{h(t,
Dy η(t, x, y)
+ 2Dxy η(t, x, y)z + Dyy η(t, x, y)|z|2 + Dy η(t, x, y)γ)}.
(5.16)
27
We will now apply Doss transformation to the 2BDSDE (5.1) in order that the Stratonovich
backward integral vanishes. Thus, the 2BDSDE will become a 2BSDE with a new generator f˜
which is quadratic in z (studied by Possamaï and Zhou [30] and Lin [16] in the case of a bounded
final condition φ(BTt,x )). Let us define the following three processes:
Ust,x
= E(t, Bst,x , Yst,x )
Vst,x
= Dy E(s, Bst,x , Ytt,x )Zst,x + Dx E(s, Bst,x , Yst,x )
Z s
=
Dy E(r, Brt,x , Yrt,x )dKrt,x .
˜ st,x
K
(5.17)
0
˜ t,x ) is solution of the
Theorem 5.3. Let Assumptions 5.1 and 5.2 hold true. Then (U t,x , V t,x , K
following 2BSDE, for all t ≤ s ≤ T ,
Z T
Z T
˜ t,x − K
˜ st,x ,
Ust,x = φ(BTt,x ) −
f˜(r, Brt,x , Yrt,x , Zrt,x , a
ˆr )dr −
Vrt,x dBr + K
(5.18)
T
s
s
where f˜ : [0, T ] × Rd × R × Rd × Df 7→ R is defined by:
f˜(t, x, y, z, a) ,
−
1
1
{f (t, x, y, Dy η(t, x, y)z + Dx η(t, x, y)) − T r(aDxx η(t, x, y))
Dy η(t, x, y)
2
1
(5.19)
(aDxy η(t, x, y)z) − T r(aDyy η(t, x, y)|z|2 )}.
2
˜ is 1 − 1, with the inverse
Proof. It is easily checked that the mapping (B, Y, Z, K) 7→ (B, U, V, K)
transformation:
Yt
= η(t, Bt , Ut )
Zt
= Dy η(t, Bt , Ut )Vt + Dx η(t, Bt , Ut )
Z t
˜ s.
Dy η(s, Bs , Us )dK
=
Kt
(5.20)
0
Consequently, the uniqueness of (5.18) follows from that of 2BDSDE (5.1), thanks to (5.17) and
˜ is a solution of the 2BSDE (5.18).
(5.20). Thus we need only show that (U, V, K)
Applying the generalized Itô-Ventzell formula (Lemma 5.1) to E(t, Bt , Yt ), one derives that for
(t, x) ∈ [0, T ] × Rd
Z T
Z T
Ut = E(t, Bt , Yt ) = φ(BT ) −
Dx E(s, Bs , Ys )dBs −
Dy E(s, Bs , Ys )f (s, Bs , Ys , Zs , a
ˆs )ds
−
Z
t
T
Dy E(s, Bs , Ys )Zs dBs +
t
1
−
2
Z
Z
t
T
Dy E(s, Bs , Ys )dKs −
t
T
2
T r(Dyy E(s, Bs , Ys )ˆ
as |Zs | )ds −
t
= φ(BT ) −
Z
t
T
H(s, Bs , Ys , Zs , a
ˆs )ds −
Z
Z
T
t
T
1
2
Z
T
T r(Dxx E(s, Bs , Ys )ˆ
as )ds
t
(5.21)
T r(Dxy E(s, Bs , Ys )ˆ
as Zs )ds
˜T − K
˜ t,
Vs dBs + K
t
where
1
1
H(s, x, y, z, ˆ
as ) , (Dy E)f (s, x, y, z, âs ) + T r((Dxx E)ˆ
as ) + T r((Dyy E)ˆ
as |z|2 )
2
2
+ T r((Dxy E)ˆ
as z).
(5.22)
28
Next, we can show that
H(s, Bs , Ys , Zs , a
ˆs ) = f˜(s, Bs , Us , Vs , a
ˆs ) ∀s ∈ [0, T ], P − a.s.
(5.23)
similarly as done in Buckdahn and Ma [3] (proof of Theorem 5.1. page 198-199).
˜ is an increasing process which satisfies the minimum condition (5.7) thanks to
The process K
(5.17), the fact that y 7→ η(t, x, y) is strictly increasing and that K satisfies the minimum condition (5.7).
We are now ready to prove that u defined by (5.8) is the stochastic viscosity solution of our
ˆ g) (5.3). First, we introduce the random field v(t, x) = U t,x , where U is the solution of
SPDE (h,
t
2BSDE (5.18). Then by (5.17) and (5.20) we know that, for (t, x) ∈ [0, T ] × Rd
u(t, x) = η(t, x, v(t, x)) ;
v(t, x) = E(t, x, u(t, x)).
(5.24)
Finally, thanks to Proposition 5.1, we need only prove that the random field v defined in (5.24) is
˜ 0).
a stochastic viscosity solution to the SPDE (h,
Remark 5.2. As mentioned in the begining of Section 5.2, we suppose that our candidate u defined
W
, [0, T ]×Rd). Thanks to the ralation (5.24), this condition is equivalent to
by (5.8) belongs to C(Ft,T
v(·, ·, ω) belongs to C([0, T ] × Rd ), P-a.s. for all ω ∈ Ω. This latter can be proved by using regularity
results for deterministic fully nonlinear PDEs ([5],[15]), but it is still a work in progress to make
it rigoursly.
