Q
stringlengths
4
3.96k
A
stringlengths
1
3k
Result
stringclasses
4 values
Proposition 3.2.9. For any \( {\mathcal{F}}_{T} \) -measurable \( F \in {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{T}}\right\rbrack = 0,\;0 \leq T \leq t. \]
Proof. From from Relation (3.2.3) we have \( F = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{T}}\right\rbrack \) if and only if\n\n\[ {\int }_{T}^{\infty }\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack d{M}_{t} = 0 \]\n\nwhich implies \( \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\...
Yes
Proposition 3.2.11. Let \( T > 0 \) . Under the stability Assumption 3.2.10, for any \( {\mathcal{F}}_{T} \) -measurable random variable \( F \in {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) we have \( F \in {\mathbb{D}}_{\lbrack T,\infty )} \) and\n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}F = 0,\;t \geq T.\n\]
Proof. Since \( F \) is \( {\mathcal{F}}_{T} \) -measurable, \( {D}_{t}F \) is \( {\mathcal{F}}_{T} \) -measurable, \( t \geq T \), by the stability Assumption 3.2.10, and from Proposition 3.2.9 we have\n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}F = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{T}}\right\rbrack = 0,\;0 \leq T \leq t.\n\]
Yes
Proposition 3.3.1. Under the duality Assumption 3.1.1 and the Clark formula Assumption 3.2.1, the operator \( \delta \) applied to any square-integrable adapted process \( {\left( {u}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \in {L}_{ad}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \) coincides with the stochasti...
Proof. Let \( u \in \mathcal{P} \) be a simple \( {\mathcal{F}}_{t} \) -predictable process. From the duality Assumption 3.1.1 and the fact (2.5.7) that\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{u}_{t}d{M}_{t}}\right\rbrack = 0 \]\n\nwe have:\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{u}_{t}d{M}_{t}...
Yes
Proposition 3.3.2. Assume that\n\ni) \( {\left( {M}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) has the predictable representation property, and\n\nii) the operator \( \delta \) coincides with the stochastic integral with respect to \( {\left( {M}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) on the space \( {L}_{ad}^{2}\l...
Proof. For all \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) and square-integrable adapted process \( u \) we have:\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\left( {F - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack }\right) \delta \left( u\right) }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{F\delta }\left( u\right) }\right\rbrack \]\n\n\[ =...
Yes
Proposition 3.4.1. For any \( F, G \in {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) we have\n\n\[ \operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}G \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack {dt}}\rig...
Proof. We have\n\n\[ \operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\left( {F - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack }\right) \left( {G - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack G\right\rbrack }\right) }\right\rbrack \]\n\n\[ = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathc...
Yes
Theorem 3.4.4. Let \( n \in \mathbb{N} \) and \( F, G \in \mathop{\bigcap }\limits_{{k = 1}}^{{n + 1}}{\mathbb{D}}_{2, k}\left( {\Delta }_{k}\right) \) . We have\n\n\[ \operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = 1}}^{n}{\left( -1\right) }^{k + 1}\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{{\Delta }_{k}}\l...
Proof. By polarization we may take \( F = G \) . For \( n = 0 \) ,((3.4.2)) is a consequence of the Clark formula. Let \( n \geq 1 \) . Applying Lemma 3.2.4 to \( {D}_{{t}_{n}}\cdots {D}_{{t}_{1}}F \) with \( t = {t}_{n} \) and \( {ds} = d{t}_{n + 1} \), and integrating on \( \left( {{t}_{1},\ldots ,{t}_{n}}\right) \in...
Yes
Proposition 3.5.1. Let \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) be lower bounded with \( F > \eta \) a.s. for some \( \eta > 0 \) . We have\n\n\[ \operatorname{Ent}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack \leq \frac{1}{2}\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\frac{1}{F}{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left( {2 - {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\{ {\phi }_{t} = 0\r...
Proof. Let us assume that \( F \) is bounded and \( {\mathcal{F}}_{T} \) -measurable, and let\n\n\[ {X}_{t} = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack = {X}_{0} + {\int }_{0}^{t}{u}_{s}d{M}_{s},\;t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }, \]\n\nwith \( {u}_{s} = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{s}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_...
Yes
Proposition 3.7.1. For any \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{b}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}^{n}\right) \), the process \( {\left( {P}_{t, T}f\left( {X}_{t}\right) \right) }_{t \in \left\lbrack {0, T}\right\rbrack } \) is an \( {\mathcal{F}}_{t} \) -martingale.
Proof. By the tower property of conditional expectations, cf. Section 9.3, we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{P}_{t, T}f\left( {X}_{t}\right) \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{s}}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {f\left( {X}_{T}\right) \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{s}}\rig...
Yes
Lemma 3.7.2. Let \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{b}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}^{n}\right) \) . We have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}f\left( {X}_{T}\right) \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack = \left( {{L}_{t}\left( {{P}_{t, T}f}\right) }\right) \left( {X}_{t}\right) ,\;t \in \left\lbrack {0, T}\right\rbrack . \]\n\n(3.7.2...
Proof. We apply the change of variable formula (3.7.1) to \( t \mapsto {P}_{t, T}f\left( {X}_{t}\right) = \) \( \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {f\left( {X}_{T}\right) \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack \), since \( {P}_{t, T}f \) is \( {\mathcal{C}}^{2} \) . Using the fact that the finite variation term\n\nvanishes since \( ...
Yes
Proposition 3.7.3. We have for \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{b}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) \)\n\n\[ \n{P}_{t, T}f\left( x\right) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}\mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = 0}}^{\infty }\frac{{\mathrm{e}}^{-{\Gamma }_{t}\left( T\right) }}{k!}{\int }_{-\infty }^{\infty }{\mathrm{e}}^{-{t}_{0}^{2}/2}{\int }_{{\left\lbrack...
Proof. We have \( {P}_{t, T}f\left( x\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {f\left( {S}_{T}\right) \mid {S}_{t} = x}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {f\left( {S}_{t, T}^{x}\right) }\right\rbrack \), and\n\n\[ \n{P}_{t, T}f\left( x\right) = \exp \left( {-{\Gamma }_{t}\left( T\right) }\right) \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k =...
Yes
Proposition 4.1.3. The operators \( D \) and \( \delta \) satisfy the duality relation\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{F\delta }\left( u\right) }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle {DF}, u{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }}\right\rbrack ,\;F \in \mathcal{S}, u \in \mathcal{U}. \]
Proof. As in Proposition 1.8.2, we consider \( F = {I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \) and \( {u}_{t} = \) \( {I}_{m}\left( {{g}_{m + 1}\left( {*, t}\right) }\right), t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + },{f}_{n} \in {L}^{2}{\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{\circ n},{g}_{m + 1} \in {L}^{2}{\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{\circ m...
Yes
For any \( u \in \widetilde{\mathcal{U}} \) we have\n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}\delta \left( u\right) = {u}_{t} + \delta \left( {{D}_{t}u}\right) ,\;t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }.\n\]
Proof. Letting \( {u}_{t} = f\left( t\right) {I}_{n}\left( {g}_{n}\right), t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }, f \in {L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) ,{g}_{n} \in {L}^{2}{\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{\circ n} \), from Proposition 4.1.3 we have, by (4.1.3),\n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}\delta \left( u\right) = {D}_{t}\delta \left...
Yes
Proposition 4.2.1. The operators \( D \) and \( \delta \) are closable in the sense of Section 9.8 on \( {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) and \( {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \) respectively.
It also follows from the density of \( \mathcal{S} \) in \( {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) that \( \mathcal{U} \) is dense in \( {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \).
No
Proposition 4.2.2. The domain \( \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) = \mathbb{D}\left( {\lbrack 0,\infty }\right) ) \) of \( D \) consists in the space of square-integrable random variables with chaos expansion\n\n\[ F = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n = 0}}^{\infty }{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \]\n\n(4.2.1)\n\nsuch that the...
Given \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) with the expansion (4.2.1) we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\parallel {DF}{\parallel }_{{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{2}}\right\rbrack = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = 1}}^{\infty }{kk}!{\begin{Vmatrix}{f}_{k}\end{Vmatrix}}_{{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{...
Yes
Proposition 4.2.3. Every \( F \in \mathcal{S} \) can be represented as\n\n\[ F = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack + {\int }_{0}^{\infty }\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack d{M}_{t} \]
Proof. By linearity, in order to prove the statement for \( F \in \mathcal{S} \), it suffices to consider \( F = {I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \). By the definitions of \( {I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \) and \( {D}_{t}{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \) and using Lemma 2.7.2 we have, since \( \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{I}_{n}...
Yes
Proposition 4.2.5. For all \( F \in { \cap }_{n \geq 1}\operatorname{Dom}\left( {D}^{n}\right) \) we have\n\n\[ F = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack + \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n = 1}}^{\infty }{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \]\n\nwhere\n\[ {f}_{n}\left( {{t}_{1},\ldots ,{t}_{n}}\right) = \frac{1}{n!}\mathbb{E}\left\l...
