1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: % Annals of Probability - Template file for LaTeX 2e
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4: \documentclass[dblspace,leqno]{aopcm}% <-- gives double-spaced document/manuscript
5: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
6: \setcounter{page}{1} % <-- To fill at IMS or the typesetter
7: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
8: %%%%%%%%%%%% Definitions %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9: %\def\theequation{\arabic{equation}} % If you don't want the equations counter
10: % to be reset with each section,
11: % outcomment this definition
12: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
13: %\font\msbmx=MSBM10 % \emptyset should be changed to \varnothing
14: %\font\msbmvii=MSBM7 % in the paper and this will give the proper symbol
15: %\font\msbmv=MSBM5
16: %\def\varnothing{\mathchoice{\mbox{\msbmx\char'077}}%
17: %{\mbox{\msbmx\char'077}}{\mbox{\msbmvii\char'077}}{\mbox{\msbmv\char'077}}}%
18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
19: \def\Cov{\mathop{\rm Cov}\nolimits}% % A sample of proper declaration of
20: \def\Argmax{\mathop{\rm Arg\,Max}\limits}% a math operator.
21: \def\Var{\mathop{\rm Var}\nolimits}%
22: \newcommand{\ink}{\rule{.2\baselineskip}{.25\baselineskip}}
23: \newcommand{\noi}{\noindent }
24: \newcommand{\und}{\underline }
25: \newcommand{\rimply}{\Rightarrow }
26: \newcommand{\la}{\lambda }
27: \newcommand{\conv}{\mbox{conv}}
28: \newcommand{\ti}{\tilde }
29: \newcommand{\cc}{\cdot }
30: \newcommand{\non}{\nonumber }
31: \newcommand{\dist}{{\rm dist}}
32:
33: \newcommand{\ii}{\iota }
34: \newcommand{\In}{\mbox{In} }
35: \newcommand{\pa}{\partial }
36: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{array}}
37: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{array}}
38: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
39: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
40: \newcommand{\beas}{\begin{eqnarray*}}
41: \newcommand{\eeas}{\end{eqnarray*}}
42: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
43: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
44: \newcommand{\bc}{\begin{center}}
45: \newcommand{\ec}{\end{center}}
46: \newcommand{\ben}{\begin{enumerate}}
47: \newcommand{\een}{\end{enumerate}}
48: \newcommand{\lan}{\langle}
49: \newcommand{\ran}{\rangle}
50: \newcommand{\ei}{\end{itemize}}
51:
52:
53: \newcommand{\prf}{{\bf Proof.\ }}
54: \newcommand{\ds}{\displaystyle}
55: \newcommand{\overbar}{\bar}
56: \newcommand{\ve}{\varepsilon}
57: \newcommand{\N}{I\!\!N}
58: \newcommand{\Z}{Z\!\!Z}
59: \newcommand{\goto}{\rightarrow}
60:
61: \newcommand{\brmk}{\begin{remark}\begin{em}}
62: \newcommand{\ermk}{\end{em}\end{remark}}
63: \newcommand{\bexa}{\begin{example}\per\begin{em}}
64: \newcommand{\eexa}{\end{em}\end{example}}
65:
66:
67: \newcommand{\skp}{\vspace{\baselineskip}}
68: \newcommand{\Pf}{{\bf Proof.\ }}
69: \newcommand{\E}{I\!\!E}
70: \newcommand{\scal}{{\cal {S}}}
71: \newcommand{\acal}{{\cal {A}}}
72: \newcommand{\NN}{{\cal {N}}}
73: \newcommand{\I}{{\cal {I}}}
74: \newcommand{\PP}{{\cal {P}}}
75: \newcommand{\F}{{\cal {F}}}
76: \newcommand{\C}{{\cal {C}}}
77: \newcommand{\G}{{\cal {G}}}
78: \newcommand{\D}{\Delta}
79: \newcommand{\B}{{\cal {B}}}
80: \newcommand{\A}{{\cal {A}}}
81: \newcommand{\Om}{\Omega}
82: \newcommand{\om}{\omega}
83: \newcommand{\sig}{\sigma}
84: \newcommand{\del}{\delta}
85: \newcommand{\Lsc}{{\cal L}}
86: \newcommand{\R}{I\! \! R}
87: \newcommand{\INT}{I\! \! N}
88: \newcommand{\ov}{\overline}
89: \newcommand{\Df}{\doteq}
90: \newcommand{\rarr}{\rightarrow}
91: \newcommand{\larr}{\leftarrow}
92: \newcommand{\add}{\addtocounter{J}{1}}
93: \newcommand{\half}{\frac{1}{2}}
94: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{eqnarray*}}
95: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{eqnarray*}}
96: \newcommand{\beqn}{\begin{eqnarray}}
97: \newcommand{\eeqn}{\end{eqnarray}}
98: \newcommand{\inn}[2]{\langle {#1}, {#2}\rangle}
99: \newcommand{\INN}[2]{\left \langle {#1}, {#2}\right \rangle}
100: \newcommand{\M}{{\cal M}}
101: \newcommand{\Su}{{\cal S}}
102: \newcommand{\ep}{\epsilon}
103: %%%%%%%%%%%% Theorems %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
104: % The AOP style allows for theorem-like environments to be numbered throughout
105: % the paper or to start from one each section (carrying in that case both the
106: % section number and "theorem" number). If you prefer the first method, declare
107: % all the environments you need as:
108: % \newcounter{<counter_name>}
109: % \newtheorem{<counter_name>}{<printed_name>},
110: % for example,
111: % \newcounter{prop}
112: % \newtheorem{prop}{Proposition}
113: % and that will appear as:
114: %
115: % Proposition 2. ...
116: %
117: % If you want to reset the counter with each new section, use the following
118: % code:
119: % \newcounter{<counter_name>}
120: % \newtheorem{<counter_name>}{<printed_name>}[section],
121: % for example,
122: % \newcounter{prob}
123: % \newtheorem{prob}{Problem}[section]
124: % and that will appear as:
125: %
126: % Problem 3.1. ...
127: %
128: % We list just some basic counters and leave for the user to decide which
129: % counters will be used, and should the above mentioned hints about
130: % declaring the theorem-like environments be used in one or the other way.
131: %\def\theequation{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}
132: %\def\thetheorem{\arabic{section}.\arabic{theorem}}
133: %\def\theass{\arabic{section}.\arabic{ass}}
134: %\def\thecond{\arabic{section}.\arabic{cond}}
135:
136:
137: %\newcounter{bean}
138: %\newcommand{\benuma}{\setlength{\labelwidth}{.25in}
139: %\begin{list}%
140: %{(\alph{bean})}{\usecounter{bean}}}
141: %\newcommand{\eenuma}{\end{list}}
142: %
143: %\newcommand{\beginsec}{\setcounter{equation}{0}}
144: \newcounter{theorem}
145: \newcounter{remark}
146: \newcounter{lemma}
147: \newcounter{cor}
148: \newcounter{defn}
149: \newcounter{cond}
150: \newcounter{assu}
151: \newcounter{prop}
152: \newcounter{pr}
153: \newcounter{definition}
154:
155:
156: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
157: \newtheorem{remark}{Remark}[section]
158: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}[section]
159: \newtheorem{cor}{Corollary}[section]
160: \newtheorem{defn}{Definition}[section]
161: \newtheorem{cond}{Condition}[section]
162: \newtheorem{assu}{Condition}[section]
163: \newtheorem{prop}{Proposition}[section]
164: \newtheorem{pr}{Property}[section]
165: \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}[section]
166:
167:
168:
169: %\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}
170: %\newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}
171: %\newtheorem{definition}{Definition}
172: %\newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}
173: %\newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}
174: % With proof it is slightly different, and the proof environment does
175: % expect an argument showing the exact text that will start the proof,
176: % since this considerably varies from case to case. For example
177: % \proof{Proof of the Modified Cramer-Rao Thoerem.}...
178: % \endproof,
179: % where <Proof of the Modified Cramer-Rao Thoerem.> is the actual text to
180: % start the proof.
181: % The \proof command can be used also with other similar environments set
182: % in roman type (not italic as theorems, lemmas, etc.) as Remark, where
183: % also a halmos (open box) at the end is required:
184: % \proof{Remark.}...\endproof
185: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
186: % For References AOP provides two possible styles. The standard one
187: % numbers the references setting the numbers in square brackets. The
188: % other style that uses only the authors names can be declared by the
189: % command \NONUMBIB: If you want to use that style, outcomment the
190: % following line:
191: %NONUMBIB
192: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
193: \begin{document}
194: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
195:
196: % On the opening page AOP style requires some unmarked footnotes in the
197: % following order:
198: % 1. Received line (no footnotemark)
199: % 2. One or more numerated footnotes showing author(s) grants, etc.
200: % 3. AMS Classification line (no footnotemark)
201: % 4. Keywords line (no footnotemark)
202: % To achieve this, a macro with up to nine parameters called
203: % \SPECFNSYMBOL is provided, where the user has to list the used markers
204: % in correct order. For example, if you need two footnotes for authors
205: % "thanks", you should use
206: \SPECFNSYMBOL{}{1}{2}{}{}{}{}{}{}%
207: % where the fourth and fifth {} are "placeholders" for the
208: % unmarked footnotes. To reset the footnote style back to normal at the
209: % beginning of the article body, use there the command
210: % \BACKTONORMALFOOTNOTE{3} (see below), "3" indicating that the
211: % first following footnote (if any) will carry the mark "3".
212: % To set (almost) properly the front matter in Computer Modern fonts,
213: % use now the command:
214: \AOPMAKETITLE
215: % and after doing so fill in the blanks (some will be done by the
216: % Publisher at the typesettimg stage --- leave X's or 0's) following
217: % the sample below:
218: % \AOPyr{1999} % <-- actual numbers
219: % \AOPvol{00} % <-- will be supplied
220: % \AOPno{00} % <-- at typesetting
221: % \AOPpp{000--000} % <-- stage
222: % \AOPReceived{}
223: % \AOPAMS{}
224: % \AOPKeywords{}
225: % \AOPtitle{}% % with a possible "thanks" footnote
226: % \AOPauthor{}% % with a additional "thanks" footnotes
227: % \AOPaffil{}% % Just the short version of affiliation. The full address
228: % % is at the end of the article.
229: % \AOPlrh{}% % Author(s) (in all caps) (see the sample below)
230: % \AOPrrh{}% % Shortened title for the running head (in all caps)
231: % \AOPAbstract{}% The text of the abstract follows in the braces.