6. Appendix
6.1. Proof of Lemma 4.1
We divide the proof in two steps.
Step 1: We start by showing the result in the case where F and g do not depend on (y, z). In this
case, we can solve directly the BDSDEs to find that for PB ⊗ P0W − a.e. (ω B , ω W ) ∈ Ω
#
"
Z T
Z T
←
−
PB ⊗P0W
B
W
PB ⊗P0W
ξ+
(6.1)
Fbs ds +
gs dW s Gt (ω B , ω W ).
yt
(ω , ω ) = E
t
t
Then, since ξ is actually FTB -measurable, we deduce immediately, using the definition of the r.c.p.d.
that
i
h
t,ωB
B
0
ξ t,ω .
EPB ⊗PW [ ξ| Gt ] (ω B , ω W ) = EPB ξ| FtB (ω B ) = EPB
Next, we know from the results of Stricker and Yor [34] that there we can define a measurable map
from (ΩW × [0, T ], FT ⊗ B([0, T ])) to (R, B(R)) which coincides P0W ⊗ dt-a.e. with the conditional
expectation of gs , under PB , with respect to the σ-algebra FtB . For notational simplicity, we still
denote this map as
(ω W , s) 7−→ EPB gs (·, ω W ) FtB .
29
In other words, the above map does indeed define a stochastic process. That being said, we claim
that for PB -a.e. ω B ∈ ΩB
#
!
"Z
Z T
T
0
←
−
←
−
EPB ⊗PW
EPB gs | FtB (ω B , ·)dW s (ω W )
gs dW s Gt (ω B , ω W ) =
t
t
!
Z T
i
B h
B
←
−
t,ω
Pt,ω
=
gs
(·)dW s (ω W ), for P0W − a.e. ω W ∈ ΩW .
E B
t
(6.2)
To prove the claim, let us first show it in the case where g is a simple process on (ΩW , FTW ) with
the following decomposition
n−1
X
B
W
gti 1(ti ,ti+1 ] .
gt (ω , ω ) =
i=0
Then, we have by definition of backward stochastic integrals, for PB ⊗ P0W -a.e. (ω B , ω W ) ∈ Ω
#
"Z
n−1
T
X
0 ←
− PB ⊗P0W
EPB ⊗PW gti+1 Wti+1 ∧t − Wti ∧t Gt ω B , ω W
E
t
=
i=0
n−1
X
i=0
0 EPB ⊗PW gti+1 Gt ω B , ω W Wti+1 ∧t − Wti ∧t (ω W ).
Notice next that for PB ⊗ P0W -a.e. (ω B , ω W ) ∈ Ω
0 EPB ⊗PW gti+1 Gt ω B , ω W = EPB gti+1 ·, ω W FtB ω B .
Indeed, for any X which is Gt -measurable, we have
Z
EPB gti+1 ·, ω W FtB ω B X(ω B , ω W )dPB (ω B )dP0W (ω W )
Ω
Z
Z
=
EPB gti+1 ·, ω W FtB ω B X(ω B , ω W )dPB (ω W ) dP0W (ω W )
B
ΩW
ZΩ
Z
=
gti+1 ω B , ω W X(ω B , ω W ) ω B dPB (ω W ) dP0W (ω W )
W
ΩB
ZΩ
gti+1 ω B , ω W X(ω B , ω W ) ω B d PB ⊗ P0W (ω B , ω W ),
=
Ω
where we have used the fact that since for every ω W ∈ ΩW , ω B 7−→ X(ω B , ω W ) is FtB -measurable,
we have by definition of the conditional expectation that
Z
Z
gti+1 ω B , ω W X(ω B , ω W )dPB (ω W ).
EPB gti+1 ·, ω W FtB ω B X(ω B , ω W )dPB (ω W ) =
ΩB
ΩB
Hence, we deduce finally that
#
"Z
n−1
T
X
←
− PB ⊗P0W
EPB gti+1 ·, ω W FtB ω B Wti+1 ∧t − Wti ∧t (ω W )
E
t
i=0
!
Z T
B
←
−
PB
B
=
E
gs | Ft (ω , ·)dW s (ω W ).
t
30
By a simple density argument, we deduce that the same holds for general processes g. Next, notice
that by definition of r.p.c.d., we have for any ω W ∈ ΩW
i
h
t,ωB
B
gst,ω (ω W ), for PB − a.e. ω B ∈ ΩB .
EPB gs | FtB (ω B , ω W ) = EPB
Therefore, the PB -negligible set outside of which the above does hold true depends, a priori, on
W
ω W . However,
i since g is uniformly continuous in ω, it is easily checked that the map ω 7−→
B h
B
t,ω
W
Pt,ω
gs
(ω ) is actually uniformly continuous. Hence, it is possible to choose the same
E B
PB -negligible set for all ω W ∈ ΩW . This finally proves (6.2).
Using similar argument, we show that we also have for PB -a.e. ω B ∈ ΩB
#
"Z
Z T
T
h
i
t,ωB
B
PB ⊗P0W
b
EPB
Fbst,ω (ω W )ds, for P0W − a.e. ω W ∈ ΩW .
E
Fs ds Gt (ω B , ω W ) =
t
t
To sum up, we have obtained that for PB -a.e. ω B ∈ ΩB
!