Proof. It suffices to note that\n\n\[ {D}_{{t}_{1}}\cdots {D}_{{t}_{n}}F = n!{f}_{n}\left( {{t}_{1},\ldots ,{t}_{n}}\right) + \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = n + 1}}^{\infty }\frac{k!}{\left( {k - n}\right) !}{I}_{k - n}\left( {{f}_{k}\left( {*,{t}_{1},\ldots ,{t}_{n}}\right) }\right) ,\]\n\nand to use the fact that\n\n\[ ...
Yes
Proposition 4.3.1. Let \( u \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( \delta \right) \) such that \( {u}_{t} \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \), dt-a.e., and \( {\left( {D}_{s}{u}_{t}\right) }_{s, t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \in {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }^{2}}\right) \) . We have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrac...
Proof. By polarization, orthogonality and density it suffices to choose \( u = \) \( g{I}_{n}\left( {f}^{\otimes n}\right), f, g \in {L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) \), and to note that by the Definition 4.1.2 of \( \delta \) we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\left| \delta \left( u\right) \right| }^{2}\righ...
Yes
Proposition 4.3.4. Let \( {\left( {u}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \in {L}_{ad}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \) be a square-integrable adapted process. We have\n\n\[ \delta \left( u\right) = {\int }_{0}^{\infty }{u}_{t}d{M}_{t} \]
Proof. This result can also be recovered from the definition (4.1.2) of \( \delta \) via multiple stochastic integrals. Since the adaptedness of \( {\left( {u}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} = \) \( {\left( {I}_{n - 1}\left( {f}_{n}\left( *, t\right) \right) \right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) implies\n\n\...
Yes
Lemma 4.3.5. Let \( u, v \in {L}_{ad}^{4}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \) . For all \( t > 0 \) we have\n\n\[{\int }_{0}^{t}{u}_{s}{\int }_{s}^{t}{v}_{r}d{M}_{r}\delta {M}_{s} = {\int }_{0}^{t}{\int }_{0}^{r}{u}_{s}{v}_{r}\delta {M}_{s}d{M}_{r}\]\n\nwhere the indefinite Skorohod integral is defined i...
Proof. First, note that\n\n\[{\int }_{0}^{r}{u}_{s}{v}_{r}\delta {M}_{s} = \delta \left( {u \cdot {\mathbf{1}}_{\{ \cdot < r\} }{v}_{r}}\right)\]\n\nis \( {\mathcal{F}}_{r} \) -measurable, \( r \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \), hence the stochastic integral in the right hand side of (4.3.5) exists in the Itô sense by Proposit...
Yes
Proposition 4.4.1. Let \( F, G \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) . We have the covariance identity\n\n\[ \operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\mathrm{e}}^{-s}{D}_{u}F{P}_{s}{D}_{u}{Gduds}}\right\rbrack . \]
Proof. It suffices to prove this identity for \( F = {I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \) and \( G = {I}_{n}\left( {g}_{n}\right) \) as\n\n\[ \operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) {I}_{n}\left( {g}_{n}\right) }\right\rbrack \]\n\n\[ = n!{\left\langle {f}_{n},{g}_{n}\ri...
Yes
Proposition 4.5.2. Assume that \( \phi \in {L}^{\infty }\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) \) is a bounded, deterministic function. We have\n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}\left( {FG}\right) = F{D}_{t}G + G{D}_{t}F + {\phi }_{t}{D}_{t}F{D}_{t}G, \]\n\n(4.5.4)\n\n\[ \nt \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }, F, G \in \mathcal{S}\text{.} \]\n
Proof. We first notice that for \( F = {I}_{1}\left( u\right) \) and \( G = {I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \), this formula is a consequence of the multiplication formula Proposition 4.5.1 since\n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}\left( {{I}_{1}\left( u\right) {I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) }\right) \]\n\n\[ \n= {D}_{t}\left( {{I}_{n + 1}\lef...
Yes
Corollary 4.5.3. For all \( F, G \in \mathcal{S} \) we have\n\n\[ \n{D}_{{t}_{1}}\cdots {D}_{{t}_{r}}\left( {FG}\right) = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{p = 0}}^{r}\mathop{\sum }\limits_{{q = r - p}}^{r}\n\]
\[ \n\mathop{\sum }\limits_{{\left\{ {{k}_{1} < \cdots < {k}_{p}}\right\} \cup \left\{ {{l}_{1} < \cdots < {l}_{q}}\right\} = \left\{ {1,\ldots, r}\right\} }}{D}_{{t}_{{k}_{1}}}\cdots {D}_{{t}_{{k}_{p}}}F{D}_{{t}_{{l}_{1}}}\cdots {D}_{{t}_{{l}_{q}}}G\mathop{\prod }\limits_{{i \in \left\{ {{k}_{1},\ldots ,{k}_{p}}\right...
Yes
Proposition 4.5.4. Let \( T \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) and assume that \( \phi \in {L}^{\infty }\left( \left\lbrack {0, T}\right\rbrack \right) \) is a locally bounded deterministic function. Then for all \( u \in \mathcal{U} \) and \( F \in \mathcal{S} \) we have\n\n\[ \delta \left( u\right) F = \delta \left( {uF}\righ...
Proof. The proof of this statement follows by duality from Proposition 4.5.2. Letting \( u = {vG} \) we have for \( F,{G}_{1},{G}_{2} \in \mathcal{S} \) :\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F{G}_{1}\delta \left( u\right) }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{G}_{2}{\left\langle v, D\left( F{G}_{1}\right) \right\rangle }...
Yes
Proposition 4.5.5. For \( F, G \in \mathcal{S} \) we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}\left( {FG}\right) \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F{D}_{t}G \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack + \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {G{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack + {\phi }_{t}\mathbb{E}...
Proof. We write (4.5.6) for \( u \in \mathcal{U} \) adapted and apply the duality between \( D \) and \( \delta \) :\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle u, D\left( {FG}\right) \rangle }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\delta \left( u\right) {FG}}\right\rbrack \]\n\n\[ = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {G(\delta \left( ...
Yes
Lemma 4.6.2. The transformation \( {T}_{t}^{\phi } \) is multiplicative, i.e.\n\n\[ \n{T}_{t}^{\phi }\left( {FG}\right) = \left( {{T}_{t}^{\phi }F}\right) \left( {{T}_{t}^{\phi }G}\right) ,\;F, G \in \mathcal{E}.\n\]
Proof. From Lemma 2.13.4 we have\n\n\[ \n{T}_{t}^{\phi }\left( {\xi \left( u\right) \xi \left( v\right) }\right) = \exp \left( {\langle u, v{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }}\right) {T}_{t}^{\phi }\xi \left( {u + v + {\phi uv}}\right)\n\]\n\n\[ \n= \exp \left( {\langle u, v{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( ...
Yes
Proposition 4.6.3. For all \( u \in {L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) ,{T}_{t}^{\phi }{\xi }_{T}\left( u\right) \) coincides \( {dt} \times d\mathbb{P} \) -a.e. with the limit as \( T \) goes to infinity of the solution \( {Z}_{T}^{t} \) to the equation\n\n\[ \n{Z}_{s}^{t} = 1 + {\int }_{0}^{s}{Z}_{{\tau }^{ - }}...
Proof. Clearly by Proposition 2.13.1 we have \( {Z}_{s}^{t} = {\xi }_{s}\left( u\right), s < t \) . Next, at time \( t \) we have\n\n\[ \n{Z}_{t}^{t} = \left( {1 + {\phi }_{t}{u}_{t}}\right) {Z}_{{t}^{ - }}^{t}\n\]\n\n\[ \n= \left( {1 + {\phi }_{t}{u}_{t}}\right) {\xi }_{{t}^{ - }}\left( u\right)\n\]\n\n\[ \n= \left( {...
Yes
Proposition 4.6.4. We have\n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}F = {D}_{t}^{B}F + \frac{{j}_{t}}{{\phi }_{t}}\left( {{T}_{t}^{\phi }F - F}\right) ,\;t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + },\;F \in \mathcal{E}.\n\]\n\n(4.6.4)
Proof. When \( {\phi }_{t} = 0 \) we have \( {D}_{t}^{B}F = {i}_{t}{u}_{t}\xi \left( u\right) = {i}_{t}{D}_{t}F \), hence\n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}\xi \left( u\right) = {i}_{t}{D}_{t}\xi \left( u\right) + {j}_{t}{D}_{t}\xi \left( u\right) \n\]\n\n\[ \n= {i}_{t}{u}_{t}\xi \left( u\right) + {j}_{t}{u}_{t}\xi \left( u\right) \n\]\n...
Yes
Lemma 4.7.1. The continuity Assumption 4.4.2 is satisfied if \( {\left( {\phi }_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) is a deterministic function.
Proof. Let \( {\left( {M}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) be defined as in (2.10.4) on the product space \( \Omega = {\Omega }_{1} \times \) \( {\Omega }_{2} \) of independent Brownian motion \( {\left( {B}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) and Poisson process \( {\left( {N}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\ma...
Yes
Proposition 4.7.3. Let \( K \geq 0 \) and \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) be such that \( {\phi }_{t}{D}_{t}F \leq K \) , \( {dtd}\mathbb{P} \) -a.e. for some \( K \geq 0 \) and \( \parallel {DF}{\parallel }_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }\right) } < \infty \) . The...