232:
233: \AOPyr{2000}
234: \AOPvol{00}
235: \AOPno{00}
236: \AOPpp{000--000}
237: \AOPReceived{Received }
238: \AOPAMS{Primary 60J60; secondary 60J65, 60K25, 34D20}
239: \AOPKeywords{Stability,
240: positive recurrence, invariant measures, Skorokhod problem,
241: constrained processes, constrained ordinary differential
242: equation, queueing systems, law of large numbers.}
243: \AOPtitle{On Positive Recurrence of Constrained Diffusion Processes}%
244: \AOPauthor{Rami Atar, Amarjit Budhiraja\thanks{Research supported in part by the National
245: Science Foundation (NSF-DMI-9812857) and the University of Notre
246: Dame Faculty Research Program} and Paul Dupuis\thanks{Research supported in part
247: by the National Science Foundation (NSF-DMS-9704426 and DMS-0072004) and the Army Research Office (ARO-DAAD19-99-1-0223)}}%
248: \AOPaffil{Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Brown University}%
249: \AOPlrh{RAMI ATAR, AMARJIT BUDHIRAJA AND PAUL DUPUIS}%
250: \AOPrrh{STABILITY OF CONSTRAINED DIFFUSIONS}%
251: \AOPAbstract{Let $G \subset \R^k$ be a convex polyhedral cone
252: with vertex at the origin given as the intersection of half
253: spaces $\{G_i, i= 1, \cdots , N\}$, where $n_i$ and $d_i$ denote
254: the inward normal and direction of constraint associated with
255: $G_i$, respectively. Stability properties of a class of
256: diffusion processes, constrained to take values in $G$, are
257: studied under the assumption that the Skorokhod problem defined
258: by the data $\{(n_i, d_i), i = 1, \cdots , N \}$ is well posed
259: and the Skorokhod map is Lipschitz continuous. Explicit
260: conditions on the drift coefficient, $b(\cdot)$, of the diffusion
261: process are given under which the constrained process is
262: positive recurrent and has a unique invariant measure. Define
263: $$ \C \Df \left \{ - \sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i d_i; \alpha_i \ge 0, i
264: \in \{1, \cdots , N\} \right \}. $$ Then the key condition for
265: stability is that there exists $\delta \in (0, \infty)$ and a
266: bounded subset $A$ of $G$ such that for all $x \in G\backslash
267: A$, $b(x) \in \C$ and $\dist(b(x), \partial \C) \ge \delta $,
268: where $\partial \C$ denotes the boundary of $\C$.}%
269:
270: %%%%%%%%%%
271: % Standard LATEX command \maketitle will call the AOP style and set the
272: % top of the first page of the article in the proper style (but not in
273: % the proper font).
274: \maketitle
275: %%%%%%%%%%
276:
277: % As discussed above, this resets the footnote counter and returns to
278: % the normal style of automatic numbering the footnotes (they are
279: % particularly not very welcomed in AOP).
280: %\BACKTONORMALFOOTNOTE{3}
281:
282: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
283:
284: \section{Introduction}%
285: The stability properties of constrained stochastic processes are
286: of central importance in the study of queuing systems that arise
287: in computer networks, communications and manufacturing problems.
288: In recent years there has been a significant progress in the study
289: of stability of such systems \cite{harwil, harwil2, dupwil,
290: cheman, dai, dai2, che, mal, meyn, BD}. All the papers in the
291: list above which treat the heavy traffic diffusion model consider
292: the case where both the drift and the diffusion coefficients are
293: constant. However, in many applications a homogeneous model of this
294: kind is not well suited, and it is enough if we mention systems where there is a control that depends on the system's state.
295: Although a similar motivation leads one
296: to also study variable constraint directions on the boundary, we confine
297: ourselves here to fixed directions. In fact, some basic
298: stability properties of the corresponding Skorokhod map, that we take
299: advantage of here, are not yet well understood in the setting of variable directions of constraint.
300:
301: In this paper we consider the stability properties of constrained
302: diffusion processes when both the drift and the diffusion
303: coefficients may be state dependent. Let $G \subset \R^k$ be a
304: convex polyhedral cone with vertex at the origin given as the
305: intersection of half spaces $\{G_i, i= 1, \cdots , N\}$, where
306: $n_i$ and $d_i$ denote the inward normal and direction of
307: constraint associated with $G_i$ respectively. The stochastic
308: processes considered in this paper will be constrained to take
309: values in $G$. One of our central assumptions is that the
310: Skorokhod problem defined by the data $\{(d_i, n_i); i = 1, \cdots
311: , N \}$ is well posed on all of $D_G([0, \infty): \R^k)$ (the
312: space of functions $\phi$ which are right continuous, have left
313: limits and $\phi(0) \in G$) and the Skorokhod map $\Gamma : D_G([0,
314: \infty): \R^k) \to D_G([0, \infty): \R^k)$ is Lipschitz
315: continuous. We refer the reader to \cite{harrei, dupish1, dupram1}
316: for sufficient conditions under which the Skorokhod map is
317: Lipschitz continuous.
318: The paper \cite{rei} studies networks of single class queues for which the Skorokhod problem associated to a diffusion approximation is regular.
319: Some examples of feedforward networks which
320: lead to a regular Skorokhod problem have been studied in \cite{ngu,
321: pet}. An example of a multiclass networks with feedback which leads to
322: a regular Skorokhod problem has recently been studied in
323: \cite{dupram3}.
324:
325: In this paper we consider the constrained diffusion process
326: $\{X^x(t)\}_{t \ge 0}$
327: given as the unique solution of the
328: equation: \be \label{maineq} X^x(t) = \Gamma\left (x +
329: \int_0^{\cdot} \sigma(X^x(s)) dW(s) + \int_0^{\cdot}b(X^x(s)) ds
330: \right) (t); \;\; t \ge 0 \ee We assume global Lipschitz
331: conditions on $\sigma$ and $b$ (cf.\ (\ref{lipbsig})), the boundedness
332: (\ref{growsig}) and uniform non degeneracy (Condition \ref{irred})
333: of the diffusion coefficient $\sigma$. The main
334: result we present is that under the above conditions the Markov
335: process $\{X^x(t)\}_{t \ge 0}$ is positive recurrent and has a
336: unique invariant measure if there exists a $\delta \in (0,
337: \infty)$ and a bounded subset $A$ of $G$ such that for all $x \in
338: G \backslash A$, $b(x) \in \C(\delta)$, where
339: $$\C(\del) \Df \{v \in \C:{\rm dist}(v,\partial C)\ge\del\},$$
340: and
341: $$
342: \C \Df \left \{ - \sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i d_i; \alpha_i \ge 0,
343: i \in \{1, \cdots , N\} \right \}
344: $$
345: and $\partial \C$ denotes the boundary of $\C$.
346: The
347: Lipschitz conditions on $\sigma$ and $b$ are assumed to assure that there is a unique
348: solution
349: to the constrained diffusion process (\ref{maineq}). As we point
350: out in Remark \ref{finrem}, our main result continues to hold if
351: these Lipschitz and growth assumptions are replaced by the
352: assumption
353: that (\ref{maineq}) has a unique weak solution for every $x \in
354: G$
355: and the solution is a Feller Markov process.
356: It should also be observed that the non-degeneracy assumption on $\sigma$ and the Feller property are used only in Section 4 in proving the ergodicity of the
357: constrained
358: diffusion process,
359: and are not needed to prove stability.
360:
361:
362:
363: As in \cite{dupwil,mal,dai} the key idea in the proof of this
364: result is to study stability properties of a related deterministic
365: dynamical system. In Theorem \ref{staba} we show that for each $\delta > 0$, the family of
366: deterministic constrained trajectories defined as
367: \be
368: z(t) \Df \Gamma \left (x + \int_0^{\cdot} v(s) ds \right )(t),
369: \label{dettyp} \ee
370: for which $v(t) \in \C(\delta)$, $t \in [0, \infty)$, enjoys strong uniform stability properties
371: if for some $\delta \in (0, \infty)$, $v(t) \in \C(\delta)$
372: for all $t \in [0, \infty)$. These stability
373: properties enable us to use $T(x)$, the hitting time to the
374: origin (cf. (\ref{hittime}), as a Lyapunov function for the
375: stability analysis of the stochastic problem. We study some basic
376: properties of $T(\cc)$ in Lemma \ref{hit}. The key consequence of
377: the stability of (\ref{dettyp}) is Lemma
378: \ref{hit} (iii). This result along with the Lipschitz property of
379: the Skorokhod map leads to Lemma \ref{deltastep} which is the
380: crucial step in relating the stability of the deterministic
381: dynamical system (\ref{dettyp}) with that of the stochastic system
382: (\ref{maineq}).
383: Stability and instability results for reflecting Brownian motion have been obtained in a number of different settings.
384: The papers \cite{wil,hobrog} consider the two dimensional case with constant and non-constant directions of constraint on the two faces of the domain,
385: respectively.
386: In \cite{harwil2} conditions are presented which guarantee the stability of a multi-dimensional reflecting Brownian motion,
387: and in addition characterizes conditions under which the invariant distribution has a product form distribution.
388: The paper \cite{che} also obtains sufficient conditions for stability for this class of processes.
389:
390:
391: Our main result is Theorem \ref{finitethm} where
392: it is shown that there is a compact set $B \in G$ for
393: which the hitting time: $$ \tau_{B}(x) \Df \inf \{t:
394: X^x(t) \in B\}$$ has finite expectation which as a
395: function of $x$ is bounded on compact subsets of $G$.
396: Proofs of such results generally use a Lyapunov function that is in the domain of the generator of the process (e.g., twice continuously differentiable in our case).
397: An interesting feature of the approach we use is that far less regularity is required of the Lyapunov function.
398: The paper concludes with the proof of the positive recurrence and
399: the uniqueness of the invariant measure for $\{X^x(t)\}$, which is
400: standard due to the uniform non-degeneracy of the diffusion
401: coefficient.
402:
403:
404:
405:
406: \section{Definitions and Formulation}
407: %\beginsec
408: Let $G \subset \R^k$ be the convex polyhedral cone in $\R^k$ with
409: the vertex at origin given as the intersection of half spaces
410: $G_i$, $i = 1, \cdots , N$. Let $n_i$ be the unit vector
411: associated with $G_i$ via the relation
412: $$ G_i = \{ x \in \R^k :
413: \inn{x}{n_i} \ge 0 \}.$$
414: Denote the boundary of a set $S \subset
415: \R^k$ by $\partial S$. We will denote the set $\{ x \in \pa G:
416: \inn{x}{n_i} = 0\}$ by $F_i$. For $x \in \pa G$, define the set,
417: $n(x)$, of unit inward normals to $G$ at $x$ by $$ n(x) \Df \{r: |r| =
418: 1, \;\;\; \inn{r}{x-y} \le 0, \;\; \forall y \in G\}.$$ With each
419: face $F_i$ we associate a unit
420: vector $d_i$ such that $\inn{d_i}{n_i} > 0$.
421: This vector defines the {\it direction of constraint} associated with the face $F_i$.