Z T
i
B h
B
←
−
PB ⊗P0W
B
t,ω
B
B
W
Pt,ω
P
+
ξ
yt
(ω , ω ) = E B
E B gs | Ft (ω , ·)dW s (ω W )
t
+
Z
T
t,ωB
EPB
t
i
h
B
Fbst,ω (ω W )ds, for P0W − a.e. ω W ∈ ΩW .
B
Pt,ω ⊗P0 ,t,ω B
W
But, we also have (remember that by the Blumenthal 0 − 1 law yt B
only depends on
W
B
B
ω ) for any ω ∈ Ω
#
"
Z T
Z T
B
0
B
t,ωB
B
B
B ←
0
−
Pt,ω
⊗P
,t,ω
W
Fbst,ω ds +
gst,ω dW s Gtt (ω W )
yt B
(ω W ) = EPB ⊗PW ξ t,ω +
t
t
#
"
Z T
Z T
B
B
B
B ←
0
−
t,ω
t,ω
t,ω
Pt,ω
⊗P
W
b
W
ξ
+
gs dW s Ft,T (ω W ).
Fs ds +
=E B
t
t
Using the same arguments as above, we obtain
B
Pt,ω ⊗P0W ,t,ω B
yt B
(ω W )
Pt,ω
B
B
=E
+
Z
t
i Z
h
t,ω B
+
ξ
T
t,ωB
EPB
t
T
t,ωB
EPB
h
i ←
B
−
gst,ω dW s
h
i
B
Fbst,ω ds
!
(ω W ),
which proves the desired result. Step 2: Since we are in a Lipschitz setting, solutions to BDSDEs
can be constructed via Picard iterations. Hence, using Step 1, the results holds at each step of the
iteration and therefore also when passing to the limit.
6.2. Proof of Lemma 4.3
P
P
For each P ∈ P t , let (Y (T, ξ), Z (T, ξ)) be the solution of the BDSDE with generators Fˆ and g,
P
and terminal condition ξ at time T . We define Ve P := V − Y (T, ξ). Then, Ve P ≥ 0, P − a.s. For any
0 ≤ t1 ≤ t2 ≤ T , let (y P,t2 , z P,t2 ) := (Y P (t2 , Vt2 ), Z P (t2 , Vt2 )).
Note that
1 ,ω
(t2 , Vtt21 ,ω ), P − a.s.
YtP1 (t2 , Vt2 )(ω) = YtP,t
1
31
Then by the dynamic programming principle (Theorem 4.1) we get
2
, P − a.s.
Vt1 ≥ ytP,t
1
P
P
−1/2
ˆt
(ztP,t2 − Z t ). Then (e
y P,t2 , zeP,t2 ) is solution of the following
Denote yetP,t2 := ytP,t2 − Y t , zetP,t2 := a
BDSDE on [0, t2 ]
Z t2
Z t2
Z t2
←
−
zesP,t2 dXsaˆ ,
gˆsP (e
ysP,t2 , zesP,t2 )dW s −
fsP (e
ysP,t2 , zesP,t2 )ds +
yetP,t2 = VetP +
t
t
t
where
P
P
P
P
P
P
ftP (ω, y, z) := Fˆt (ω, y + Y t (ω), a
ˆ1/2 (ω)z + Z t (ω)) − Fˆt (ω, Y t (ω), Z t (ω))
P
P
gˆtP (ω, y, z) := gt (ω, y + Y t (ω), a
ˆ1/2 (ω)z + Z t (ω)) − gt (ω, Y t (ω), Z t (ω)).
2
. Therefore, Ve P is a positive weak doubly f P - supermartingale under P by Definition
Then VetP1 ≥ yetP,t
1
6.3 (given in the Appendix). Now applying the downcrossing inequality Theorem 6.1, one can easily
see that P- a.e. ω, the limit
lim
VerP exists for all t ∈ [0, T ]. Note that y P is continuous, P-a.s.
We get that the lim in the definition of V + is in fact the lim P-a.s. Then,
Vt+ =
lim
Vr ,
P t − q.s.
and therefore V + is càdlàg P t − q.s.
6.3. Doubly f - supersolution and martingales
In this section, we extend some of the results of Peng [26] concerning f - supersolution of BSDEs
to the case of BDSDEs. In the following, we fix a probability measure P. Let us given the following
objects:
(i) a terminal condition ξ which is FT -measurable and in L2 (P)
(ii) f : Ω × R × Rd → R , g : Ω × R × Rd → Rl are two functions verifying:
Z
Z
T
T
• E
|f (t, 0, 0)|2 dt < +∞ , E
kg(t, 0, 0)k2 dt < +∞
0
0
• There exist constants c > 0 and 0 < α < 1 such that for any(ω, t) ∈ Ω×[0, T ] ; (y1 , z1 ), (y2 , z2 ) ∈
R × Rd
|f (t, y1 , z1 ) − f (t, y2 , z2 )|2 ≤ c |y1 − y2 |2 + kz1 − z2 k2
kg(t, y1 , z1 ) − g(t, y2 , z2 )k2
≤ c|y1 − y2 |2 + αkz1 − z2 k2 .
(iii) a real-valued r.c.l.l. progressively measurable process {Vt , 0 ≤ t ≤ T } with
E sup |Vt |2 < +∞.
0≤t≤T
We want to study the following problem: to find a pair of processes (y, z) ∈ D2 (P)×H2 (P) satisfying
Z T
Z T
Z T
←
−
yt = ξT +
fs (ys , zs )ds +
gs (ys , zs )dW s + VT − Vt −
zs dBs , P − a.s.