Proof. We first assume that \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) is a bounded random variable. Let us assume that \( \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack = 0 \) . From Proposition 4.5.2 we have as in the proof of Proposition 1.11.1:\n\n\[ 0 \leq \frac{{\mathrm{e}}^{-{sF}}{D}_{u}{\mathrm{e}}^{sF}}{{D}_{u}F} \]...
Yes
Corollary 4.7.4. Assume that \( {\phi }_{t} = \phi \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }, t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \), is constant. Let \( F \in \) \( \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) be such that \( {DF} \leq K \) for some \( K \geq 0 \) and \( \parallel {DF}{\parallel }_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{...
\[ \mathbb{P}\left( {F - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack \geq x}\right) \leq \exp \left( {-\frac{\parallel {DF}{\parallel }_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }\right) }^{2}}{{\phi }^{2}{K}^{2}}g\left( \frac{x\phi K}{\parallel {DF}{\parallel }_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{...
Yes
Proposition 4.8.3. The operators\n\n\[ \n{\\nabla }^{ \\ominus } : \\mathcal{S} \\rightarrow {L}^{2}\\left( {\\Omega \\times {\\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\\right) \n\]\n\nand\n\n\[ \n{\\nabla }^{ \\oplus } : \\mathcal{U} \\rightarrow {L}^{2}\\left( \\Omega \\right) \n\]\n\nsatisfy the duality relation\n\n\[ \n\\mathbb{E}\\left\...
Proof. By polarization, we need to prove the following. Letting \( F = {I}_{n}\\left( {f}^{\\otimes n}\\right) \) , \( u = h{I}_{n}\\left( {g}^{\\otimes n}\\right) \) and \( f, g, h \\in {\\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{1}\\left( {\\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\\right) \), we have\n\n\( \\mathbb{E}\\left\\lbrack {\\left\\langle {\\nabla }^{ \\...
Yes
Proposition 5.1.2. The following statements hold on the Hermite polynomials:\n\ni) Generating function:\n\n\[ \n{\psi }_{\lambda }\left( {x,\sigma }\right) = {\mathrm{e}}^{{\lambda x} - \frac{1}{2}{\lambda }^{2}{\sigma }^{2}},\;x,\lambda \in \mathbb{R}. \n\]\n\nii) Derivation rule:\n\n\[ \n\frac{\partial {H}_{n}}{\part...
Proof. The recurrence relation (5.1.1) shows that the generating function \( {\psi }_{\lambda } \) satisfies the differential equation\n\n\[ \n\left\{ \begin{array}{l} \frac{\partial {\psi }_{\lambda }}{\partial \lambda }\left( {x,\sigma }\right) = \left( {x - \lambda {\sigma }^{2}}\right) {\psi }_{\lambda }\left( {x,\...
Yes
Proposition 5.1.3. For any orthogonal family \( \\left\\{ {{u}_{1},\\ldots ,{u}_{d}}\\right\\} \) in \( {L}^{2}\\left( {\\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\\right) \) we have \[ {I}_{n}\\left( {{u}_{1}^{\\otimes {n}_{1}} \\circ \\cdots \\circ {u}_{d}^{\\otimes {n}_{d}}}\\right) = \\mathop{\\prod }\\limits_{{k = 1}}^{d}{H}_{{n}_{k}}\\le...
Proof. We have \[ {H}_{0}\\left( {{I}_{1}\\left( u\\right) ;\\parallel u{\\parallel }_{2}^{2}}\\right) = {I}_{0}\\left( {u}^{\\otimes 0}\\right) = 1\\;\\text{ and }\\;{H}_{1}\\left( {{I}_{1}\\left( u\\right) ;\\parallel u{\\parallel }_{2}^{2}}\\right) = {I}_{1}\\left( u\\right) , \] hence the proof follows by induction...
Yes
Proposition 5.1.4. We have\n\n\[ \xi \left( u\right) = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = 0}}^{\infty }\frac{1}{n!}{I}_{n}\left( {u}^{\otimes n}\right) = \exp \left( {{I}_{1}\left( u\right) - \frac{1}{2}\parallel u{\parallel }_{{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{2}}\right) . \]
Proof. Relation (5.1.7) follows from Proposition 5.1.2-i) and Proposition 5.1.3 which reads \( {I}_{n}\left( {u}^{\otimes n}\right) = {H}_{n}\left( {{I}_{1}\left( u\right) ;\parallel u{\parallel }_{{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{2}}\right), n \geq 1 \) .
No
Proposition 5.1.5. The Brownian motion \( {\left( {B}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) has the chaos representation property.
Proof. Theorem 4.1, p. 134 of [50], shows by a Fourier transform argument that the linear space spanned by the exponential vectors\n\n\[ \left\{ {\exp \left( {{I}_{1}\left( u\right) - \frac{1}{2}\parallel u{\parallel }_{{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{2}}\right) \; : \;u \in {L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\...
Yes
Lemma 5.1.6. Assume that \( F \) has the form \( F = g\left( {{I}_{1}\left( {e}_{1}\right) ,\ldots ,{I}_{1}\left( {e}_{k}\right) }\right) \) for some \( g \in {L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}^{k},{\left( 2\pi \right) }^{-k/2}{\mathrm{e}}^{-{\left| x\right| }^{2}/2}{dx}}\right) \), and admits the chaos expansion \( F = \math...
Proof. The polynomial \( {P}_{n} \) is given by (5.1.8) above, which is a finite sum.
No
Lemma 5.3.1. Let \( F \) of the form\n\n\[ F = f\left( {{I}_{1}\left( {u}_{1}\right) ,\ldots ,{I}_{1}\left( {u}_{n}\right) }\right) \]\n\nwhere \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{b}\left( {\mathbb{R}}^{n}\right) \) and \( {u}_{1},\ldots ,{u}_{n} \in {L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) \) are mutually orthogonal. For all \( t ...
Proof. Since, by Proposition 5.1.5, the exponential vectors are total in \( {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) and \( {P}_{t} \) is continuous on \( {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \), it suffices to consider\n\n\[ {f}_{u}\left( x\right) = \exp \left( {x - \frac{1}{2}\parallel u{\parallel }_{2}^{2}}\right) \]\n\nand to note ...
Yes
Lemma 5.3.2. We have for \( u \in {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \) : \[ {\begin{Vmatrix}{P}_{t}u\end{Vmatrix}}_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }\right) } \leq \parallel u{\parallel }_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }\r...
Proof. Due to Lemma 5.3.1 we have \[ {\begin{Vmatrix}{P}_{s}u\left( \omega \right) \end{Vmatrix}}_{{L}^{2}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{2} = {\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\left| {P}_{s}{u}_{t}\left( \omega \right) \right| }^{2}{dt} \] \[ \leq {\int }_{0}^{\infty }{P}_{s}{\left| {u}_{t}\left( \omega \right) \right| }^{2}{...
Yes
Theorem 5.4.3. For any non-decreasing functionals \( F, G \in {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) we have\n\n\[ \operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) \geq 0 \]
The proof of this result is a direct consequence of Lemma 3.4.2 and the next lemma.
No
Proposition 5.4.5. For any non-decreasing functional \( F \in {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack \geq 0,\;{dt} \times d\mathbb{P} - \text{ a.e. } \]
Proof. Assume that \( F \in {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) is non-decreasing. Then \( {P}_{1/n}F, n \geq 1 \), is non-decreasing from (5.3.2), and belongs to \( \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) from Relation (5.3.1). From Lemma 5.4.4 we have\n\n\[ {D}_{t}{P}_{1/n}F \geq 0,\;{dt} \times d\mathbb{P} - \text{ a.e. },...
Yes
Corollary 5.5.2. Let \( n \geq 1 \) and \( u \in {\mathbb{D}}_{n + 1,2}\left( H\right) \) such that \( \langle u, u{\rangle }_{H} \) is deterministic and\n\n\[ \operatorname{trace}{\left( Du\right) }^{k + 1} + \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{i = 2}}^{k}\frac{1}{i}{\left\langle {\left( Du\right) }^{k - i}u, D\operatorname{trace...
Proof. We have\n\n\[ {D}_{t}\langle u, u\rangle = {D}_{t}{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{u}_{s},{u}_{s}}\right\rangle {ds} \]\n\n\[ = {\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{u}_{s},{D}_{t}{u}_{s}}\right\rangle {ds} + {\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{D}_{t}{u}_{s},{u}_{s}}\right\rangle {ds} \]\n\n\[ = 2{\int }_{0}^{\...
Yes
Lemma 5.5.3. Let \( n \geq 1 \) and \( u \in {\mathbb{D}}_{n + 1,2}\left( H\right) \) . Then for all \( 1 \leq k \leq n \) we have\n\n\[ \n\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\left( \delta \left( u\right) \right) }^{n - k}\left\langle {{\left( Du\right) }^{k - 1}u,{D\delta }\left( u\right) }\right\rangle }\right\rbrack - \left( {...
Proof. We have \( {\left( Du\right) }^{k - 1}u \in {\mathbb{D}}_{\left( {n + 1}\right) /k,1}\left( H\right) ,\delta \left( u\right) \in {\mathbb{D}}_{\left( {n + 1}\right) /\left( {n - k + 1}\right) ,1}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) \) , and using Relation (5.5.2) we obtain\n\n\[ \n\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\left( \delta \lef...