422: For $x \in \pa
423: G$ define
424: $$ d(x) \Df \left\{d \in \R^k: d = \sum_{i \in \In(x)}\alpha_i d_i;
425: \alpha_i \ge 0; \;\; |d| = 1 \right\}, $$ where $$\In(x) \Df \{i \in
426: \{1,2, \cdots N\}: \inn{x}{n_i} = 0 \}.$$ Let $D([0,\infty):\R^k)$
427: denote the set of functions mapping $[0,\infty)$ to $\R^k$ that
428: are right continuous and have limits from the left. We endow
429: $D([0,\infty):\R^k)$ with the usual Skorokhod topology. Let
430: \[
431: D_G([0,\infty):\R^k) \doteq \{ \psi \in
432: D([0,\infty):\R^k) : \psi(0) \in G\}.
433: \]
434: For $\eta \in D([0,\infty):\R^k)$
435: let $| \eta | (T)$
436: denote the total variation of $\eta$ on
437: $\left[ 0,T \right]$ with respect to the Euclidean norm on
438: $\R^k$.
439:
440: \begin{defn}
441: \label{def-sp}
442: Let $\psi \in D_G([0,\infty):\R^k)$
443: be given.
444: Then $(\phi, \eta) \in D([0,\infty):\R^k)\times D([0,\infty):\R^k)$
445: solves the Skorokhod problem (SP) for $\psi$
446: with respect to $G$ and $d$ if and only if $\phi(0) = \psi (0)$,
447: and for all
448: $t \in [0, \infty)$
449: \begin{enumerate}
450: \item
451: $\phi(t) = \psi (t) + \eta (t)$;
452: \item
453: $\phi (t) \in G$;
454: \item
455: $| \eta | (t) < \infty$;
456: \item
457: $\ds | \eta | (t) = \int_{[0,t]}
458: I_{\left\{ \phi (s) \in \partial G \right\} }
459: d | \eta | (s)$;
460: \item
461: There exists Borel measurable $\gamma : [ 0, \infty)
462: \rightarrow \R^{k}$
463: such that $\gamma (t) \in d( \phi (t))$,
464: $d|\eta |$-almost everywhere
465: and
466: \[ \eta (t) = \int_{[0,t]}
467: \gamma (s)
468: d | \eta | (s). \]
469: \end{enumerate}
470: \end{defn}
471: On the domain $D \subset D_G([0,\infty):\R^k)$ on which there is a
472: unique solution to the Skorokhod problem we define the Skorokhod
473: map (SM) $\Gamma$ as $\Gamma(\psi) \Df \phi$, if $(\phi, \psi - \phi)$
474: is the unique
475: solution of the Skorokhod problem posed by $\psi$.
476: We will make the following assumption on the regularity
477: of the Skorokhod map defined by the data $\{(d_i, n_i); i = 1, 2,
478: \cdots N\}$.
479: \begin{assu}
480: \label{regular}
481: The Skorokhod map is well defined on all of
482: $D_G([0,\infty):\R^k)$, i.e.,
483: $D = D_G([0,\infty):\R^k)$ and the SM
484: is Lipschitz continuous in the following sense.
485: There exists a $K < \infty$ such
486: that
487: for all $\phi_1, \phi_2 \in D_G([0,\infty):\R^k)$:
488: \be
489: \sup_{0 \le t < \infty}|\Gamma(\phi_1)(t) - \Gamma(\phi_2)(t)|
490: < K \sup_{0 \le t < \infty}|\phi_1(t) - \phi_2(t)|.
491: \label{lip}
492: \ee
493: \end{assu}
494: We will assume without loss of generality that $K \ge 1$.
495: We refer the reader to \cite{dupish1} (or alternatively see \cite{dupram1})
496: for sufficient conditions under which this regularity property holds.
497:
498:
499: We now introduce the
500: constrained diffusion process that will be
501: studied in this paper. Let $(\Om, \F , P)$ be a complete
502: probability space on which is given a filtration $\{\F_t\}_{t \ge
503: 0}$ satisfying the usual hypotheses. Let $(W(t), \F_t)$ be a
504: $n$-dimensional standard Wiener process on the above probability
505: space. We will study the constrained diffusion process
506: given as a solution to
507: equation \ref{maineq}, namely,
508: \[
509: \label{constrainz}
510: X^x(t) = \Gamma\left (x + \int_0^{\cdot} \sigma(X^x(s)) dW(s) +
511: \int_0^{\cdot}b(X^x(s))
512: ds \right) (t),\]
513: where $\sigma : G \to \R^{k\times k}$ and
514: $b: G \to \R^k$ are maps satisfying the following condition:
515: \begin{assu}
516: \label{growlip}
517: There exists $\gamma \in (0, \infty)$ for which
518: \be
519: \label{lipbsig}
520: |\sigma(x) - \sigma(y)| + |b(x) - b(y)| \le \gamma|x-y|;
521: \;\;\; \forall x,y \in G
522: \ee
523: and
524: \be
525: \label{growsig}
526: |\sigma(x)| \le \gamma; \;\;\;
527: \forall x \in G .
528: \ee
529: \end{assu}
530: Using the regularity assumption on the Skorokhod map it can be
531: shown (cf.\ \cite{andore,dupish1}) that there is a well defined
532: process satisfying (\ref{constrainz}).
533: In fact,
534: the classical method of Picard iteration gives the following:
535: \begin{theorem}
536: \label{uniqsoln}
537: For all $x \in G$ there exists a unique pair of continuous $\{\F_t\}$ adapted
538: processes
539: $(X^x(t), k(t))_{t \ge 0}$
540: and a
541: progressively measurable process $(\gamma(t))_{t \ge 0}$ such that
542: the following hold:
543: \begin{enumerate}
544: \item
545: $X^x(t) \in G$, for all $t \ge 0$, a.s.
546: \item For all $t \ge 0$,
547: $$X^x(t) = x + \int_0^t \sigma(X^x(s)) dW(s) + \int_0^t b(X^x(s)) ds +
548: k(t),$$
549: a.s.
550: \item
551: For all $T \in [0, \infty)$
552: $$
553: |k|(T) < \infty , \;\; a.s.
554: $$
555: \item
556: $$|k|(t) = \int_0^t I_{\{X^x(s) \in \pa G\}} d|k|(s),$$
557: and
558: $k(t) = \int_0^t \gamma(s) d|k|(s)$ with $\gamma(s) \in
559: d(X^x(s))$
560: a.e. $[d|k|]$.
561: \end{enumerate}
562: \end{theorem}
563: \begin{remark}\label{rem:sm}
564: The process $X^x(\cdot)$ is the unique continuous $\{\F_t\}$ adapted process
565: which satisfies the equation
566: $$
567: X^x(t) = \Gamma\left (x + \int_0^{\cdot} \sigma(X^x(s)) dW(s) +
568: \int_0^{\cdot}b(X^x(s))
569: ds \right) (t),$$
570: for all $t$ a.s. Also, $X^x(\cc)$ is a Feller Markov process.
571: \end{remark}
572: We now proceed to formulate our central result.
573: Define
574: \[
575: \C \Df \left \{ - \sum_{i=1}^N \alpha_i d_i: \alpha_i \ge 0;
576: \; i \in \{1, \cdots , N\} \right \}
577: %\label{cone}
578: \]
579: The cone ${\cal C}$ was used to characterize stability of certain
580: semimartingale reflecting Brownian motions in \cite{BD}.
581:
582: For $\delta \in (0, \infty)$, define
583: $$
584: \C(\delta) \Df
585: \{v \in \C:\dist(v,\partial C)\ge\del\}.
586: $$
587: Our next assumption on the diffusion model stipulates the
588: permissible velocity directions.
589: \begin{assu}
590: \label{permit}
591: There exist a $\delta \in (0, \infty)$ and a bounded set
592: $A \subset G$ such that
593: for all $x \in G\backslash A$, $b(x) \in \C(\delta)$.
594: \end{assu}
595: Finally we will make the following uniform nondegeneracy assumption on
596: the diffusion coefficient.
597: \begin{assu}
598: \label{irred}
599: There exists $c \in (0, \infty)$ such that
600: for all $x \in G$ and $\alpha \in \R^k$
601: $$
602: \alpha'(\sigma(x)\sigma'(x))\alpha \ge c \alpha'\alpha .
603: $$
604: \end{assu}
605:
606: Here is the main theorem of this paper.
607: \begin{theorem}
608: Assume that Conditions \ref{regular}, \ref{growlip}, \ref{permit},
609: \ref{irred}
610: hold.
611: Then the strong Markov process $\{X^x(\cc); x \in G\}$ is
612: positive recurrent and has a unique invariant probability
613: measure.
614: \label{main}
615: \end{theorem}
616: In the rest of the paper we will assume that Conditions
617: \ref{regular}, \ref{growlip}, \ref{permit} and
618: \ref{irred}
619: hold.
620:
621: \section{Stability of Constrained ODEs}
622: %\beginsec
623: Let $v: [0, \infty) \to \R^k$ be a measurable map such that
624: \be
625: \int_0^t |v(s)| ds < \infty; \;\;\; \mbox{for all} \;\;
626: t \in [0, \infty).
627: \label{boc}
628: \ee
629: Let $x \in G$. In this section we will study the stability
630: properties of the trajectory $z: [0, \infty) \to \R^k$ defined as
631: \be
632: \label{traj}
633: z(t) \Df \Gamma \left(x + \int_0^{\cdot} v(s) ds\right)(t); \;\; t \in [0,
634: \infty).
635: \ee
636:
637: It is useful to rewrite the above trajectory as a solution
638: of
639: an ordinary differential equation. In order to do so we
640: introduce the following notion of discrete projections
641: (cf. \cite{
642: dupish1,dupram1}).
643: Define $\pi: \R^k \to G$ as follows:
644: $$
645: \pi(y) \Df \Gamma(\psi_y)(1), \;\;\; y \in \R^k,$$
646: where $\psi_y \in D([0, \infty); \R^k)$ is given as
647: \[
648: \psi_y(t) = \left\{ \begin{array}{l} 0, \;\;\; t \in [0,1) \\
649: y, \;\;\; t \in [1, \infty). \end{array} \right.
650: \]
651: In other words,
652: $\pi$ is a projection that is consistent with the given Skorokhod problem,
653: in that the constrained version of any piecewise constant trajectory $\psi$ can be found by recursively applying $\pi$.
654: We also define
655: the {\it projection of the velocity} $v\in \R^k$ {\it at} $x\in G$ by
656: $$
657: \pi(x,v) \Df \lim_{\Delta \to 0} \frac{\pi(x+\Delta v) -
658: x}{\Delta}.