(6.3)
t
t
We have the following exixtence and uniqueness theorem
t
32
Proposition 6.1. Under the above hypothesis there exists a unique pair of processes (y, z) ∈
D2 (P) × H2 (P) of solution BDSDE (6.3).
Proof. In the case where V ≡ 0, the proof can be found in [22]. Otherwise, we can make the
change of variable y t := yt + Vt and treat the equivalent BDSDE
y t = ξT + VT +
Z
T
fs (y s − Vs , zs )ds +
t
Z
T
t
←
−
gs (y s − Vs , zs )dW s −
Z
T
zs dB
(6.4)
t
We also have a comparison theorem in this context
Proposition 6.2. Let ξ1 and ξ2 ∈ L2 (P), V i , i = 1, 2 be two adapted càdlàg processes and
fsi (y, z), gsi (y, z) four functions verifying the above assumption. Let (y i , z i ) ∈ D2 (P)×H2 (P), i = 1, 2
be the solution of the following BDSDEs:
Z T
Z T
Z T
←
−
yti = ξTi +
fsi (ysi , zsi )ds +
gs (ysi , zsi )dW s + VTi − Vti −
zsi dBs , P − a.s , i = 1, 2
t
t
t
1
2
respectively. If we have P − a.s. that ξ1 ≥ ξ2 , V − V is non decreasing, and fs1 (ys1 , zs1 ) ≥ fs2 (ys1 , zs1 )
then it holds that for all t ∈ [0, T ]
yt1 ≥ yt2 P − a.s.
Remark 6.1. If we replace the determonistic time T by a bounded stopping time τ , then all the
above is still valid.
For a given stopping time, we now consider the following BDSDE
Z τ
Z τ
Z
←
−
yt = ξT +
fs (ys , zs )ds +
gs (ys , zs )dW s + Vτ − Vt∧τ −
t∧τ
t∧τ
τ
zs dBs , P − a.s.
(6.5)
t∧τ
where ξ ∈ L2 (P) and V ∈ I2 (P).
Definition 6.1. If y is a solution of BDSDE of form (6.5), the we call y a doubly f - supersolution
on [0, τ ]. If V ≡ 0 in [0, τ ], then we call y a doubly f - solution.
Proposition 6.3. Given y a doubly f - supersolution on [0, τ ], there is a unique z ∈ H2 (P) and a
unique V ∈ I2 (P) such that (y, z) satisfies (6.5).
Proof. If both (y, z, V ) and (y, z 1 , V 1 ) satisfy (6.5), then we apply Itô’s formula to (y − y)2 on
[0, τ ] and take expectation:
Z τ
X
(△(Vt − Vt1 ))2 ] = 0
E[
|zs − zs1 |2 ds] + E[
0
t∈(0,τ ]
Thus z ≡ z 1 . From this it follows that V ≡ V 1 .
Thus we can define
Definition 6.2. Let y be a supersolution on [0, τ ] and let (y, z, V ) be the related unique triple in
the sense of BDSDE (6.5). Then we call (z, V ) the decomposition of y.
We now introduce the notion of doubly f - (super) martingales.
Definition 6.3.
33
(i) A doubly f - martingale on [0, T ] is a doubly f - solution on [0, T ].
(ii) A process (Yt ) is a doubly f - supermartingale in the strong (resp. weak) sense if for all stopping
time τ ≤ t (resp. all t ≤ T ), we have EP [|Yτ |2 ] < +∞ (resp. EP [|Yt |2 ] < +∞ and if the doubly f solution (ys ) on [0, τ ] (resp. [0, t]) with terminal condition Yτ (resp. Yt ) verifies yσ ≤ Yσ for every
stopping time σ ≤ τ (resp. ys ≤ Ys for every s ≤ t).
Certainly, a doubly f - supermartingale in the strong sense is also a doubly f - supermartingale in
the weak sense. Under mild conditions, a doubly f - supermartingale in the weak sense corresponds
to a doubly f - supermartingale in the strong sense.
6.4. Downcrossing inequality
In this section, we prove a downcrossing inequality for doubly f -supermatingales.
Theorem 6.1. Assume that f (0, 0) = 0. Let (Yt ) be a positive doubly f -supermartingale in the
weak sense and let 0 = t0 < t1 < ... < ti = T be a subdivision of [0, T ]. Let 0 < a < b, then there
exists C > 0 such that Dab [Y, n], the number of downcrossings of [a, b] by {Yti }, verifies
E −µ [Dab [Y, n]] ≤
Proof. Consider
yti = Yti +
Z
ti
t
(µ|ysi | + µ|zsi |)ds +
Z
ti
t
C
E µ [Y0 ∧ b]
b−a
←
−
gs (ysi , zsi )dW s −
Z
t
Since Yti ≥ 0, using comparison theorem, we have yti ≥ 0 , t ≤ ti
Z
Z ti
Z ti
←
−
gs (ysi , zsi )dW s −
(µysi + as zsi )ds +
yti = Yti +
t
where ais := µsgn(zsi )1ti−1 <s≤ti and as :=
t
Pn
i=0
ti
t
ti
zsi dBs
zsi dBs
, 0 ≤ t ≤ ti
ais .