Yes
Lemma 5.6.2. Let \( F, G \in \mathcal{S} \) be written as\n\n\[ F = f\left( {{I}_{1}\left( {u}_{1}\right) ,\ldots ,{I}_{1}\left( {u}_{n}\right) }\right) ,\;{u}_{1},\ldots ,{u}_{n} \in \mathcal{S}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) ,\;f \in {\mathcal{C}}^{1}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}^{n};\mathbb{R}}\right) ,\]...
Proof. Let \( {e}_{1},\ldots ,{e}_{k} \in \mathcal{S}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) \) be orthonormal vectors that generate \( {u}_{1},\ldots ,{u}_{n},{v}_{1},\ldots ,{v}_{m} \) . Assume that \( {u}_{i} \) and \( {v}_{i} \) are written as\n\n\[ {u}_{i} = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{j = 1}}^{k}{\alpha }...
Yes
Proposition 5.6.4. For \( F \in \mathcal{S} \), we have in \( {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) :\n\n\[ \frac{d}{d\varepsilon }\Lambda \left( {{U}_{\varepsilon },{\varepsilon h}}\right) {F}_{\mid \varepsilon = 0} = {\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{h}_{0}\left( t\right) ,{D}_{t}F}\right\rangle {dt} + \delta \left( {\ma...
Proof. Let \( A : \mathcal{S} \rightarrow \mathcal{S} \) be defined by\n\n\[ {AF} = \delta \left( {\mathcal{L}{DF}}\right) + \operatorname{trace}\left( {{\operatorname{Id}}_{H} \otimes \mathcal{L}}\right) {DDF} + {\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{h}_{0}\left( t\right) ,{D}_{t}F}\right\rangle {dt},\;F \in \mathcal{S}....
Yes
Corollary 5.6.5. Assume that \( \mathcal{L} : {L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) \rightarrow {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) \) is antisymmetric as an endomorphism of \( {L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) ,\mathbb{P} \) -a.s., we h...
Proof. Since \( \mathcal{L} \) is antisymmetric, we have for any symmetric tensor \( u \otimes u \in \) \( \mathcal{S}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) \otimes \mathcal{S}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) \) :\n\n\[ \operatorname{trace}\left( {{\operatorname{Id}}_{H} \otimes \mathcal...
Yes
Corollary 5.7.2. Assume that the Ricci curvature of \( M \) is uniformly bounded, and let \( z \in \mathcal{U}\left( {\mathbf{P}\left( M\right) \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) \) be adapted. We have\n\n\[ \n{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{\widehat{D}}_{t}F,\dot{z}\left( t\right) }\right\rangle {d...
Proof. We let \( {V}_{\varepsilon }\left( t\right) = \exp \left( {{\varepsilon q}\left( {t, z}\right) }\right), t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + },\varepsilon \in \mathbb{R} \) . Then from Proposition 3.5.3 of [44] we have\n\n\[ \n{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\langle \widehat{D}F,\dot{z}\left( t\right) \rangle {dt} = \frac{d}{d\varepsil...
Yes
Proposition 5.7.4. We have for \( z \in \mathcal{U}\left( {\mathbf{P}\left( M\right) \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + };{\mathbb{R}}^{d}}\right) \) :\n\n\[ \n{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{\widetilde{D}}_{t}F,\dot{z}\left( t\right) }\right\rangle {dt} = {\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{\widehat{D}}_{t}F,\dot{\widetilde{...
Proof. We compute\n\n\[ \n{\int }_{0}^{\infty }\left\langle {{\widetilde{D}}_{t}F,\dot{z}\left( t\right) }\right\rangle {dt} = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{i = 1}}^{{i = n}}{\int }_{0}^{{t}_{i}}\left\langle {{Q}_{{t}_{i}, s}^{ * }{t}_{0 \leftarrow {t}_{i}}{\nabla }_{i}^{M}f\left( {\gamma \left( {t}_{1}\right) ,\ldots ,\gamm...
Yes
Lemma 5.7.7. Let \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( \widetilde{D}\right) \) . If \( \parallel \widetilde{D}F{\parallel }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + },{L}^{\infty }\left( {\mathrm{P}\left( M\right) }\right) }\right) } \leq C \), for some \( C > 0 \), then
\[ \nu \left( {F - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack \geq x}\right) \leq \exp \left( {-\frac{{x}^{2}}{{2C}\parallel \widetilde{D}F{\parallel }_{\mathbf{H}}}}\right) ,\;x \geq 0. \] (5.7.7) In particular, \( \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {e}^{\lambda {F}^{2}}\right\rbrack < \infty \), for \( \lambda < {\left( 2C\parallel \...
Yes
Proposition 5.8.3. We have for \( F \in \mathcal{S} \)\n\n\[{\int }_{0}^{\infty }h\left( t\right) \left( {{\nabla }_{t}^{ \ominus } + \frac{1}{2}{D}_{t}{D}_{t}}\right) {Fdt} = - \mathop{\lim }\limits_{{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0}}\frac{1}{\varepsilon }\left( {F \circ {\mathcal{T}}_{\varepsilon h} - F}\right) .
Proof. We first notice that as a consequence of Proposition 5.8.1, the operator\n\n\[{\nabla }_{t}^{ \ominus } + \frac{1}{2}{D}_{t}{D}_{t}\]\n\n\( t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \), has the derivation property. Indeed, by Proposition 5.8.1 we have\n\n\[{\nabla }_{t}^{ \ominus }\left( {FG}\right) + \frac{1}{2}{D}_{t}{D}_{t}\l...
Yes
Proposition 6.1.3. Let \( {A}_{1},\ldots ,{A}_{n} \) be compact disjoint subsets of \( X \) . Under the measure \( {\pi }_{\sigma }^{X} \) on \( \left( {{\Omega }^{X},{\mathcal{F}}^{X}}\right) \), the \( {\mathbb{N}}^{n} \) -valued vector\n\n\[ \omega \mapsto \left( {\omega \left( {A}_{1}\right) ,\ldots ,\omega \left( ...
Proof. Consider a disjoint partition \( {A}_{1} \cup \cdots \cup {A}_{n} \) of \( X \) and\n\n\[ F\left( \omega \right) = {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\{ \omega \left( {A}_{1}\right) = {k}_{1}\right\} }\cdots {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\{ \omega \left( {A}_{n}\right) = {k}_{n}\right\} } \]\n\n\[ = {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\{ \omega \left( X\r...
Yes
Proposition 6.1.4. Let \( f \in {L}^{1}\left( {X,\sigma }\right) \) . We have\n\n\[ \n{\mathbb{E}}_{{\pi }_{\sigma }}\left\lbrack {\exp \left( {i{\int }_{X}f\left( x\right) \omega \left( {dx}\right) }\right) }\right\rbrack = \exp \left( {{\int }_{X}\left( {{\mathrm{e}}^{{if}\left( x\right) } - 1}\right) \sigma \left( {...
Proof. We first assume that \( X \) is compact. We have\n\n\[ \n{\mathbb{E}}_{{\pi }_{\sigma }}\left\lbrack {\exp \left( {i{\int }_{X}f\left( x\right) \omega \left( {dx}\right) }\right) }\right\rbrack \n\]\n\n\[ \n= {\mathrm{e}}^{-\sigma \left( X\right) }\mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n = 0}}^{\infty }\frac{1}{n!}{\int }_{X}\...
Yes
Proposition 6.1.5. Let \( \alpha \in \left( {0,1}\right) \) . We have \( {\pi }_{\sigma ,\alpha }^{X} = {\pi }_{\alpha \sigma }^{X} \), i.e. \( {\pi }_{\sigma ,\alpha }^{X} \) is the Poisson measure with intensity \( {\alpha \sigma }\left( {dx}\right) \) on \( {\Omega }^{X} \).
Proof. It suffices to treat the case where \( X \) is compact. We have\n\n\[ \n{\mathbb{E}}_{{\pi }_{\sigma ,\alpha }}\left\lbrack {\exp \left( {i{\int }_{X}f\left( x\right) \omega \left( {dx}\right) }\right) }\right\rbrack \n\]\n\n\[ \n= {\mathrm{e}}^{-\sigma \left( X\right) }\mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n = 0}}^{\infty }\...
Yes
Proposition 6.1.7. There exists a measurable map\n\n\[ \n\tau : X \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\n\]\n\na.e. bijective, such that \( \lambda = {\tau }_{ * }\sigma \), i.e. the Lebesgue measure is the image of \( \sigma \) by \( \tau \) .
We denote by \( {\tau }_{ * }\omega \) the image measure of \( \omega \) by \( \tau \), i.e. \( {\tau }_{ * } : {\Omega }^{X} \rightarrow \Omega \) maps\n\n\[ \n\omega = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{i = 1}}^{\infty }{\epsilon }_{{x}_{i}}\;\text{ to }\;{\tau }_{ * }\omega = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{i = 1}}^{\infty }{\epsilon ...
Yes
Proposition 6.1.8. The application \( {\tau }_{ * } : {\Omega }^{X} \rightarrow \Omega \) maps the Poisson measure \( {\pi }_{\sigma } \) on \( {\Omega }^{X} \) to the Poisson measure \( {\pi }_{\lambda } \) on \( \Omega \) .