659: $$
660: For a proof of the fact that the above limit exists we refer the
661: reader to \cite{BD} where various properties of the
662: projection map are also studied. In particular we will use the
663: following facts (for proofs see \cite{BD}).
664: \begin{enumerate}
665: \item
666: For $x \in G$,
667: $\alpha, \beta , \gamma \ge 0$ and $v \in \R^k$:
668: \be
669: \pi(\beta x , \alpha v + \gamma x) = \alpha \pi(x, v) + \gamma x.
670: \label{scal}
671: \ee
672: \item
673: For $v \in \R^k$, we have that
674: \be
675: \pi(v) = 0 \;\; \mbox{if and only if} \;\;
676: v \in \C
677: \label{stayz}
678: \ee
679: \end{enumerate}
680:
681: The following theorem represents the trajectory in (\ref{traj})
682: as a solution of an ordinary differential equation
683: (cf. \cite{dupish1}).
684: \begin{theorem}
685: \label{ode2}
686: Let $v: [0, \infty) \to \R^k$ satisfy (\ref{boc}). Then for all
687: $x \in G$,
688: $z(\cdot)$ defined via (\ref{traj}) is the
689: unique absolutely continuous function
690: such
691: that
692: \[
693: \dot{z}(t) = \pi(z(t), v(t)), \;\;\; a.e. \;\; t, \;\;\;\;
694: z(0) = x.
695: \]
696: \end{theorem}
697:
698: In Theorem \ref{staba} below we present a basic stability property of the
699: above dynamical system.
700: \begin{theorem}
701: \label{staba}
702: Let $v$ be as in Theorem \ref{ode2}.
703: Assume that there exists a $\delta \in (0, \infty)$
704: such that
705: $$
706: v(t) \in \C(\delta) \;\; \mbox{for all}\;\;
707: t \in [0,
708: \infty).
709: $$
710: Let $x \in G$ and $z(\cdot)$ be defined via (\ref{traj}).
711: Then:
712: $$
713: |z(t)| \le \frac{K^2|x|^2}{K|x| + \delta t}, \;\;\; \forall
714: t \in [0, \infty),
715: $$
716: where $K$ is the finite constant in (\ref{lip}).
717: \end{theorem}
718:
719: \noi
720: {\bf Proof:}
721: In order to specify the initial point of the trajectory we will
722: write
723: the trajectory defined by (\ref{traj}) as $z(x, \cc)$.
724: Define the trajectory $\ti z(\cc)$ as
725: $$\ti z(t) \Df \Gamma\left( \int_0^{\cc}v(s) ds\right)(t).$$
726: Theorem \ref{ode2} implies that $\ti z(\cc)$ is the unique
727: solution
728: of
729: \be
730: \dot{\ti z}(t) = \pi(\ti z(t), v(t)), \;\; a.e.\; t; \;\;\;\;
731: \ti z(0) = 0.
732: \label{subs}
733: \ee
734: However
735: since $v(t) \in \C(\delta) \subset \C$,
736: we have from (\ref{stayz})
737: that $\pi(0, v(t)) =0$ for all $t \ge 0$ and
738: so the zero trajectory solves (\ref{subs}).
739: By Theorem \ref{ode2} this implies that
740: $\ti z(t) \equiv 0$.
741: Thus
742: \beqn
743: \sup_{0 \le t < \infty}
744: |z(x,t)| &=&
745: \sup_{0 \le t < \infty}
746: |z(x,t) - \ti z(t)| \non
747: \\
748: &=&
749: \sup_{0 \le t < \infty}
750: \left|\Gamma\left(x + \int_0^{\cc}v(s) ds\right)(t)
751: - \Gamma \left(\int_0^{\cc}v(s) ds\right )(t)\right| \non \\
752: &\le &
753: K |x|.
754: \label{zero}
755: \eeqn
756:
757: The above inequalities in particular show that the theorem is
758: true
759: when $x = 0$. Henceforth we assume that $x \neq 0$.
760: Define
761: $$
762: \gamma \Df \frac{\delta }{K|x|}$$
763: and
764: \be
765: \label{psidef}
766: \psi(t) \Df (1+ \gamma t)z(x,t).\ee
767: Note that from (\ref{scal}) it follows
768: that
769: \beq
770: \dot{\psi}(t) &=& \gamma z(x,t) + (1+ \gamma t)\pi(z(x,t),
771: v(t))\\
772: &=&
773: \pi\left(z(x,t), (1+\gamma t) v(t) + \gamma z(x,t)\right) \\
774: &=&
775: \pi\left(\psi(t), (1+\gamma t)\left(v(t) + \frac{\gamma}{1 +
776: \gamma t} z(x,t)\right)\right).
777: \eeq
778: By Theorem \ref{ode2} we now have that
779: $\psi(t) = \Gamma(x + f(\cc))(t)$ for all $t \in [0, \infty)$
780: where
781: $$
782: f(t) \Df \int_0^t\left( (1+\gamma s)\left(v(s) + \frac{\gamma}{1 +
783: \gamma s} z(x,s)\right)\right) ds.
784: $$
785: Note that from (\ref{zero}) it follows that
786: $$
787: \left|\frac{\gamma}{1 +
788: \gamma t} z(x,t)\right| \le K|x| \frac{\delta }{K|x|} = \delta .$$
789: Thus
790: if $v \in \C(\delta )$
791: then
792: $v + \frac{\gamma}{(1 +
793: \gamma t)} z(x,t) \in \C$. From this observation it follows
794: that
795: for all $t \in [0, \infty)$
796: $$
797: u(t) \Df (1+\gamma t)\left(v(t) + \frac{\gamma}{1 +
798: \gamma t} z(x,t)\right) \in \C.$$
799:
800: Define the trajectory
801: $$\ti \psi(t) \Df \Gamma (f(\cc))(t); \;\; t \in [0, \infty).$$
802: Then $\ti \psi(\cc)$ solves the equation
803: \be
804: \label{dummy}
805: \dot{\ti \psi}(t) = \pi(\ti \psi(t), u(t)); \;\; \ti \psi(0) = 0.
806: \ee
807: Since for all $t \in (0, \infty)$, $u(t) \in \C$
808: we have that $\pi(0, u(t)) = 0$. Thus the function
809: $x(t) = 0$ for all $t \in (0, \infty)$ is a solution of
810: (\ref{dummy}). Now by the uniqueness of the solution of
811: (\ref{dummy}) (Theorem \ref{ode2}) we have that
812: $\ti \psi(t) = 0$ for all $t \in (0, \infty)$.
813: Thus
814: \beq
815: |\psi(t)| &=& |\psi(t) - \ti \psi(t)|\\
816: & \le & |\Gamma(x + f(\cc))(t) - \Gamma(f(\cc))(t)|\\
817: & \le & K|x|,
818: \eeq
819: for all $t \in (0, \infty)$.
820: Finally from (\ref{psidef})
821: $$
822: |z(x,t)| \le \frac{K|x|}{1+ \gamma t} = \frac{K^2 |x|^2}{
823: K|x| + \delta t}.
824: $$
825: \ink
826:
827: For $x \in G$ and $\delta \in (0, \infty)$
828: let $\acal(x, \delta )$ be the collection of all absolutely
829: continuous functions $z: [0, \infty) \to \R^k$
830: defined via (\ref{traj}) for some $v: [0, \infty) \to
831: {\cal C}(\del)$
832: which satisfies (\ref{boc}).
833: Henceforth we will fix such a $\delta $ and abbreviate
834: $\acal(x, \delta )$ by $\acal(x)$.
835:
836: For a fixed $x \in G$, we now define the
837: ``hitting time to the origin'' function
838: as follows:
839: \be
840: \label{hittime}
841: T(x) \Df \sup_{z \in \acal(x)} \inf \{t \in [0, \infty): z(t) =
842: 0\}.\ee
843: We next study some of the properties of $T(x)$.
844: \begin{lemma}
845: \label{hit}
846: There exist constants $c,C\in(0,\infty)$ depending only on
847: $K$ and $\del$ such that the following holds.
848: \begin{itemize}
849: \item[(i)]
850: For all $x, y \in G$
851: $$
852: |T(x) - T(y)| \le C|x-y|.
853: $$
854: \item[(ii)]
855: \[
856: % \label{oio}
857: T(x) \ge c|x|. \]
858: Thus, in particular, for all $M \in (0, \infty)$
859: the set $\{x \in G: T(x) \le M \}$ is compact.
860: \item[(iii)] Fix $x \in G$ and
861: let $z \in \acal(x)$. Then for all $t > 0$
862: \[
863: %\label{positive}
864: T(z(t)) \le (T(x) - t)^+.
865: \]
866: \end{itemize}
867: \end{lemma}
868: {\bf Proof:}
869: We first show that for all $x \in G$
870: \be
871: \label{bdd}
872: T(x) \le \frac{4K^2}{\delta} |x|.\ee
873: Fix $x \in G$ and let $z \in \acal(x)$ be arbitrary. From Theorem \ref{staba}
874: we have that for all $t \in (0, \infty)$
875: $$
876: |z(t)| \le \frac{K^2|x|^2}{K|x| + \delta t}.
877: $$
878: Hence for all $t\ge T_1\doteq 2K^2\delta^{-1}|x|$ one has
879: $|z(t)| \le |x|/2$.
880: In general, if $$T_n \Df T_1\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}2^{-k}$$ then for $t\ge T_n$
881: one has that $$|z(t)| \le \frac{|x|}{2^n}.$$ Thus $z(t) = 0$
882: for all $t \ge 4K^2\delta^{-1}|x|$.
883: Since $z \in \acal(x)$ is arbitrary, (\ref{bdd}) follows.
884:
885: Now let $x, y \in G$ be arbitrary. Let
886: $\{z_n\} \subset \acal(x)$ be a sequence such that if
887: $$
888: \tau_n \Df \inf \{t: z_n(t) = 0 \},$$
889: then
890: \be
891: \label{limit}
892: \tau_n \to T(x) \;\;\; \mbox{as}\;\; n \to \infty .
893: \ee
894: Note that $z_n$ is given as
895: $$z_n(t) = \Gamma \left(x + \int_0^{\cc}v_n(s) ds\right)(t);
896: \;\;\;
897: t \in [0, \infty)
898: $$
899: for some $v_n$ satisfying (\ref{traj}).
900: Define for $t \in [0, \infty)$
901: $$
902: w_n(t) \Df \Gamma\left(y + \int_0^{\cc}v_n(s) ds\right)(t).
903: $$From the Lipschitz property of $\Gamma$ (Condition
904: \ref{regular})
905: we have that
906: \[
907: %\label{lip-1}
908: \sup_{0 \le t < \infty}
909: |z_n(t) - w_n(t)| \le K|x-y|.
910: \]
911: Also clearly $w_n \in \acal(y)$.