Define y˜si = e−λ(ti −s) ysi , we obtain for all 0 ≤ t ≤ ti
Z
Z ti
Z ti
←
−
e−λ(ti −s) gs (ysi , zsi )dW s −
e−λ(ti −s) as zsi ds +
y˜ti = +
t
t
t
, 0 ≤ t ≤ ti
ti
e−λ(ti −s) zsi dBs
Let Q be the probability measure defined by
Z T
dQ
=E
e−λ(ti −s) as dBs .
dP
0
Z t
←
−
and define yˆsi := y˜si +
e−λ(ti −s) gs (ysi , zsi )dW s , we then have easily that
0
yˆti = EQ [ˆ
ytii |Gt ] 0 ≤ t ≤ ti
Since Y is a doubly f -supermartingale (and thus also a f −µ -supermartingale where fs−µ (y, z) :=
−µ(|y| + |z|)), we therefore obtain
Z ti
←
−
Q
e−λ(ti −s) gs (ysi , zsi )dW s |Gti−1 ] = yˆtii−1
E [Yti +
0
Z ti−1
←
−
e−λ(ti −s) gs (ysi , zsi )dW s
= y˜tii−1 +
0
Z ti−1
←
−
e−λ(ti −s) gs (ysi , zsi )dW s
≤ e−λ(ti −ti−1 ) Yti−1 +
0
It means that the process X :=
(Xti )ni=0
where Xti = e
λti
Yti +
34
Z
0
ti
←
−
eλs gs (ysi , zsi )dW s , is a Q-
supermartingale with respect to (Gti )ni=0 . Then we can finish the proof exactly as in [6].
6.5. Reflected backward doubly stochastic differential equations
In this section, we want to study the problem of a reflected backward doubly stochastic differential
equation (RBDSDE in short) with one càdlàg barrier. This is an extension of the work of Hamadene
and Ouknine [12] for the standard reflected BDSDEs to our case. So we need the following objects:
(i) a terminal condition ξ which is FT -measurable and in L2 (P)
(ii) f : Ω × R × Rd → R , g : Ω × R × Rd → Rl are two functions verifying:
Z
Z
T
T
• E
|f (t, 0, 0)|2 dt < +∞ , E
||g(t, 0, 0)||2 dt < +∞.
0
0
• There exist constants c > 0 and 0 < α < 1 such that for any(ω, t) ∈ Ω×[0, T ] ; (y1 , z1 ), (y2 , z2 ) ∈
R × Rd
|f (t, y1 , z1 ) − f (t, y2 , z2 )|2
≤ c |y1 − y2 |2 + ||z1 − z2 ||2
|g(t, y1 , z1 ) − g(t, y2 , z2 )|2
≤ c|y1 − y2 |2 + α||z1 − z2 ||2 .
(iii) The barrier {St , 0 ≤ t ≤ T } is a real-valued r.c.l.l. progressively measurable process satisfying
ST ≤ ξ and
E sup (St+ )2 < +∞.
0≤t≤T
Now we present the definition of the solution of RBDSDEs with one lower r.c.l.l. barrier.
Definition 6.4. We call (Y, Z, K) a solution of the backward doubly stochastic differential equation
with one r.c.l.l. reflecting lower barrier S(.), terminal condition ξ and coefficients f and g, which
satisfy (i)-(iii) if the following hold:
(iv) Y ∈ D2 (P) , Z ∈ H2 (P).
Z T
Z
f (s, Ys , Zs )ds +
(v) Yt = ξ +
t
T
←
−
g(s, Ys , Zs )dW s −
t
Z
T
Zs dBs + KT − Kt , 0 ≤ t ≤ T .
t
(vi) Yt ≥ St , 0 ≤ t ≤ T, a.s.
(vii) If K c (resp. K d ) is the continuous (resp. purely discontinuous) part of K, then
Z T
(Ys − Ss )dKsc = 0, a.s. and ∀t ≤ T, ∆Ktd = (St− − Yt )+ 1[Yt− =St− ] .
0
The state-process Y (.) is forced to remain above the barrier S(.), thanks to the cumulation
action of the reflection process K(.), which acts only when necessary to prevent Y (.) from crossing
the barrier, and in this sense, its action can be considered minimal.
Remark 6.2. The condition (vii) implies in particular that
Z
0
T
(Ys− − Ss− )dKs = 0
35
Actually
Z
Z
T
(Ys− − Ss− )dKs
=
0
T
0
Z
=
0
T
(Ys− − Ss− )dKsc +
(Ys− − Ss )dKsc +
Z
T
0
X
(Ys− − Ss− )dKsd
(Ys− − Ss− )∆Ksd
s≤T
= 0.
The last term of the second equality is null since K d jumps only when Ys− = Ss− .
The main objective of this section is to prove the:
Theorem 6.2. Under the above hypotheses, the RBDSDE (v) has a unique solution (Y, Z, K).
Before we start proving this theorem, let us establish the same result in case f and g do not
depend on Y and Z. More precisely, given f and g such that
Z T
E
|f (s)|2 ds < +∞,
0
Z
E
T
0
kg(s)k2 ds < +∞
and ξ as above, consider the reflected BDSDE
Z
Z T
Z T
←
−
g(s)dW s −
f (s)ds +
Yt = ξ +
t
t
T
Zs dBs + KT − Kt .
(6.6)
t
Proposition 6.4. There exists a unique triplet (Y, Z, K) verifies conditions of Definition 6.4 and
satisfies (6.6).
Proof. a) Existence: The method combines penalization and the Snell envelope method.