Proof. It suffices to check that for all families \( {A}_{1},\ldots ,{A}_{n} \) of disjoint Borel subsets \( X \) and \( {k}_{1},\ldots ,{k}_{n} \in \mathbb{N} \), we have\n\n\[ \n{\pi }_{\sigma }\left( \left\{ {\omega \in {\Omega }^{X} : {\tau }_{ * }\omega \left( {A}_{1}\right) = {k}_{1},\ldots ,{\tau }_{ * }\omega \...
Yes
Corollary 6.1.9. Let \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( D\right) \) be such that \( {DF} \leq K \), a.s., for some \( K \geq 0 \), and \( \parallel {DF}{\parallel }_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{2}\left( X\right) }\right) } < \infty \) . Then
\[ \mathbb{P}\left( {F - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack \geq x}\right) \leq \exp \left( {-\frac{\parallel {DF}{\parallel }_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{2}\left( X\right) }\right) }^{2}}{{K}^{2}}g\left( \frac{xK}{\parallel {DF}{\parallel }_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {\Omega ,{L}^{2}\left( X\right) }\right) }^{2}}...
Yes
Proposition 6.2.1. The Poisson process \( {\left( {N}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) of Definition 2.3.1 can be constructed as\n\n\[ \n{N}_{t}\left( \omega \right) = \omega \left( \left\lbrack {0, t}\right\rbrack \right) ,\;t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }.\n\]
Proof. Clearly, the paths of \( {\left( {N}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \) are piecewise continuous, càdlàg (i.e. continuous on the right with left limits), with jumps of height equal to one. Moreover, by definition of the Poisson measure on \( \Omega \), the vector \( \left( {{N}_{{t}_{1}} - {N}_{{t}_{0}},...
Yes
Proposition 6.2.2. Let \( {f}_{n} : {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }^{n} \mapsto \mathbb{R} \) be continuous with compact support in \( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }^{n} \) . Then we have the \( \mathbb{P}\left( {d\omega }\right) \) -almost sure equality\n\n\[ \n{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \left( \omega \right) = n!{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\int ...
The above formula can also be written as\n\n\[ \n{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) = n!{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\int }_{0}^{{t}_{n}^{ - }}\cdots {\int }_{0}^{{t}_{2}^{ - }}{f}_{n}\left( {{t}_{1},\ldots ,{t}_{n}}\right) d\left( {{N}_{{t}_{1}} - {t}_{1}}\right) \cdots d\left( {{N}_{{t}_{n}} - {t}_{n}}\right) ,\n\]\n\nand by symm...
Yes
Proposition 6.2.4. For all symmetric functions \( {f}_{n} \in {L}^{2}{\left( X,\sigma \right) }^{\circ n},{g}_{m} \in \) \( {L}^{2}{\left( X,\sigma \right) }^{\circ m} \), we have\n\n\[ \n{\mathbb{E}}_{{\pi }_{\sigma }}\left\lbrack {{I}_{n}^{X}\left( {f}_{n}\right) {I}_{m}^{X}\left( {g}_{m}\right) }\right\rbrack = n!{\...
Proof. Denoting \( {f}_{n}\left( {{\tau }^{-1}\left( {x}_{1}\right) ,\ldots ,{\tau }^{-1}\left( {x}_{n}\right) }\right) \) by \( {f}_{n} \circ {\tau }^{-1}\left( {{x}_{1},\ldots ,{x}_{n}}\right) \) we have\n\n\[ \n{\mathbb{E}}_{{\pi }_{\sigma }}\left\lbrack {{I}_{n}^{X}\left( {f}_{n}\right) {I}_{m}^{X}\left( {g}_{m}\ri...
Yes
Proposition 6.2.5. We have for \( u, v \in {L}^{2}\left( {X,\sigma }\right) \) such that \( {uv} \in {L}^{2}\left( {X,\sigma }\right) \) :\n\n\[ \n{I}_{1}^{X}\left( u\right) {I}_{n}^{X}\left( {v}^{\otimes n}\right) \n\]\n\n(6.2.5)\n\n\[ \n= {I}_{n + 1}^{X}\left( {{v}^{\otimes n} \circ u}\right) + n{I}_{n}^{X}\left( {\l...
Proof. This result can be proved by direct computation from (6.2.1). Alternatively it can be proved first for \( X = {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) using stochastic calculus or directly from Proposition 4.5.1 with \( {\phi }_{t} = 1, t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) :\n\n\[ \n{I}_{1}\left( {u \circ {\tau }^{-1}}\right) {I}_{n}\left(...
Yes
Proposition 6.2.9. The multiple Poisson stochastic integral of the function\n\n\\[ \n{\\mathbf{1}}_{{A}_{1}}^{\\otimes {k}_{1}} \\circ \\cdots \\circ {\\mathbf{1}}_{{A}_{d}}^{\\otimes {k}_{d}} \n\\]\nsatisfies\n\n\\[ \n{I}_{n}\\left( {{\\mathbf{1}}_{{A}_{1}}^{\\otimes {k}_{1}} \\circ \\cdots \\circ {\\mathbf{1}}_{{A}_{...
Proof. We have\n\n\\[ \n{I}_{0}\\left( {\\mathbf{1}}_{A}^{\\otimes 0}\\right) = 1 = {C}_{0}\\left( {\\omega \\left( A\\right) ,\\sigma \\left( A\\right) }\\right) \n\\]\n\nand\n\n\\[ \n{I}_{1}\\left( {\\mathbf{1}}_{A}^{\\otimes 0}\\right) \\left( \\omega \\right) = \\omega \\left( A\\right) - \\sigma \\left( A\\right) ...
Yes
Lemma 6.2.10. Let \( F \) of the form\n\n\[ F\left( \omega \right) = g\left( {\omega \left( {A}_{1}\right) ,\ldots ,\omega \left( {A}_{k}\right) }\right) \]\n\nwhere\n\n\[ \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{{l}_{1},\ldots ,{l}_{k} = 0}}^{\infty }{\left| g\left( {l}_{1},\ldots ,{l}_{k}\right) \right| }^{2}{p}_{{l}_{1}}\left( {\sig...
Proof. We decompose \( g \) satisfying (6.2.18) as an orthogonal series\n\n\[ g\left( {{i}_{1},\ldots ,{i}_{k}}\right) = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n = 0}}^{\infty }{P}_{n}\left( {{i}_{1},\ldots ,{i}_{n},\sigma \left( {A}_{1}\right) ,\ldots ,\sigma \left( {A}_{n}\right) }\right) ,\]\n\nwhere\n\n\[ {P}_{n}\left( {{i}_{1},\...
Yes
Proposition 6.3.1. For all \( u \in {L}^{2}\left( X\right) \) we have\n\n\[ \xi \left( u\right) = \exp \left( {{\int }_{X}u\left( x\right) \left( {\omega \left( {dx}\right) - \sigma \left( {dx}\right) }\right) }\right) \mathop{\prod }\limits_{{x \in \omega }}\left( {\left( {1 + u\left( x\right) }\right) {\mathrm{e}}^{-...
Proof. The case \( X = {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) is treated in Proposition 2.13.1, in particular when \( {\phi }_{t} = 1, t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \), and the extension to \( X \) a metric space is obtained using the isomorphism \( \tau : X \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) of Proposition 6.1.7.\n\nIn particular, from Prop...
Yes
Proposition 6.3.2. Every square-integrable random variable \( F \in {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega }^{X}\right. \) , \( {\pi }_{\sigma } \) ) admits the Wiener-Poisson decomposition\n\n\[ F = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n = 0}}^{\infty }{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \]\n\nin series of multiple stochastic integrals.
Proof. A modification of the proof of Theorem 4.1 in [50], cf. also Theorem 1.3 of [66], shows that the linear space spanned by\n\n\[ \left\{ {{\mathrm{e}}^{-{\int }_{X}u\left( x\right) \sigma \left( {dx}\right) }\mathop{\prod }\limits_{{x \in \omega }}\left( {1 + u\left( x\right) }\right) : u \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}\lef...
Yes
Proposition 6.3.3. Let \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{b}^{1}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) \) . We have\n\n\[ f\left( {T}_{n}\right) = - \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = 0}}^{\infty }\frac{1}{k!}{I}_{k}\left( {{\int }_{{t}_{1} \vee \cdots \vee {t}_{k}}^{\infty }{f}^{\prime }\left( s\right) {P}_{n}^{\left( k\right) }\left( s\righ...
Proof. We have\n\n\[ f\left( {T}_{n}\right) = - {\int }_{0}^{\infty }{f}^{\prime }\left( s\right) {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\lbrack {T}_{n},\infty \right) }\left( s\right) {ds} \]\n\n\[ = - {\int }_{0}^{\infty }{f}^{\prime }\left( s\right) \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = 0}}^{\infty }\frac{1}{k!}{P}_{n}^{\left( k\right) }\left( s...