912: Now let
913: $$
914: \tau'_n \Df \inf \{t \in (0, \infty): w_n(t) = 0\}.$$
915: Fix $n$ and suppose that $\tau_n \le \tau'_n$.
916: Then
917: \[
918: |w_n(\tau_n)| = |w_n(\tau_n) - z_n(\tau_n)|
919: \le K|x-y|.
920: \]
921: Hence from (\ref{bdd}), letting $C\doteq 4K^3\delta^{-1}$,
922: $$
923: \tau'_n \le \tau_n + C |x-y|.$$
924: Similarly it can be seen that if
925: $\tau'_n \le \tau_n$
926: then
927: $$
928: \tau_n \le \tau'_n + C |x-y|
929: $$
930: and thus
931: $$
932: |\tau_n - \tau'_n| \le C|x-y|.$$
933: We therefore have that
934: \[
935: \tau_n \le \tau'_n + C|x-y|
936: \le T(y) + C|x-y|.
937: \]
938:
939: Sending $n \to \infty$, it follows from (\ref{limit}) that
940: $$
941: T(x) \le T(y) + C|x-y|.$$
942: Since the role of $x$ and $y$ can be reversed, we have that
943: $$
944: |T(x) - T(y)| \le C|x-y|,
945: $$
946: and since $x$ and $y$ are arbitrary we have (i).
947:
948: Next we show (ii).
949: Fix some $v \in \C(\delta)$,
950: and let $x \in G\backslash\{0\}$ be given.
951: With $\ii: [0, \infty) \to [0, \infty)$ denoting the
952: identity map,
953: clearly the trajectory $\{\Gamma(x + v\ii)(t)\}_{t \ge 0}$ belongs
954: to $\acal(x)$. Note that
955: \beq
956: \sup_{0 \le t \le M}
957: |\Gamma(x + v\ii)(t) - x|
958: &=& \sup_{0 \le t \le M}
959: |\Gamma(x + v\ii)(t) - \Gamma(x + 0\ii)(t)|\\
960: &\le& K M|v|.
961: \eeq
962: Therefore for any $M<|x|/K|v|$
963: \[
964: \inf_{0 \le t \le M}
965: |\Gamma(x + v\ii)(t)|
966: \ge
967: |x| - KM|v|
968: > 0,
969: \]
970: which implies that $T(x) > M$.
971: Taking the supremum over $M<|x|/K|v|$ gives
972: \beq
973: T(x) & \ge & \frac{|x|}{K|v|}.
974: \eeq
975: This proves (ii) with $c=1/K|v|$.
976:
977: Finally we prove (iii). Let $t>0$ be fixed.
978: If $T(z(s)) = 0$ for some $s \in [0,t]$ then the result is
979: obviously true. Now suppose that $T(z(s)) > 0$ for all
980: $s \in [0,t]$.
981: Let $\beta > 0$ be arbitrary and $u \in \acal(z(t))$ be such that
982: $\tau \Df \inf \{s \in [0, \infty) : u(s) = 0\}$ satisfies
983: $\tau > T(z(t)) - \beta$.
984: Define $\ti z: [0, \infty) \to \R^k$ by
985: \[
986: \ti z(s) =\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} z(s) & s \le t\\
987: u(s-t) & s > t.\end{array}
988: \right.
989: \]
990: Then $\ti z \in \acal(x)$ and
991: \beq
992: T(x) & \ge & \inf \{s \in [0, \infty): \ti z(s) = 0\}\\
993: & =& t + \tau \\
994: & \ge & T(z(t))+ t - \beta .
995: \eeq
996: Since $\beta > 0$ is arbitrary we have that
997: $T(z(t)) \le T(x) - t$. This proves
998: the lemma.
999: \ink
1000:
1001: \section{Stability of Constrained Diffusion Processes}
1002: %\beginsec
1003: We begin with the following lemma. For $x \in G$, let $\Om_0(x)$
1004: be a $P-$null set such that for all $\om \not \in \Om_0(x)$
1005: and $0 \le u < t < \infty$, $X^x(\cdot)=X^x(\cdot,\omega)$ satisfies
1006: $$
1007: X^x(t) = \Gamma \left(X^x(u) + \int_0^{\cdot}
1008: b(X^x(u+s)) ds
1009: + \int_0^{\cdot} \sigma (X^x(u+s)) dW_u(s) \right)(t-u),
1010: $$
1011: where $W_u(s) \Df W(s+u)$.
1012: \begin{lemma}
1013: \label{deltastep}
1014: Let $T$ be the function defined in (\ref{hittime}). Fix $x \in
1015: G\setminus A$ and let
1016: $\{X^x(t)\}_{ t \ge 0}$ be as in Theorem \ref{main}.
1017: Let $\Delta > 0$ and $u > 0$ be arbitrary.
1018: Fix $\om \not \in \Om_0(x)$. Suppose that
1019: $X^x(t, \om) \in G\backslash A$ for all $t \in (u, u + \D]$.
1020: Then
1021: \[
1022: %\label{iter}
1023: T(X^x(u + \D, \om)) \le (T(X^x(u, \om)) - \D)^+
1024: + KC \ov \nu(\om) ,
1025: \]
1026: where $C$ is as in Lemma \ref{hit} (i) and
1027: \be
1028: \label{nunov}
1029: \ov \nu \Df \sup_{u \le s \le u +\D} \left |\int_{u}^s
1030: \sigma(X^x(s)) dW(s)\right |.\ee
1031: \end{lemma}
1032: {\bf Proof:}
1033: In the proof we will suppress $\om$ from the notation.
1034: We begin by noticing that for $t \in [u , u + \D)$,
1035: $X^x(t) = \ti X(t - u)$, where
1036: \beq
1037: \ti X(t) &\Df& \Gamma\left(X^x(u)
1038: + \int_0^{\cdot} b(X^x(s+ u))
1039: ds \right . \\
1040: & &\mbox{}+ \left . \int_0^{\cdot} \sigma(X^x(s+ u)) dW_u(s)
1041: \right)(t); \;\; 0 \le t \le \Delta .
1042: \eeq
1043: Now define a sequence of $\R^k$ valued stochastic processes
1044: $\{\tilde Y(t)\}_{0 \le t \le \D}$ as follows.
1045: \be
1046: \label{surro}
1047: \tilde Y(t) \Df \Gamma \left( X^x(u) +
1048: \int_0^{\cdot} b(X^x(s+u))
1049: ds\right) (t).
1050: \ee
1051: Note that $\tilde Y(t)$ has absolutely continuous paths $P$-a.s.,
1052: and that $b(X^x(s+u))\in {\cal C}(\delta)$ for all $s \in [0,\Delta]$.
1053: Also, note that by Condition \ref{regular} we have
1054: \beqn
1055: \sup_{0 \le t \le \D}
1056: |\ti X(t) - \tilde Y(t)|
1057: & \le &
1058: K \sup_{0 \le t \le \D}
1059: \left | \int_0^t \sigma(X^x(s+u)) dW_u(s)\right| \non \\
1060: &=& K \ov \nu.
1061: \label{lateruse}
1062: \eeqn
1063: Using the Lipschitz property of $T$ (Lemma \ref{hit} (i))
1064: we have that
1065: \beq
1066: T(X^x(u + \D)) & = & T(\ti X(\Delta))\\
1067: & \le & T(\tilde Y(\D)) + KC \ov \nu\\
1068: & \le & (T(X^x(u)) - \D)^+ + KC \ov \nu,
1069: \eeq
1070: where the last inequality follows from Lemma \ref{hit}(iii).
1071: \ink
1072:
1073: \begin{lemma}
1074: \label{doob}
1075: Suppose that $\{\alpha_i(t)\}$; $i = 1, 2, \cdots , l$ are
1076: $\R^k$ valued $\sigma \{W(s): 0 \le s \le t
1077: \}$-progressively measurable processes such that there exists
1078: $\ov \alpha \in (0, \infty)$ for which
1079: $$
1080: |\alpha_i(t)| \le \ov \alpha ,$$
1081: for all $t \in (0, \infty)$, $i \in \{1, \cdots , l\}$,
1082: $P$-a.s.
1083: Then for $\lambda \in (0, \infty)$
1084: $$
1085: \E\left( e^{\lambda \sum_{i=1}^l
1086: \left |\int_0^t \inn{\alpha_i(s)} {dW(s)} \right |}\right)
1087: \le 2 e^{\frac{l^2\lambda^2 \ov \alpha^2 t}{2}},
1088: $$
1089: where $\inn{\cdot}{\cdot}$ is the usual inner product in $\R^k$.
1090: \end{lemma}
1091:
1092: \noindent
1093: {\bf Proof:}
1094: We first consider the case when $l =1$.
1095: Observe that
1096: $$E\left(\exp\left(\lambda \int_0^t \inn{\alpha_1(s)}{dW(s)} - \half \la^2 \int_0^t |\alpha_1(s)|^2 ds\right) \right) = 1$$
1097: and
1098: $$E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \int_0^t \inn{\alpha_1(s)}{dW(s)} - \half \la^2 \int_0^t |\alpha_1(s)|^2 ds\right) \right) = 1.$$
1099: Using the upper bound on $|\alpha_1(\cc)|$ we now have that
1100: \beq
1101: E\left(\exp\left(\lambda \left|\int_0^t \inn{\alpha_1(s)}{dW(s)}\right|\right) \right)
1102: &\le & E\left(\exp\left(\lambda \int_0^t \inn{\alpha_1(s)}{dW(s)}\right) \right)\\
1103: & +& E\left(\exp\left(-\lambda \int_0^t \inn{\alpha_1(s)}{dW(s)}\right) \right)\\
1104: & \le & e^{\frac{\lambda^2 \ov \alpha^2 t}{2}} + e^{\frac{\lambda^2 \ov \alpha^2 t}{2}}\\
1105: & = & 2 e^{\frac{\lambda^2 \ov \alpha^2 t}{2}} .
1106: \eeq
1107:
1108: %Let $\ti B(\cdot)$ be a one dimensional standard Brownian motion
1109: %independent of $W(\cdot)$ and let $c \in (0, \infty)$.
1110: %Note that $M(t) \Df \int_0^t \inn{\alpha_1(s)} {dW(s)} + c\ti
1111: %B(t)$
1112: % is a continuous
1113: %$L^2$ martingale and
1114: % $<M>_t \to \infty$, a.s. as $t \to \infty$.
1115: % Define $\tau \Df \int_0^t |\alpha_1(s)|^2 ds + c^2t$.
1116: %Then $M(t)$ has the same probability law as $B(\tau)$, where
1117: %$B(\cc)$ is a standard one dimensional Brownian motion
1118: %(cf. Theorem
1119: %3.4.6 \cite{KarShr}).