For each n ∈ N∗ , we set
fn (s, y) = f (s) + n(ys − Ss )−
and consider the BDSDE
Ytn = ξ n +
Z
T
t
fn (s, Ysn )ds +
Z
T
←
−
g(s)dW s −
t
Z
t
T
Zsn dBs .
(6.7)
It is well known (see Pardoux and Peng [22]) that BDSDE (6.7) has a unique solution (Y n , Z n ) ∈
D2 (P) × H2 (P) such that for each n ∈ N,
Z T
n 2
E sup |Yt | +
||Zsn ||2 ds < ∞.
0≤t≤T
0
From now on the proof will be divided into four steps.
Step 1 : For all n ≥ 0 and (s, y) ∈ [0, T ] × R,
fn (s, y, z) ≤ fn+1 (s, y, z),
which provide by Comparison Theorem, Ytn ≤ Ytn+1 , t ∈ [0, T ] a.s..
Step 2 : For each n ∈ N, denoting
Z t
←
−
Y¯tn := Ytn +
g(s)dW s ,
0
Z
ξ¯ := ξ +
we have
Y¯tn = ξ¯ +
Z
T
←
−
g(s)dW s
,
S¯t := St +
0
Z
t
36
←
−
g(s)dW s ,
0
T
f (s)ds + n
Z
T
t
t
(Y¯sn − S¯s )− ds −
Z
T
Zsn dBs .
t
(6.8)
The process Y¯tn satisfies
∀t ≤ T
, Y¯tn = ess supE
τ ≥t
Z
t
τ
¯ {τ =T } |Gt .
f (s)ds + (Y¯τn ∧ S¯τ )1{τ <T } + ξ1
In fact, for any n ∈ N and t ≤ T we have
Z T
Z
Y¯tn = ξ¯ +
f (s)ds + n
t
T
t
(Y¯sn − S¯s )− ds −
Z
t
T
Z¯sn dBs .
(6.9)
(6.10)
Therefore for any stopping time τ ≥ t we have
Z τ
Z τ
Y¯tn = E[Y¯τn +
f (s)ds + n
(Y¯sn − S¯s )− ds|Gt ]
t
t
Z τ
n
¯
¯
¯
f (s)ds|Gt ],
≥ E[(Sτ ∧ Yτ )1[τ <T ] + ξ1{τ =T } +
(6.11)
t
¯ {τ =T } . On the other hand, let τ ∗ be the stopping time defined as
since Y¯τn ≥ (S¯τ ∧ Y¯τn )1[τ <T ] + ξ1
t
follows:
¯n − K
¯ n > 0} ∧ T,
τt∗ = inf{s ≥ t, K
s
t
Z t
¯ tn = n
(Y¯sn − S¯s )− ds. Let us show that 1[τt∗ <T ] Y¯τnt∗ ) = (S¯τt∗ ∧ Y¯τnt∗ )1[τt∗ <T ] .
where K
0
Let ω be fixed such that τt∗ (ω) < T . Then there exists a sequence (tk )k≥0 of real numbers which
decreases to τt∗ (ω) such that Y¯tnk (ω) ≤ S¯tk (ω). As Y¯ n and S¯ are RCLL processes then taking the
limit as k → ∞ we obtain Y¯τnt∗ ≤ S¯τt∗ which implies 1[τt∗ <T ] Y¯τnt∗ ) = (S¯τt∗ ∧ Y¯τnt∗ )1[τt∗ <T ] .
Now from (6.10), we deduce that:
Y¯tn
= Y¯τnt∗ +
Z
τt∗
f (s)ds −
Z
t
t
τt∗
Z¯sn dBs
¯ {τ ∗ =T } +
= (S¯τt∗ ∧ Y¯τnt∗ )1[τt∗ <T ] + ξ1
t
Z
τt∗
f (s)ds −
t
Z
τt∗
t
Z¯sn dBs .
Taking the conditional expectation and using inequality (6.11) we obtain: ∀n ≥ 0, and t ≥ T
Z
τ
n
¯ {τ =T } |Gt .
¯
Yt = ess supE
f (s)ds + (Y¯τn ∧ S¯τ )1{τ <T } + ξ1
(6.12)
τ ≥t
t
Step 3 : There exists a RCLL (Yt )t≤T of D2 (P) such that P-a.s.
(i) Y = lim Y n in H2 (P), S ≤ Y .
n→∞
(ii) for any t ≤ T,
Yt = ess supE
τ ≥t
Z
t
τ
¯ {τ =T } |Gt −
f (s)ds + S¯τ 1{τ <T } + ξ1
Z
0
t
←
−
g(s)dW s .
(6.13)
Actually for t ≤ T let us set Y˜t = ess supE
τ ≥t
Z
t
τ
37
¯ {τ =T } |Gt .
f (s)ds + S¯τ 1{τ <T } + ξ1
The process Y˜ belongs to D2 (P) since S¯ is so, f ∈ H2 (P) and ξ¯ is square integrable. On the other
hand for any n ≥ 0 and t ≤ T we have Y¯tn ≤ Y˜t . Thus there exist a Gt -measurable process Y¯
Z t
←
−
such that P-a.s. for any t ≤ T, Y¯tn ր Y¯t ≤ Y˜t and we have Ytn ր Yt = Y¯t −
g(s)dW s , then
0
Y = lim Y n in H2 (P).
n→∞
Z t
Besides the process (Y¯tn +
f (s)ds)t≤T is a RCLL supermartingale as a snell envelope of
0
Z t
Z t
n
¯
¯
¯
¯
(
f (s)ds + (St ∧ Yt )1[t<T ] + ξ1{t=T } )t≤T and it converges increasingly to (Yt +
f (s)ds)t≤T .