Yes
Proposition 6.3.4. Let \( {n}_{1},\ldots ,{n}_{d} \in \mathbb{N} \) with \( 1 \leq {n}_{1} < \cdots < {n}_{d} \), and let \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{d}\left( {\Delta }_{d}\right) \) . The chaos expansion of \( f\left( {{T}_{{n}_{1}},\ldots ,{T}_{{n}_{d}}}\right) \) is given as\n\n\[ f\left( {{T}_{{n}_{1}},\ldots ,{T}_...
Proof. Let \( 0 = {s}_{0} \leq {s}_{1} \leq \cdots \leq {s}_{d} \), and \( {n}_{1},\ldots ,{n}_{d} \in \mathbb{N} \) . We have from (6.3.3) and (6.2.16):\n\n\[ \mathop{\prod }\limits_{{i = 1}}^{d}{\mathbf{1}}_{\left\{ {N}_{{s}_{i}} - {N}_{{s}_{i - 1}} = {n}_{i}\right\} } = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n = 0}}^{\infty }\math...
Yes
Proposition 6.4.3. The operators \( {D}^{X} \) and \( {\delta }^{X} \) satisfy the duality relation\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\left\langle {D}^{X}F, u\right\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {X,\sigma }\right) }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F{\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) }\right\rbrack \]\n\n(6.4.7)\n\n\( F \in \ope...
Proof. The proof is identical to those of Propositions 1.8.2 and 4.1.3, and follows from the isometry formula (6.2.4). We consider \( F = {I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \) and \( {u}_{x} = \)\n\n\[ {I}_{m}\left( {{g}_{m + 1}\left( {*, x}\right) }\right), x \in X,{f}_{n} \in {L}^{2}{\left( X\right) }^{\circ n},{g}_{m + 1}...
Yes
Corollary 6.4.6. For all \( F \) is bounded and measurable \( A \in \mathcal{B}\left( X\right) ,0 < \) \( \sigma \left( A\right) < \infty \), we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{A}F\left( {\omega \cup \{ x\} }\right) \sigma \left( {dx}\right) }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{F\omega }\left( A\right)...
Proof. From Proposition 6.4.3, Lemma 6.4.4, and Relation (6.4.4) we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{A}F\left( {\omega \cup \{ x\} }\right) \sigma \left( {dx}\right) }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{X}{\mathbf{1}}_{A}\left( x\right) {D}_{x}{F\sigma }\left( {dx}\right) }\right\rbrack + \sigma...
Yes
Proposition 6.4.7. For any \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( {D}^{X}\right) \) we have\n\n\[ \n{D}_{x}^{X}F\left( \omega \right) = F\left( {\omega \cup \{ x\} }\right) - F\left( \omega \right) \]\n\n\( {\pi }_{\sigma }\left( {d\omega }\right) \times \sigma \left( {dx}\right) \) -a.e.
Proof. There exists a sequence \( {\left( {F}_{n}\right) }_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \) of functionals of the form (6.4.8), such that \( {\left( {D}^{X}{F}_{n}\right) }_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \) converges everywhere to \( {D}^{X}F \) on a set \( {A}_{F} \) such that \( \left( {{\pi }_{\sigma } \otimes \sigma }\right) \left( {A}_{...
Yes
Proposition 6.4.8. We have for \( F, G \in \mathcal{S} \) :\n\n\[ \n{D}_{x}^{X}\left( {FG}\right) = F{D}_{x}^{X}G + G{D}_{x}^{X}F + {D}_{x}^{X}F{D}_{x}^{X}G, \]\n\n(6.4.14)\n\n\( \mathbb{P}\left( {d\omega }\right) {d\sigma }\left( x\right) \) -a.e.
Proof. This formula can be proved either from Propositions 4.5.2 and 6.1.8 with \( {\phi }_{t} = 1, t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \), when \( X = {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \), or directly from (6.4.9):\n\n\[ \n{D}_{x}^{X}\left( {FG}\right) \left( \omega \right) = F\left( {\omega \cup \{ x\} }\right) G\left( {\omega \cup \{ x\} }\r...
Yes
Lemma 6.4.10. Let \( X = {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) and \( \sigma \left( {dx}\right) = {dx} \) . For any \( F \) of the form \( F = f\left( {{T}_{1},\ldots ,{T}_{n}}\right) \) we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack \]\n\n\[ = {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\{ {N}_{t} < n\right\} }{\int }_{t}...
Proof. By application of Proposition 2.3.6 we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack \]\n\n\[ = {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\{ {N}_{t} < n\right\} }\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {f\left( {{T}_{1},\ldots ,{T}_{{N}_{t}}, t,{T}_{{N}_{t} + 1},\ldots ,{T}_{n - 1}}\right) - f\left( {{T}_{1},\ldots ,...
Yes
Proposition 6.5.1. Let \( u : X \times {\Omega }^{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \) and \( F : {\Omega }^{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \) such that \( u\left( {\cdot ,\omega }\right) ,{D}_{ \cdot }^{X}F\left( \omega \right) \), and \( u\left( {\cdot ,\omega }\right) {D}_{ \cdot }^{X}F\left( \omega \right) \in {L}^{1}\left( {X,...
Proof. Relation (6.5.1) follows by duality from Proposition 6.4.8, or from Proposition 4.5.6 and Proposition 6.1.8.
No
Proposition 6.5.2. For all \( u \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( {\delta }^{X}\right) \) we have\n\n\[{\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) = {\int }_{X}{u}_{x}\left( {\omega \smallsetminus \{ x\} }\right) \left( {\omega \left( {dx}\right) - \sigma \left( {dx}\right) }\right) .
Proof. The statement clearly holds by (6.4.3) when \( g \in {L}^{2}\left( {X,\sigma }\right) \) is deterministic. Next we show using (6.5.1) that the identity also holds for a process\nof the form \( u = g{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right), g \in {L}^{2}\left( {X,\sigma }\right) \), by induction on the order of the multiple ...
Yes
Proposition 6.5.3. When \( X = {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \), for any square-integrable adapted pro- \( \operatorname{cess}{\left( {u}_{t}\right) }_{t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }} \in {L}_{ad}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \) we have\n\n\[ \delta \left( u\right) = {\int }_{0}^{\infty }{u}_{t}d\left( {{N}_{t} -...
The following is the Skorohod isometry on the Poisson space, which follows here from Proposition 6.5.1, or from Propositions 4.3.1 and 6.1.8.
No
Proposition 6.5.4. For \( u : {\Omega }^{X} \times X \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \) measurable and sufficiently integrable we have\n\n\[{\mathbb{E}}_{{\pi }_{\sigma }}\left\lbrack {\left| {\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) \right| }^{2}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\parallel u{\parallel }_{{L}^{2}\left( {X,\sigma }\righ...
Proof. Applying Proposition 6.4.2, Proposition 6.5.1 and Relation (6.4.5) we have\n\n\[{\mathbb{E}}_{{\pi }_{\sigma }}\left\lbrack {\left| {\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) \right| }^{2}\right\rbrack\n\]\n\[= {\mathbb{E}}_{{\pi }_{\sigma }}\left\lbrack {{\delta }^{X}\left( {u{\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) }\right) +\langle u,...
Yes
Proposition 6.5.5. We have, for \( u : {\Omega }^{X} \times X \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \) a sufficiently integrable process,\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\left( {\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) \right) }^{n + 1}\right\rbrack = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = 0}}^{{n - 1}}\left( \begin{array}{l} n \\ k \end{array}\right) \mathbb...
Proof. Using the relation\n\n\[ {D}_{t}^{X}{\left( {\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) \right) }^{n} = {\varepsilon }_{t}^{ + }{\left( {\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) \right) }^{n} - {\left( {\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) \right) }^{n} \]\n\n\[ = {\left( {\varepsilon }_{t}^{ + }{\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) \right) }^{n} - {\left( ...
Yes
Proposition 6.6.2. Let \( \pi \) be a probability measure on \( {\Omega }^{X} \) such that \( {\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) \) is integrable, \( u \in \mathcal{U} \). Assume that\n\n\[ \n{\mathbb{E}}_{\pi }\left\lbrack {{\delta }^{X}\left( u\right) }\right\rbrack = 0,\;u \in \mathcal{U},\n\]\n\nor equivalently\n\n\[ \n{...
Proof. Clearly, (6.6.3) implies (6.6.4) as in the proof of Proposition 6.6.1. The implication (6.6.4) \( \Rightarrow \) (6.6.3) follows in this case by taking \( F = 1 \). Denoting the characteristic function of \( \omega \mapsto {\int }_{X}h\left( x\right) \omega \left( {dx}\right) \) by\n\n\[ \n\psi \left( z\right) =...
Yes
Corollary 6.6.3. Let \( \pi \) be a probability measure on \( {\Omega }^{X} \) such that \( {I}_{n}\left( {f}^{\otimes n}\right) \) is integrable under \( \pi, f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{\infty }\left( X\right) \) . The relation\n\n\[ \n{\mathbb{E}}_{\pi }\left\lbrack {{I}_{n}\left( {f}^{\otimes n}\right) }\right\rbrack ...
Proof. If (6.6.5) holds then by polarization and the Definition 6.4.2 we get\n\n\[ \n{\mathbb{E}}_{\pi }\left\lbrack {{\delta }^{X}\left( {g \otimes {I}_{n}\left( {{f}_{1} \otimes \cdots \otimes {f}_{n}}\right) }\right) }\right\rbrack = 0, \n\]\n\n\( g,{f}_{1},\ldots ,{f}_{n} \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{\infty }\left( X\rig...