1120: % Therefore
1121: %\beq
1122: %\E\left( e^{\lambda \left
1123: %|\int_0^t \inn{\alpha_1(s)}{ dW(s)} + c\ti B(t)\right |}\right)
1124: %& = &
1125: %\E e^{\lambda|B(\tau)|} \\
1126: %& \le & \E e^{\lambda |B(\ov \alpha^2 t + c^2t)|},
1127: %\eeq
1128: %where the last step follows from optional sampling theorem for
1129: %submartingales (cf. Theorem 1.3.22 \cite{KarShr})
1130: %on noticing that $\tau \le \ov \alpha^2 t + c^2t$.
1131: %Letting $c \to 0$ we have that
1132: %$$
1133: %\E\left( e^{\lambda \left
1134: %|\int_0^t \inn{\alpha_1(s)}{ dW(s)}\right |}\right)
1135: %\le \E e^{\lambda |B(\ov \alpha^2 t)|}.$$
1136: %Finally the result follows on observing that
1137: %$$
1138: %\E e^{\lambda |B(\ov \alpha^2 t)|} \le 2 e^{\frac{\lambda^2\ov \alpha^2
1139: % t}{2}}.
1140: %$$
1141: This proves the lemma for the case $l=1$. Now we consider the case $l > 1$.
1142: Note that
1143: \beq
1144: \E \left( e^{\lambda \sum_{i=1}^l |\int_0^t
1145: \inn{\alpha_i(s)}{dW(s)}|}\right)
1146: & \le &
1147: \E \left( \prod_{i=1}^l e^{\lambda |\int_0^t
1148: \inn{\alpha_i(s)}{dW(s)}|}\right)\\
1149: & \le & \left( \prod_{i=1}^l \E\left(e^{l\lambda |\int_0^t
1150: \inn{\alpha_i(s)}{dW(s)}|}\right)
1151: \right)^{\frac{1}{l}}\\
1152: & \le & 2 \left( e^{\frac{l^3 \lambda^2 \ov{\alpha}^2
1153: t}{2}}\right)^{\frac{1}{l}}\\
1154: &= & 2e^{\frac{l^2\lambda^2 \ov{\alpha}^2
1155: t}{2}}.
1156: \eeq
1157: \ink
1158:
1159: In what follows, we will denote the set of positive integers by $\INT$.
1160: \begin{lemma}
1161: \label{doob-main}
1162: Let $x \in G$ and $\D > 0$ be fixed. For $n \in \INT$ let
1163: $\nu_n$ be defined as follows:
1164: \be
1165: \label{nun}
1166: \nu_n \Df \sup_{(n-1)\D \le s \le n \D} \left |\int_{(n-1)\D}^s
1167: \sigma(X^x(s)) dW(s)\right |.\ee
1168: Then for any
1169: $\kappa \in (0, \infty)$ and $m, n \in \INT$; $m \le n$,
1170: $$
1171: \E\left( e^{\kappa \sum_{i=m}^n \nu_i}\right)
1172: \le
1173: \left [ 2\sqrt{2} e^{k^2\kappa^2 \gamma^2 \D} \right]^{(n-m+1)},
1174: $$
1175: where $\gamma$ is as in Condition \ref{growlip}.
1176: \end{lemma}
1177: {\bf Proof:}
1178: For $t > 0$, let
1179: $$
1180: \G_t \Df \sigma \{ W(s): 0 \le s \le t \}.$$
1181: Then
1182: \be
1183: \label{cond1}
1184: \E e^{\kappa \sum_{i=m}^n \nu_i}
1185: =
1186: \E\left( e^{\kappa \sum_{i=m}^{n-1} \nu_i}
1187: \left(
1188: \E\left(e^{\kappa \nu_n} \mid \G_{(n-1)\D}\right)\right) \right).
1189: \ee
1190: Now
1191: \beq
1192: \E\left(e^{\kappa \nu_n} \mid \G_{(n-1)\D}\right)
1193: & =&
1194: \E \left(
1195: \left. \sup_{(n-1)\D \le s \le n \D}
1196: e^{\kappa \left|\int_{(n-1)\D}^s \sigma(X^x(u))dW(u)\right|}\right|
1197: \G_{(n-1)\D} \right) \\
1198: &=&
1199: \E \left(
1200: \left. \sup_{(n-1)\D \le s \le n \D}
1201: e^{\kappa \left|\int_{(n-1)\D}^s \sigma(X^x(u))dW(u)\right|}\right|
1202: X^x((n-1)\D) \right),
1203: \eeq
1204: where the last step follows from the Markov property of
1205: $X^x$.
1206:
1207: An application of Doob's maximal inequality for submartingales
1208: yields that
1209: the last expression is bounded above by
1210: $$
1211: 2 \left( \E \left( \left. e^{2\kappa \left|\int_{(n-1)\D}^{n\D} \sigma(X(u))
1212: dW(u)\right |}
1213: \right| X^x((n-1)\D) \right) \right)^{\half}.$$
1214: By an application of Lemma \ref{doob}
1215: and the observation that for positive real numbers $x_1, \cdots x_k$, $\sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^k x_i^2} \le
1216: \sum_{i=1}^k x_i$ we have that the last expression
1217: is bounded above by
1218: $$
1219: 2\sqrt{2}e^{k^2\kappa^2 \gamma^2 \D}.$$
1220: Using this observation in (\ref{cond1}) we have the result by
1221: iterating.
1222: \ink
1223:
1224: \skp
1225: For $\D > 0$ let
1226: \[
1227: %\label{bd}
1228: B^{\D} \Df \{y \in G: T(y) \le \D \}.
1229: \]
1230: Let $\{X^x(t)\}_{t \ge 0}$ be as in
1231: Theorem \ref{uniqsoln}. Given a compact set $B \subset G$, let
1232: \be
1233: \label{taub}
1234: \tau_B(x) \Df \inf \{t: X^x(t) \in B \}.\ee
1235: \begin{theorem}
1236: \label{finitethm}
1237: Let $\{X^x(t)\}_{t \ge 0}$ be as in
1238: Theorem \ref{main}.
1239: Then there exists $\Delta \in ( 0,\infty)$
1240: such that for all $M \in (0, \infty)$
1241: $$
1242: \sup_{x: |x| \le M} \E(\tau_{B^{\D}}(x)) < \infty .$$
1243: \end{theorem}
1244:
1245: \noindent
1246: {\bf Proof:}
1247: %We first show that it sufffices to consider $A=\emptyset$.
1248: %This we do by a simple coupling argument.
1249: Without loss of generality
1250: we can assume that $\Delta$ is chosen large enough so that
1251: $B^{\Delta} \supset A$.
1252:
1253:
1254: Let $\Delta \in (0, \infty)$ and let
1255: $$A_n \Df \{\omega : \inf_{s \in [0, n\D]}T(X^x(s)) > \Delta \}. $$
1256: Then
1257: \beqn
1258: P(A_n) & \le &
1259: %P\left(T(X^x(\D)) > \D , \cdots , T(X^x(n\D)) > \D \right) \non \\
1260: %& \le &
1261: P\left( \Delta < T(X^x(n\D)) \le T(x) - n \D + CK\sum_{j=1}^n \nu_j
1262: \right), \non \\
1263: \label{an}
1264: \eeqn
1265: where $\{\nu_j\}_{j=1}^n$ are as in (\ref{nun}) and the
1266: inequality follows from Lemma \ref{deltastep}.
1267: Next observe that the probability on the right side of
1268: (\ref{an})
1269: is bounded above by:
1270: \beq
1271: P \left ( CK \sum_{i=1}^n \nu_i \ge (n+1)\D - T(x) \right)
1272: & \le &
1273: \frac{\E(e^{\alpha CK \sum_{i=1}^n \nu_i})}
1274: {e^{\alpha ((n+1)\D - T(x))}} \\
1275: & \le &
1276: \frac{\left(2\sqrt{2}e^{k^2\alpha^2C^2K^2\gamma^2 \D}\right)^n}
1277: {e^{\alpha ((n+1)\D - T(x))}}\\
1278: & = &
1279: \frac{e^{\alpha T(x)}}{e^{\alpha \D}}
1280: e^{\left( k^2\alpha^2 C^2K^2 \gamma^2 - \alpha + \frac{\log
1281: 8}{2\D}\right)
1282: n \D},
1283: \eeq
1284: where $\alpha > 0$ is arbitrary
1285: and the next to last inequality follows from Lemma
1286: \ref{doob-main}.
1287: Choose $\D > 0$ (sufficiently large) and $\alpha > 0$ (sufficiently
1288: small)
1289: such that
1290: $$
1291: k^2 \alpha^2 C^2K^2 \gamma^2 - \alpha + \frac{ \log 8}{2\D} \Df -
1292: \eta < 0.$$
1293: Then
1294: \beq
1295: P(X^x(s) \not \in B^{\D}; 0 \le s \le n\D )
1296: & = & P(A_n)\\
1297: & \le & \frac{e^{\alpha T(x)}}{e^{(\alpha - \eta)\D}}e^{-\eta (n+1)
1298: \D},
1299: \eeq
1300: for all $n \in \INT$.
1301: Now let $t \in (0, \infty)$ be arbitrary and $n_0$ be such that
1302: $t \in [n_0 \D , (n_0 + 1)\D]$.
1303: Then
1304: \beq
1305: P(\tau_{B^{\D}}(x) > t)
1306: & =&
1307: P(X^x(s) \not \in B^{\D}; 0 \le s \le t) \\
1308: & \le &
1309: P(X^x(s) \not \in B^{\D}; 0 \le s \le n_0\D) \\
1310: & \le &
1311: \frac{e^{\alpha T(x)}}{e^{(\alpha - \eta)\D}}
1312: e^{- \eta (n_0 + 1)\D} \\
1313: & \le &
1314: \frac{e^{\alpha T(x)}}{e^{(\alpha - \eta)\D}}
1315: e^{- \eta t}.
1316: \eeq
1317: Hence
1318: \beq
1319: \E(\tau_{B^{\D}}(x)) &=&
1320: \int_0^{\infty} P(\tau_{B^{\Delta}}(x) > t) dt \\
1321: & \le & \frac{e^{\alpha T(x)}}{e^{(\alpha -
1322: \eta)\D}}\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\eta t} dt \\
1323: & =& \frac{e^{\alpha T(x)}}{\eta e^{(\alpha - \eta) \D}}.
1324: \eeq
1325: Recalling that $T(\cc)$ is a continuous function we have from the
1326: above inequality that for all $M \in (0, \infty)$
1327: $$
1328: \sup_{x: |x| \le M} \E(\tau_{B^{\D}}(x)) < \infty .
1329: $$
1330: \ink
1331:
1332: \begin{lemma}
1333: \label{tight}
1334: For $x \in G$ let $\{X^x(t)\}_{t \ge 0}$ be as in
1335: Theorem \ref{main}. Then for all
1336: $M \in (0, \infty)$ the family $\{X^x(t); t \ge 0, |x| \le M\}$
1337: is tight.