0
0
It follows that this latter process is an RCLL supermartingale. Henceforth the process Y is also a
(Gt )- RCLL with E[sup|Yt |2 ] < +∞.
t≤T
The process (Yt )t≥0 is (Ft )- measurable as the limit of a (Ft )- measurable process (Ytn )t≥0 .
Next let us prove that Y ≥ S. We have
E[Y0n ) = E[ξ +
Z
T
f (s)ds] + E[
Z
0
0
T
n(Ysn − Ss )− ds].
Dividing the two hand-sides by n and taking the limit as n → ∞ to obtain E[
Z
T
0
(Ysn −Ss )− ds] = 0.
As the processes Y and S are RCLL then P-a.s. Yt ≥ St , for t < T . But YT = ξ ≥ ST , therefore
Y ≥ S.
Finally let us show that Y satisfies (6.13). But this is a direct consequence of the continuity of
the Snell envelope through sequences of increasing RCLL processes. In fact on the one hand, the
¯ {t=T } )t≤T )t≤T converges increasingly
sequence of increasing RCLL processes ((S¯t ∧ Y¯tn )1[t<T ] + ξ1
¯ {t=T } )t≤T )[t ≤ T since Y¯t ≥ S¯t .
to the RCLL (S¯t 1[t<T ] + ξ1
Z t
Z
τ
f (s)ds + Y¯tn )t≤T converges to ess supE
Therefore, the sequence (
f (s)ds + S¯τ 1{τ <T } +
τ ≥t
0
0
Z t
¯ {τ =T } |Gt which then is equal to (
f (s)ds + Y¯t )t≤T and which implies that
ξ1
0
Yt
Z
t
←
−
g(s)dW s
0
Z t
Z
τ
←
−
¯ {τ =T } |Gt −
= ess supE
g(s)dW s .
f (s)ds + S¯τ 1{τ <T } + ξ1
= Y¯t −
τ ≥t
0
t
Step 4 : There exist two processes Z ∈ H2 (P), K ∈ I2 (P) such that (Y, Z, K) is the solution of the
RBDSDE (6.6).
Z t
f (s)ds + Y¯tn )t≤T is a Snell envelope. Then, there exist
We know from (6.13) that the process (
0
a process K ∈ I2 (P) and a (Gt )-martingale such that
Z
0
t
f (s)ds + Yt +
Z
t
←
−
g(s)dW s = Mt − Kt
, 0 ≤ t ≤ T.
0
Additionally K = K c + K d where K c is continuous non-decreasing and K d non-decreasing purely
discontinuous predictable such that for any t ≤ T, ∆t K d = (St− − Yt )1{Yt− =St− } .
38
Now the martingale M belongs to S2 (P) then the Itô’s martingale representation theorem implies
Z T
the existence of (Gt ) -measurable process Z such that E[
|Zs |2 ds] < ∞ and
0
Mt = M0 +
Z
t
Zs dBs ,
0 ≤ t ≤ T,
P − a.s.
0
Hence
Yt = Y0 −
Let us now prove that
Z
0
Z
t
f (s)ds −
t
←
−
g(s)dW s +
Z
t
Zs dBs − Kt ,
0 ≤ t ≤ T.
0
0
0
T
Z
(Ys − Ss )dKsc = 0.
It remains
show that Zt and Kt are in fact Ft -adapted. For Kt , it is obvious since it is the limit
Z to
t
n(Ysn − Ss )− ds which is Ft - measurable for each t ≤ T .
of Ktn =
Now
0
Z
t
T
Zs dBs = ξ +
Z
t
T
f (s, Ys , Zs )ds +
Z
T
←
−
g(s, Ys , Zs )dW s − Yt + KT − Kt ,
t
W
and the right side is FTB ∨Ft,T
-measurable. Hence from the Itô’s martingale representation theorem
W
W
B
-measurable for any t < s, so
Zs , t < s < T is Fs ∨ Ft,T adapted. Consequently Zs is FsB ∨ Fs,T
B
W
it is Fs ∨ Fs,T -measurable.
b) Uniqueness: under Lipschitz continuous condition, the proof of uniqueness is a standard in
BSDE theory (see e.g. proof of Proposition 2.1. in [1]).
The existence of solution of RBDSDE (v) in Theorem 6.2 is obtained via a standard fixed Banach
point theorem for reflected BSDEs (see for instance El Karoui, Hamadene and Matoussi [9]).
References
[1] Aman, A., and Mrhardy, N. Obstacle problem for spde with nonlinear neumann
boundary condition via reflected generalized backward doubly spdes.
[2] Bally, V., and Matoussi, A. Weak solutions for SPDEs and backward doubly
stochastic differential equations. J. Theoret. Probab. 14, 1 (2001), 125–164.
[3] Buckdahn, R., and Ma, J. Stochastic viscosity solutions for nonlinear stochastic
partial differential equations. I. Stochastic Process. Appl. 93, 2 (2001), 181–204.
[4] Buckdahn, R., and Ma, J. Stochastic viscosity solutions for nonlinear stochastic
partial differential equations. II. Stochastic Process. Appl. 93, 2 (2001), 205–228.