Yes
Proposition 6.7.1. For \( F \in {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \), we have\n\n\[ F = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack + {\int }_{{\mathbb{R}}^{d} \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t, x}^{X}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack X\left( {{dt},{dx}}\right) . \]
Proof. Let\n\n\[ {\widetilde{\Delta }}_{n} = \left\{ {\left( {\left( {{x}_{1},{t}_{1}}\right) ,\ldots ,\left( {{x}_{n},{t}_{n}}\right) }\right) \in {\left( {\mathbb{R}}^{d} \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) }^{n} : {t}_{1} < \cdots < {t}_{n}}\right\} . \]\n\nFrom (6.7.3) we have for \( F \in \mathcal{S} \) :\n\n\[ F = \...
Yes
Lemma 6.8.1. In case \( \sigma \) is finite on \( X \) we have\n\n\[ \n{P}_{t}F\left( \omega \right) = {\int }_{{\Omega }^{X} \times {\Omega }^{X}}F\left( {\widetilde{\omega } \cup \widehat{\omega }}\right) {q}_{t}\left( {\omega, d\widetilde{\omega }, d\widehat{\omega }}\right) ,\;\omega \in {\Omega }^{X},\n\]\n\n(6.8....
Proof. We consider random functionals of the form\n\n\[ \nF = {\mathrm{e}}^{-{\int }_{X}u\left( x\right) \sigma \left( {dx}\right) }\mathop{\prod }\limits_{{x \in \omega }}\left( {1 + u\left( x\right) }\right) = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{k = 0}}^{\infty }\frac{1}{n!}{I}_{n}\left( {u}^{\otimes n}\right) ,\n\]\n\ncf. Propo...
Yes
Proposition 6.8.2. We have the covariance identity\n\n\[ \n\operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\int }_{X}{\mathrm{e}}^{-s}{D}_{x}^{X}F{P}_{s}{D}_{x}^{X}{G\sigma }\left( {dx}\right) {ds}}\right\rbrack , \n\]\n\n(6.8.2)\n\n\( F, G \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( {D}^{X}\rig...
Proof. By the chaos representation property Proposition 6.3.2, orthogonality of multiple integrals of different orders, and continuity of \( {P}_{s}, s \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \), on \( {L}^{2}\left( {{\Omega }^{X},\mathbb{P}}\right) \), it suffices to prove the identity for \( F = {I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}\right) \) and \(...
Yes
Corollary 6.8.3. We have\n\n\[ \operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) = {\int }_{0}^{1}{\int }_{X}{\int }_{{\Omega }^{X} \times {\Omega }^{X}}\mathop{\sum }\limits_{{{\omega }^{\prime } \subset \omega }}{D}_{x}^{X}F\left( \omega \right) \left( {G\left( {{\omega }^{\prime } \cup \widehat{\omega }\cup \{ x\} }\right) - G...
Proof. From (6.8.1) and (6.8.2) we have\n\n\[ \operatorname{Cov}\left( {F, G}\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\int }_{X}{\mathrm{e}}^{-s}\left( {{D}_{x}^{X}F}}\right) \left( {{P}_{s}{D}_{x}^{X}G}\right) \sigma \left( {dx}\right) {ds}}\right\rbrack \]\n\n\[ = {\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\int }_{X}{\int ...
Yes
Proposition 6.9.1. Let \( F \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( {D}^{X}\right) \) be such that \( {\mathrm{e}}^{sF} \in \operatorname{Dom}\left( {D}^{X}\right) \) , \( 0 \leq s \leq {t}_{0} \), for some \( {t}_{0} > 0 \) . Then\n\n\[ \n{\pi }_{\sigma }\left( {F - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack \geq x}\right) \leq \exp ...
Proof. We start by deriving the following inequality for \( F \) a centered random variable:\n\n\[ \n\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F{\mathrm{e}}^{sF}}\right\rbrack \leq h\left( s\right) \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\mathrm{e}}^{sF}\right\rbrack ,\;0 \leq s \leq {t}_{0}. \n\] \n\n(6.9.3) \n\nThis follows from (6.8.2). Indeed, usin...
Yes
Proposition 6.9.2. Let \( F : {\Omega }^{X} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} \) and let \( K : X \rightarrow {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) be a function such that\n\n\[ \n{D}_{y}^{X}F\left( \omega \right) \leq K\left( y\right) ,\;y \in X,\;\omega \in {\Omega }^{X}.\n\]\n\nThen\n\n\[ \n{\pi }_{\sigma }\left( {F - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F...
Proof. Let \( {F}_{n} = \max \left( {-n,\min \left( {F, n}\right) }\right), n \geq 1 \) . Since when \( K \) is \( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) -valued the condition \( {D}_{y}^{X}{F}_{n}\left( \omega \right) \leq K\left( y\right) ,\omega \in {\Omega }^{X}, y \in X \), is satisfied we may apply Proposition 6.9.1 to \( {F}_{n}...
Yes
Corollary 6.9.3. Let \( F \in {L}^{2}\left( {{\Omega }^{X},{\pi }_{\sigma }}\right) \) be such that \( {D}^{X}F \leq K,{\pi }_{\sigma } \otimes \sigma \) -a.e., for some \( K \in \mathbb{R} \), and \( {\begin{Vmatrix}{D}^{X}F\end{Vmatrix}}_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {{\Omega }^{X},{L}^{2}\left( {X,\sigma }\right) }\right) } ...
Proof. If \( K \geq 0 \), let us first assume that \( F \) is a bounded random variable. The function \( h \) in (6.9.7) is such that\n\n\[ \nh\left( t\right) \leq \frac{{\mathrm{e}}^{tK} - 1}{K}{\begin{Vmatrix}{D}^{X}F\end{Vmatrix}}_{{L}^{\infty }\left( {{\Omega }^{X},{L}^{2}\left( {X,\sigma }\right) }\right) }^{2} \n...
Yes
Corollary 6.9.4. Let\n\n\[ \nF = \left( {{F}_{1},\ldots ,{F}_{n}}\right) = {\left( {\int }_{\left\{ {\left| y\right| }_{2} \leq 1\right\} }{y}_{k}\left( \omega \left( dy\right) - \sigma \left( dy\right) \right) + {\int }_{\left\{ {\left| y\right| }_{2} > 1\right\} }{y}_{k}\omega \left( dy\right) \right) }_{1 \leq k \le...
Proof. The representation (6.9.11) shows that\n\n\[ \left| {{D}_{x}^{X}f\left( F\right) \left( \omega \right) }\right| = \left| {f\left( {F\left( {\omega \cup \{ x\} }\right) }\right) - f\left( {F\left( \omega \right) }\right) }\right| \]\n\n\[ \leq c\parallel F\left( {\omega \cup \{ x\} }\right) - F\left( \omega \righ...
Yes
Proposition 7.1.3. We have for \( F \in \mathcal{I} \) and \( V \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{1}\left( {X,{TX}}\right) \) :\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\left\langle {\widehat{D}}^{L}F, V\right\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {X,{d\omega };{TX}}\right) }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F{\int }_{X}{L}^{ * }V\left( x\right) \o...
Proof. We have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\left\langle {\widehat{D}}^{L}F, V\right\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {X,{d\omega };{TX}}\right) }\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\mathop{\sum }\limits_{{x \in \omega }}{\left\langle {\widehat{D}}_{x}^{L}F, V\left( x\right) \right\rangle }_{TX}}\right\rbrack \]\n\n\[ = \m...
Yes
Lemma 7.1.4. For \( F \in \mathcal{I} \) we have\n\n\[ \n{\widehat{D}}_{x}F\left( \omega \right) = {\varepsilon }_{x}^{ - }{\nabla }^{X}{\varepsilon }_{x}^{ + }F\left( \omega \right) \;\text{ on }\;\left\{ {\left( {\omega, x}\right) \in {\Omega }^{x} \times X : x \in \omega }\right\} .\n\]
Proof. Let\n\n\[ \nF = f\left( {{\int }_{X}{\varphi }_{1}{d\omega },\ldots ,{\int }_{X}{\varphi }_{n}{d\omega }}\right) ,\;x \in X,\;\omega \in {\Omega }^{X}, \n\]\n\nand assume that \( x \in \omega \) . We have\n\n\[ \n{\widehat{D}}_{x}F\left( \omega \right) = \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{i = 1}}^{n}{\partial }_{i}f\left( ...
Yes
Proposition 7.1.5. For \( V \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{\infty }\left( {X;{TX}}\right) \) and \( F \in \mathcal{I} \) we have\n\n\[ \langle \widehat{D}F\left( \omega \right), V{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {X,{d\omega };{TX}}\right) } \]\n\n(7.1.4)\n\n\[ = {\left\langle {\nabla }^{X}DF\left( \omega \right), V\right\rangle }_{{L...
Proof. This identity follows from the relation\n\n\[ {\widehat{D}}_{x}F\left( \omega \right) = \left( {{\nabla }_{x}^{X}{D}_{x}F}\right) \left( {\omega \smallsetminus \{ x\} }\right) ,\;x \in \omega ,\]\n\nand the application to \( u = {\left\langle {\nabla }^{X}DF, V\right\rangle }_{TX} \) of the relation\n\n\[ {\delt...