1338: \end{lemma}
1339: {\bf Proof:}
1340: Let $\Delta > 0$ be large enough so that $B^{\Delta} \supset A$.
1341: Fix $\om \in \Om_0(x)$, where $\Om_0(x)$ is as defined at the
1342: beginning of this section.
1343: In the rest of the proof we will suppress the dependence of all
1344: random variables on $\om$ in the notation.
1345: Let
1346: $$S(\Delta) \Df \{j \in \{1, 2, \cdots , n-1\}: T(X^x(t))\le
1347: \D\;\;
1348: \mbox{for some} \; t \in [(j-1)\Delta , j \Delta)\}.$$
1349: Define
1350: \[
1351: m = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}\max \{j: j \in S(\Delta)\} & \mbox{if $S(\D)$ is
1352: non empty}\\
1353: 0 & \mbox{otherwise}.
1354: \end{array}
1355: \right.
1356: \]
1357: From Lemma \ref{deltastep} we
1358: have that
1359: \be T(X^x(n\D)) \le T(X^x(m\Delta)) +
1360: \sum_{j=m+1}^n(KC\nu_j - \D).
1361: \label{z1}
1362: \ee
1363: Let
1364: $$t \Df \sup \{s \in [(m-1)\D , m \D): T(X^x(s)) \le \D \}.$$
1365: %I DON'T SEE HOW THE NEXT FOLLOWS DIRECTLY FROM THE LEMMA.
1366: If $m > 0$, we have from Lemma \ref{deltastep} that
1367: \beq
1368: T(X^x(m\Delta))
1369: & \le &
1370: (T(X^x(t)) - (m\D - t))^+ +
1371: KC \sup_{t < s < m\Delta}\left| \int_t^s \sigma(X^x(u)) dW(u)
1372: \right|\\
1373: & \le &
1374: \D + KC \sup_{t < s < m\Delta}\left| \int_t^s \sigma(X^x(u)) dW(u)
1375: \right|\\
1376: & \le & \D + 2 KC \sup_{(m-1)\Delta < s < m\Delta}\left|
1377: \int_{(m-1)\D}^s \sigma(X^x(u)) dW(u)
1378: \right|\\
1379: &=& \D + 2KC\nu_m,
1380: \eeq
1381: where in obtaining the second inequality we have
1382: used the fact that for $(m-1)\D \le t \le s \le m \D$
1383: $$\left|\int_t^{s}\sigma(X^x(u)) dW(u)\right|
1384: \le \left |\int_{(m-1)\D}^{s}\sigma(X^x(u)) dW(u)\right|
1385: + \left |\int_{(m-1)\D}^{t} \sigma(X^x(u)) dW(u)\right|.$$
1386:
1387: Using this observation in (\ref{z1}) we have that
1388: \beq
1389: T(X^x(n\D)) & \le & T(x) + 2\D + \sum_{j=m}^n (2KC\nu_j(x) - \D)\\
1390: & \le & T(x) + 2\D + \max_{1 \le
1391: l \le n} \sum_{j=l}^n (2KC\nu_j(x) - \D), \eeq
1392: where we have
1393: written $\nu_j \equiv \nu_j(x)$ in order to explicitly bring out
1394: its dependence on $x$. Hence for $M_0 \in (0, \infty)$ \beq
1395: P(T(X^x(n\D)) \ge M_0) &\le& P\left( \max_{1 \le l \le n}
1396: \sum_{j=l}^n(2KC\nu_j(x) - \D) \ge M_0 - T(x) - 2\D\right)\\ &\le &
1397: \sum_{l=1}^n P\left(2KC\sum_{j=l}^n \nu_j(x) \ge M_0 + (n-l-1)\D -T(x)\right)\\
1398: & \le & \frac{e^{\alpha (T(x) + \D)}}{e^{\alpha M_0}}\sum_{l=1}^n
1399: \frac{\E(e^{\alpha 2KC \sum_{j=l}^n \nu_j(x)})}{e^{\alpha (n-l)
1400: \D}},
1401: \eeq
1402: where $\alpha > 0$ is arbitrary.
1403: From Lemma \ref{doob-main} we now have that
1404: \beq
1405: P(T(X^x(n\D)) \ge M_0)
1406: & \le & \frac{e^{\alpha (T(x) + \D)}}{e^{\alpha M_0}}\sum_{l=1}^n
1407: \frac{\left(2\sqrt{2} e^{8k\alpha^2C^2K^2 \gamma^2
1408: \D}\right)^{n-l+1}}
1409: {e^{\alpha (n-l)
1410: \D}},\\
1411: & \le & \frac{e^{\alpha (2\D + T(x))}}{e^{\alpha M_0}}\sum_{l=1}^n
1412: e^{(8k\alpha^2C^2K^2 \gamma^2 \D - \alpha \D + \frac{\log
1413: 8}{2})(n-l +1)}.
1414: \eeq
1415: Now choose $\alpha$ and $\D$ so that
1416: $$
1417: 8k\alpha^2C^2K^2 \gamma^2 \D - \alpha \D + \frac{\log
1418: 8}{2} = - \theta < 0.$$
1419: Then
1420: \beq
1421: P(T(X^x(n\D)) \ge M_0) &\le & \frac{e^{\alpha (2\D + T(x))}}{e^{\alpha M_0}}
1422: \sum_{l=1}^n
1423: e^{-\theta(n-l)} \\
1424: & \le & \frac{e^{\alpha (2\D + T(x))}}{e^{\alpha M_0}(1- e^{-\theta})}.
1425: \eeq
1426: Hence for all $M, M_0 \in (0, \infty)$
1427: $$
1428: \sup_{n \in \INT , |x| \le M}
1429: P(T(X^x(n\D)) \ge M_0) \le \frac{e^{\alpha (2\D + \frac{4K^2}{\delta }M)}}
1430: {e^{\alpha
1431: M_0}(1-e^{-\theta})}.
1432: $$
1433: From Lemma \ref{hit} (ii) it now follows that
1434: \be
1435: \label{onebd}
1436: \sup_{n \in \INT, |x| \le M} P(X^x(n\D) \ge M_0) \le
1437: \frac{e^{\alpha (2\D + \frac{4K^2}{\delta }M)} }{e^{\alpha
1438: c M_0}(1-e^{-\theta})}.
1439: \ee
1440: Now let $t \in [n \D, (n+1)\D]$ and consider the process
1441: $\{\tilde Y(t)\}_{0 \le t \le \D}$
1442: defined in
1443: (\ref{surro}) with $u$ there replaced by $n\D$.
1444: For each $n$ it follows from (\ref{lateruse}) that
1445: $$
1446: |X^x(t) - \tilde Y(t - n \D)| \le K \nu_n(x).$$
1447: Define a function $\tilde b: G \to \R^k$ which agrees
1448: with $b$ off $A$ and satisfies Condition \ref{permit} with $A=\emptyset$
1449: as well as equations (\ref{lipbsig}).
1450: Also define
1451: \[
1452: %\label{surro2}
1453: Y^*(t) \Df \Gamma \left( X^x(n\D) +
1454: \int_0^{\cdot} \tilde b(X^x(s+ n\D))
1455: ds\right) (t).
1456: \]
1457: Clearly
1458: $$ L \Df \sup_{x \in G}|b(x) - \tilde b(x)| < \infty .$$
1459: Furthermore
1460: \beq
1461: |\tilde Y(t - n\D)| & \le &
1462: |\tilde Y(t - n\D) - Y^*(t - n\D)| + |Y^*(t - n\D)|\\
1463: & \le &
1464: KL\D + K |X^x(n\D)|,
1465: \eeq
1466: where in obtaining the last inequality we have used
1467: the Lipschitz property of $\Gamma$ and Theorem \ref{staba}.
1468: Combining the above observations we have that
1469: $$
1470: |X^x(t)| \le K( \nu_n(x) + |X^{x}(n\D)|) + KL\D.$$
1471: Therefore for $M_0 \in (0, \infty)$, any $n$, and $t \in [n\D, n\D+\D]$
1472: \beqn
1473: P(|X^x(t)| \ge M_0) \le P\left(\nu_n(x) \ge \frac{M_0 - KL\D}{2K}\right)
1474: + P\left(|X^x(n\D)| \ge \frac{M_0- KL\D}{2K}\right).\non \\
1475: \label{secbd}
1476: \eeqn
1477: Clearly, the family $\{|\nu_n(x)|; n \ge 1, |x| \le M \}$ is tight.
1478: Now let $\eta > 0$ be arbitrary. Choose $M_0 \in (0, \infty)$
1479: such that
1480: $$\sup_{n \in \INT , |x| \le M} P\left(|\nu_n(x)| \ge \frac{M_0 -KL\Delta }{2K}\right)
1481: \le \frac{\eta}{2}$$
1482: and
1483: $$\frac{e^{\alpha(2\D + \frac{4K^2}{\delta }M)}}
1484: {e^{\frac{\alpha c(M_0 -KL\D) }{2K}}(1-e^{-\theta})} \le
1485: \frac{\eta}{2}.$$
1486: Then from (\ref{onebd}) and (\ref{secbd}) we have that
1487: $$
1488: \sup_{t \ge 0, |x| \le M} P(|X^x(t)| \ge M_0) \le \eta .$$
1489: Since $\eta > 0$ is arbitrary, we have the result.
1490: \ink
1491:
1492: \skp
1493: From Theorem \ref{finitethm}, Lemma \ref{tight} and Condition \ref{irred}
1494: the proof of positive recurrence and the existence and uniqueness
1495: of an invariant measure for $\{X^x(t)\}_{t \ge 0}$ is standard
1496: (cf. \cite{dupwil}). However for the sake of completeness we
1497: present the proof below.
1498:
1499: \skp \noi
1500: {\bf Proof of Theorem \ref{main}:}
1501: Denote the measure
1502: induced by $\{X^x(\cc)\}$ on $C([0,\infty): G)$ by $P_x$, where $C([0,\infty): G)$ is
1503: the space of $G$ valued continuous functions defined on the nonnegative real line.
1504: In arguments that are presented below,
1505: it will be convenient to let initial conditions be defined through conditioning,
1506: rather than though the superscript as in $X^x$.
1507: As a consequence,
1508: instead of $X^x$ we will work with the canonical process $\xi(\cc)$ on $C([0,\infty): G)$, and the canonical
1509: filtration which we denote by $\{\F_t\}$.
1510: Finally, the expectation operator corresponding to the probability measure
1511: $P_x$ will be denoted by $\E_x$.