[5] Caffarelli, L. A., and Cabré, X. Fully nonlinear elliptic equations, vol. 43 of
American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications. American Mathematical
Society, Providence, RI, 1995.
[6] Chen, Z., and Peng, S. A general downcrossing inequality for g-martingales. Statist.
Probab. Lett. 46, 2 (2000), 169–175.
[7] Crandall, M. G., Ishii, H., and Lions, P.-L. User’s guide to viscosity solutions
of second order partial differential equations. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 27, 1
(1992), 1–67.
39
[8] Dellacherie, C., and Meyer, P. Probabilités et Potentiel, Chapitres XII à XVI,
Théorie du potentiel. Hermann, Paris, 1980.
[9] El Karoui, N., Hamadène, S., and Matoussi, A. Backward stochastic differential
equations and applications. Chapter 8 in the book Indifference Pricing: Theory and
Applications, Springer-Verlag (2008), 267–320.
[10] El Karoui, N., Peng, S., and Quenez, M. Backward stochastic differential equations in finance. Mathematical Finance 7, 1 (1997), 1–71.
[11] Fremlin, D. H. Consequences of Martin’s axiom, vol. 84 of Cambridge Tracts in
Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984.
[12] Hamadene, S., and Ouknine, Y. Reflected backward sdes with general jumps.
arXiv:0812.3965 to appear in Prob. theory and Applications.
[13] Karandikar, R. On pathwise stochastic integration. Stochastic Processes and Their
Applications, 57:11-18 (1995).
[14] Kunita, H. Stochastic flows and stochastic differential equations, vol. 24 of Cambridge
Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990.
[15] Lieberman, G. M. Second order parabolic differential equations. World Scientific
Publishing Co., Inc., River Edge, NJ, 1996.
[16] Lin, Y. A new result for second order bsdes with quadratic growth and its applications. arXiv:1301.0457 .
[17] Lions, P.-L., and Souganidis, P. E. Fully nonlinear viscosity stochastic partial
differential equations: non-smooth equations and applications. C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris
327, 1 (1998), 735–741.
[18] Lions, P.-L., and Souganidis, P. E. Équations aux dérivées partielles stochastiques
nonlinéaires et solutions de viscosité. Exp. No. I, 15.
[19] Lions, P.-L., and Souganidis, P. E. Viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear stochastic
partial differential equations. S¯
urikaisekikenky¯
usho K¯
oky¯
uroku, 1287 (2002), 58–65.
[20] Matoussi, A., and Scheutzow, M. Semilinear stochastic pde’s with nonlinear
noise and backward doubly sde’s. Journal of Theoretical Probability 15 (2002), 1–39.
[21] Nutz, M. Pathwise construction of stochastic integrals. Electron. Commun. Probab.
17 (2012), no. 24, 7.
[22] Pardoux, E., and Peng, S. Backward doubly sde’s and systems of quasilinear
spdes. Probab. Theory and Related Field 98 (1994), 209–227.
[23] Pardoux, É., and Peng, S. G. Adapted solution of a backward stochastic differential equation. Systems Control Lett. 14, 1 (1990), 55–61.
[24] Pardoux, É., and Protter, P. A two-sided stochastic integral and its calculus.
Probab. Theory Related Fields 76, 1 (1987), 15–49.
[25] Peng, S. Backward SDE and related g-expectation. In Backward stochastic differential equations (Paris, 1995–1996), vol. 364 of Pitman Res. Notes Math. Ser. Longman,
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
40
Harlow, 1997, pp. 141–159.
Peng, S. Monotonic limit theorem of BSDE and nonlinear decomposition theorem
of Doob-Meyer’s type. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields 113, 4 (1999), 473–499.
Possamaï, D. Second order backward stochastic differential equations under a monotonicity condition. Stochastic Process. Appl. 123, 5 (2013), 1521–1545.
Possamai, D., Xiaolu, T., and Zhou, C. Second order bsdes with measurable
parameters. forthcoming paper .
Possamaï, D., and Zhou, C. Second order backward stochastic differential equations with quadratic growth. Stochastic Process. Appl. 123, 10 (2013), 3770–3799.
Possamaï, D., and Zhou, C. Second order backward stochastic differential equations with quadratic growth. Stochastic Process. Appl. 123, 10 (2013), 3770–3799.
Soner, H., Touzi, N., and Zhang, J. Wellposedness of second order backward
sdes. Prob.Theory and Relat.Fields (2010).
Soner, H., Touzi, N., and Zhang, J. Dual formulation of second order target
problems. Annals of Applied Probability 23(1), 308-347 (2013).
Soner, H. M., Touzi, N., and Zhang, J. Quasi-sure stochastic analysis through
aggregation. Electron. J. Probab. 16, 67 (2011), 1844–1879.
Stricker, C., and Yor, M. Calcul stochastique dépendant d’un paramètre. Z.
Wahrsch. Verw. Gebiete 45, 2 (1978), 109–133.
Strook, D.W., V. S. Multidimensional diffusion processes. Spring-Verlag, Berlin,
Heidelberg (1979).

4.1 - arXiv.org

Transcription

Similar documents

Document 6527798

important notice - Mille

Slideshow/handouts from presentation.

Johnny O`Hara - Plummer Home

How to access ESS Catholic Education Office Diocese of Wollongong

spirit - Spoilercentrum

LOCAL MAXIMA OF THE SAMPLE WIENER PROCESS

2008 SUP - Starboard