No
Corollary 7.1.7. The isometry relation\n\n\\[ \n{\\mathbb{E}}_{\\pi }\\left\\lbrack {\\langle \\widehat{D}F,\\widehat{D}G{\\rangle }_{{L}_{\\omega }^{2}\\left( {TX}\\right) }}\\right\\rbrack = {\\mathbb{E}}_{\\pi }\\left\\lbrack {\\left\\langle {\\nabla }^{X}DF,{\\nabla }^{X}DG\\right\\rangle }_{{L}_{\\sigma }^{2}\\lef...
Proof.\n\ni) Relations (6.4.5) and (7.1.6) show that (7.1.7) holds when \\( \\pi = {\\pi }_{\\sigma } \\) . ii) If (7.1.7) is satisfied, then taking \\( F = {I}_{n}\\left( {u}^{\\otimes n}\\right) \\) and \\( G = {I}_{1}\\left( h\\right), h, u \\in \\) \\( {\\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{\\infty }\\left( X\\right) \\), Relation (7...
Yes
Corollary 7.1.10. Let \( F \in \mathcal{S} \) and \( h \in {\mathcal{C}}_{b}^{1}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) \) with \( h\left( 0\right) = 0 \) . We have the integration by parts formula\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle \widehat{D}F, h{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + },{d\omega }}\right) }}\right\rb...
Proof. From Lemma 7.1.9 it suffices to notice that if \( k > d \) ,\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F{h}^{\prime }\left( {T}_{k}\right) }\right\rbrack = {\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\mathrm{e}}^{-{t}_{k}}{h}^{\prime }\left( {t}_{k}\right) {\int }_{0}^{{t}_{k}}\cdots {\int }_{0}^{{t}_{d}}\cdots {\int }_{0}^{{t}_{2}}f\left( {{t}_...
Yes
Proposition 7.1.11. For \( F \in \mathcal{S} \) and \( h \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{1}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) \) we have :\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle \widehat{D}F,{hG}{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + }, d{N}_{t}}\right) }}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F\widehat{\delta }\left( {hG}\r...
Proof. We have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle \widehat{D}F,{hG}{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + }, d{N}_{t}}\right) }}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle \widehat{D}\left( {FG}\right), h{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + }, d{N}_{t}}\right) } - F\langle \widehat{D}G, h{\rangle }_{...
Yes
Lemma 7.2.2. For \( F \) of the form \( F = f\left( {{T}_{1},\ldots ,{T}_{n}}\right) \) we have\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\widetilde{D}}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack = - \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{{N}_{t} < k \leq n}}\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\partial }_{k}f\left( {{T}_{1},\ldots ,{T}_{n}}\right) \mid {\m...
\[ = - \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{{N}_{t} < k \leq n}}{\int }_{t}^{\infty }{\mathrm{e}}^{-\left( {{s}_{n} - t}\right) }{\int }_{t}^{{s}_{n}}\cdots {\int }_{t}^{{s}_{{N}_{t} + 2}} \]\n\n\[ {\partial }_{k}f\left( {{T}_{1},\ldots ,{T}_{{N}_{t}},{s}_{{N}_{t} + 1},\ldots ,{s}_{n}}\right) d{s}_{{N}_{t} + 1}\cdots d{s}_{n}. \]
No
Lemma 7.2.3. Let \( T > 0 \) . For any \( {\mathcal{F}}_{T} \) -measurable random variable \( F \in \) \( {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) we have \( F \in {\mathbb{D}}_{\lbrack T,\infty )} \) and \[ {\widetilde{D}}_{t}F = 0,\;t \geq T. \]
Proof. In case \( F = f\left( {{T}_{1},\ldots ,{T}_{n}}\right) \) with \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{\infty }\left( {\mathbb{R}}^{n}\right), F \) does not depend on the future of the Poisson process after \( T \), it does not depend on the \( k \) -th jump time \( {T}_{k} \) if \( {T}_{k} > T \), i.e. \[ {\partial }_{i}f...
Yes
Proposition 7.2.4. We have for \( F \in \mathcal{S} \) and \( u \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) \) :\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle \widetilde{D}F, u{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + },{dt}}\right) }}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {F{\int }_{0}^{\infty }u\left( t\right) \l...
Proof. We have, using (7.2.1),\n\n\[ \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle \widetilde{D}F, u{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + },{dt}}\right) }}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{\int }_{0}^{\infty }{r}^{\left( 1\right) }\left( {s, t}\right) {\widehat{D}}_{s}{Fu}\left( t\right) d{N}_{s}{dt...
Yes
Proposition 7.2.6. The divergence operator\n\n\[ \n\widetilde{\delta } : {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \rightarrow {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \n\]\n\nis the adjoint of the gradient operator\n\n\[ \n\widetilde{D} : {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \rightarrow {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb...
Proof. It suffices to note that Proposition 7.2.4 implies\n\n\[ \n\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle \widetilde{D}F,{hG}{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + },{dt}}\right) }}\right\rbrack = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {\langle \widetilde{D}\left( {FG}\right), h{\rangle }_{{L}^{2}\left( {{\mathbb{R}}_{ + },{dt}}\right) }...
Yes
Proposition 7.2.8. For any \( F \in {L}^{2}\left( \Omega \right) \) we have\n\n\[ F = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack + {\int }_{0}^{\infty }\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack d\left( {{N}_{t} - t}\right) \]
\[ = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack + {\int }_{0}^{\infty }\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\widetilde{D}}_{t}F \mid {\mathcal{F}}_{t}}\right\rbrack d\left( {{N}_{t} - t}\right) \]
No
Proposition 7.2.9. The adjoint of \( \widetilde{D} \) extends the compensated Poisson stochastic integral, i.e. for all adapted square-integrable process \( u \in {L}^{2}\left( {\Omega \times {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }}\right) \) we have
Proof. We consider first the case where \( v \) is a cylindrical elementary predictable process \( v = F{\mathbf{1}}_{(s, T\rbrack }\left( \cdot \right) \) with \( F = f\left( {{T}_{1},\ldots ,{T}_{n}}\right), f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{\infty }\left( {\mathbb{R}}^{n}\right) \) . Since \( v \) is predictable, \( F \) is ...
No
Proposition 7.4.1. For any \( F \in \mathop{\bigcap }\limits_{{n = 0}}^{\infty }\operatorname{Dom}\left( {{D}^{n}\widetilde{D}}\right) \) we have the chaos expansion\n\n\[ F = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack F\right\rbrack + \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n \geq 1}}^{\infty }{\widetilde{I}}_{n}\left( {{1}_{{\Delta }_{n}}{f}_{n}}\right...
Proof. We apply Proposition 4.2 .5 to \( {\widetilde{D}}_{t}F, t \in {\mathbb{R}}_{ + } \) :\n\n\[ {\widetilde{D}}_{t}F = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\widetilde{D}}_{t}F}\right\rbrack + \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n = 1}}^{\infty }{\widetilde{I}}_{n}\left( {{1}_{{\widetilde{\Delta }}_{n}}\mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{D}^{n}{\widet...
Yes
Lemma 7.4.2. We have for \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{1}\left( \mathbb{R}\right) \) and \( n \geq 1 \) \n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}{\widetilde{D}}_{s}f\left( {T}_{n}\right) = {\widetilde{D}}_{s \vee t}f\left( {T}_{n - 1}\right) - {\widetilde{D}}_{s \vee t}f\left( {T}_{n}\right) - {\mathbf{1}}_{\{ s < t\} }{\mathbf{1}}_{\left\lbrack...
Proof. From Relation (6.4.15) we have \n\n\[ \n{D}_{t}{\widetilde{D}}_{s}f\left( {T}_{n}\right) = - {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\lbrack 0,{T}_{n - 1}\right\rbrack }\left( t\right) \left( {{\mathbf{1}}_{\left\lbrack 0,{T}_{n - 1}\right\rbrack }\left( s\right) {f}^{\prime }\left( {T}_{n - 1}\right) - {\mathbf{1}}_{\left\lbrack 0,...
Yes
Proposition 7.4.3. For \( k \geq 1 \), the chaos expansion of \( f\left( {T}_{k}\right) \) is given as\n\n\[ f\left( {T}_{k}\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {f\left( {T}_{k}\right) }\right\rbrack + \mathop{\sum }\limits_{{n \geq 1}}\frac{1}{n!}{I}_{n}\left( {f}_{n}^{k}\right) ,\] \n\nwhere \( {f}_{n}^{k}\left( {{t}_{1}...
Proof. of Proposition 7.4.3. Let us first assume that \( f \in {\mathcal{C}}_{c}^{1}\left( {\mathbb{R}}_{ + }\right) \) . We have\n\n\[ {f}_{1}^{k}\left( t\right) = \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\widetilde{D}}_{t}f\left( {T}_{k}\right) }\right\rbrack \] \n\n\[ = - \mathbb{E}\left\lbrack {{\mathbf{1}}_{\left\lbrack 0,{T}_{k}...
Yes