1512: Given a compact set $B \subset G$, let
1513: \[
1514: \ti \tau_B \Df \inf \{t: \xi(t) \in B \}.\]
1515: In order to show positive recurrence, we need
1516: to
1517: show
1518: that if $S$ is an arbitrary compact set in $G$ with
1519: positive Lebesgue measure then for all $x \in G$,
1520: $\E_x \ti \tau_S < \infty$.
1521: Let $B^{\D}$ be as in Theorem \ref{finitethm},
1522: and
1523: let $r \in (0, \infty)$ be such that $B^{\D} \subset \{x: |x| \le
1524: r\}$.
1525: Then from Theorem \ref{finitethm} we have that for all
1526: $C \in (0, \infty)$
1527: \be \label{ball}
1528: \sup_{x: |x| \le C}\E_x(\ti \tau_{B_r}) < \infty ,
1529: \ee
1530: where $B_r \Df \{x \in G: |x| \le r\}$.
1531: From the uniform non degeneracy assumption (Condition
1532: \ref{irred}),
1533: we have (cf. \cite{harwil})
1534: $$ p(S) \doteq \inf_{x \in B_r} P_x(\xi(1) \in S) > 0.$$
1535: Furthermore, Feller property of
1536: $\{X^x(\cdot)\}$ implies that the family
1537: $\{X^x(t): x \in B_r, 0 \leq t \leq 1\}$
1538: is tight, and
1539: so there
1540: exists $M \in (0, \infty)$ such that
1541: \be
1542: \label{apfin1}
1543: \inf_{x \in B_r}
1544: P_x(\xi(1) \in S \;\; \mbox{and}\;\;
1545: |\xi(t)| \le M \;\; \mbox{for all}\;\; t \in [0,1])
1546: \ge \frac{p(S)}{2}.
1547: \ee
1548: %Now as in \cite{dupwil} the strong Markov property of
1549: %$\{X^x(t)\}$ yields that
1550: %\beq
1551: %\E(\tau_S(x)) & \le &
1552: %\frac{1}{p(S)}\left (2 + \sup_{y: |y| \le M}\E(\tau_{B_r}(y))
1553: %\right)
1554: %+ \E(\tau_{B_r}(x))\\
1555: %& < & \infty ,
1556: %\eeq
1557: Let $C \in (M, \infty)$ be fixed, and define
1558: \[ \hat \tau \Df \inf\{t: |\xi(t)| \ge C\} \]
1559: and $\ti \tau \Df \min \{1, \hat \tau, \ti \tau_S \}$.
1560: If $y \in B_r$, then by the strong Markov property
1561: \beqn
1562: \E_y(\ti \tau_S) & = &
1563: \E_y \left ( \E_y \left ( \ti \tau_S \mid \F_{\ti \tau}\right) \right)\non \\
1564: &\le& \E_y \left( \ti \tau + \E_{\xi(\ti \tau)}(\ti \tau_S) \right)\non \\
1565: & \le & 1 + \E_y \left(\E_{\xi(\ti \tau)}(\ti \tau_S) \right). \label{apfin2}
1566: \eeqn
1567: Now define
1568: \[ \Lambda \Df \{ \xi(\cc) \in C([0, \infty): G): \sup_{0 \le t \le 1}|\xi(t)| \le M \;\mbox{and}\; \xi(1) \in S \}.\]
1569: Since $E_{\xi(\tilde \tau)}(\tilde \tau_S)=0$ w.p.1 if $\xi \in \Lambda$,
1570: for $y \in B_r$
1571: \beqn
1572: \E_y\left(\E_{\xi(\ti \tau)}(\ti \tau_S) \right) &=&
1573: \E_y\left(\I_{\Lambda}(\xi)\E_{\xi(\ti \tau)}(\ti \tau_S) \right) +
1574: \E_y\left(\I_{\Lambda^c}(\xi)\E_{\xi(\ti \tau)}(\ti \tau_S) \right) \non \\
1575: &=& \E_y\left(\I_{\Lambda^c}(\xi)\E_{\xi(\ti \tau)}(\ti \tau_S) \right). \label{apfin3}
1576: \eeqn
1577: Next, fix $z \in G$ such that $|z| \le C$. Then
1578: \[ \E_z(\ti \tau_S) = \E_z(\ti \tau_{B_r} + (\tau_S - \ti \tau_{B_r})). \]
1579: Once more using the strong Markov property, we have
1580: \beqn
1581: \E_z(\ti \tau_S) & \le & \E_z\left(\ti \tau_{B_r} + \sup_{x \in B_r} \E_x(\ti \tau_S)\right)\non \\
1582: & \le & \sup_{z: |z| \le C} \E_z(\ti \tau_{B_r}) + \sup_{x \in B_r} \E_x(\ti \tau_S).
1583: \label{apfin4}
1584: \eeqn
1585: Observing that $|\xi(\ti \tau)| \le C$ and combining (\ref{apfin3}) and (\ref{apfin4}) we have that
1586: for $y \in B_r$
1587: \be
1588: \E_y\left(\E_{\xi(\ti \tau)}(\ti \tau_S) \right)
1589: \le \left( \sup_{z: |z| \le C} \E_z(\ti \tau_{B_r}) + \sup_{x \in B_r} \E_x(\ti \tau_S)\right) P_y(\Lambda^c).
1590: \label{apfin5}
1591: \ee
1592: From (\ref{apfin1}), (\ref{apfin2}) and (\ref{apfin5}) it now follows that
1593: \[
1594: \sup_{y \in B_r} \E_y(\ti \tau_S)
1595: \le 1 + \sup_{z: |z| \le C} \E_z(\ti \tau_{B_r}) + \left(1 - \frac{p(S)}{2}\right)\sup_{x \in B_r}\E_x(\ti \tau_S).
1596: \]
1597: Thus
1598: \[
1599: \sup_{y \in B_r} \E_y(\ti \tau_S) \le \frac{2}{p(S)}\left\{ 1 + \sup_{z: |z| \le C} \E_z(\ti \tau_{B_r}) \right \}.
1600: \]
1601: A final application of the strong Markov property now yields that for $x \in G$
1602: \beq
1603: \E_x(\ti \tau_S) & \le &
1604: \E_x(\ti \tau_{B_r}) + \sup_{y \in B_r} \E_y(\ti \tau_S) \\
1605: & \le &
1606: \E_x(\ti \tau_{B_r}) + \frac{2}{p(S)}\left\{ 1 + \sup_{z: |z| \le C} \E_z(\ti \tau_{B_r}) \right \}\\
1607: &< & \infty ,
1608: \eeq
1609: where the last inequality follows from Theorem \ref{finitethm} and (\ref{ball}).
1610: This completes the proof of positive recurrence.
1611:
1612: Finally we consider the existence and uniqueness of invariant
1613: measures.
1614: From Lemma \ref{tight} we have that the family of measures
1615: $\{\mu_t ; t \ge 1\}$ defined by
1616: $$\mu_t(B) \Df \frac{1}{t}\int_0^t P(X^x(s) \in B) ds$$
1617: is tight. Since the Markov process $\{X^x(t)\}$ is Feller we
1618: have that any weak limit of $\{\mu_t\}$ is an invariant measure.
1619: (See, for example, the proof of Theorem 4.1.21, Chapter I, \cite{skor}).
1620: Finally uniqueness follows as in \cite{harwil, dupwil} in view of
1621: Condition \ref{irred}.
1622: \ink
1623:
1624: \begin{remark}
1625: \label{finrem}
1626: The Lipschitz and growth condition (Condition \ref{growlip}) on
1627: $b$
1628: and $\sigma$ are essentially assumed to guarantee a unique
1629: solution
1630: to the constrained diffusion process (\ref{maineq}) which is
1631: Feller Markov.
1632: The conclusion of
1633: Theorem
1634: \ref{main} continues to hold with the same proof if
1635: Condition \ref{growlip} is replaced by the assumption that
1636: (\ref{growsig})
1637: holds for some $\gamma \in (0, \infty)$, $b$ is locally bounded and
1638: (\ref{maineq}) has a unique weak solution with continuous paths
1639: for every $x \in G$
1640: and the solution is Feller-Markov.
1641: \end{remark}
1642: \section*{Acknowledgments.} We will like to thank the referees for a careful review of the paper.
1643:
1644: \begin{thebibliography}{20}
1645: \footnotesize
1646:
1647: \bibitem{BD}
1648: A.~Budhiraja and P.~Dupuis.
1649: \newblock Simple necessary and sufficient conditions for the stability of
1650: constrained processes.
1651: \newblock {\em SIAM J. Applied Math.}, 59:1686--1700, 1999.
1652:
1653: \bibitem{che}
1654: H.~Chen.
1655: \newblock A sufficient condition for the positive recurrence of a
1656: semimartingale reflecting {B}rownian motion in an orthant.
1657: \newblock {\em Annals of Applied Probability}, 6:758--765, 1996.
1658:
1659: \bibitem{cheman}
1660: H.~Chen and A.~Mandelbaum.
1661: \newblock Discrete flow networks: {B}ottlenecks analysis and fluid
1662: approximations.
1663: \newblock {\em Mathematics of Operations Research}, 16:408--446, 1991.
1664:
1665: \bibitem{dai}
1666: J.~G. Dai.
1667: \newblock Stability of open multiclass queueing networks via fluid models.
1668: \newblock In F.~P. Kelley and R.~J. Williams, editors, {\em Stochastic
1669: Networks}, volume~71 of {\em IMA Volumes in Mathematics and Its
1670: Applications}, pages 71--90. Springer--Verlag, New York, 1995.
1671:
1672: \bibitem{dai2}
1673: J.~G. Dai.
1674: \newblock A fluid-limit model criterion for instability of multiclass queueing
1675: networks.
1676: \newblock {\em Annals of Applied Probability}, 6:751--757, 1996.
1677:
1678: \bibitem{dupish1}
1679: P.~Dupuis and H.~Ishii.
1680: \newblock On {L}ipschitz continuity of the solution mapping to the {S}korokhod
1681: problem, with applications.
1682: \newblock {\em Stochastics}, 35:31--62, 1991.
1683:
1684: \bibitem{dupram1}
1685: P.~Dupuis and K.~Ramanan.
1686: \newblock Convex duality and the {S}korokhod {P}roblem. {I}, {I}{I}.
1687: \newblock {\em Probability Theory and Related Fields}, 2:153--195, 197--236,
1688: 1999.
1689:
1690: \bibitem{dupram3}
1691: P.~Dupuis and K.~Ramanan.
1692: \newblock A multiclass feedback queueing network with a regular {S}korokhod
1693: problem.
1694: \newblock {\em LCDS Report 99-5}, 1999.
1695:
1696: \bibitem{dupwil}
1697: P.~Dupuis and R.~J. Williams.
1698: \newblock Lyapunov functions for semimartingale reflecting {B}rownian motions.
1699: \newblock {\em The Annals of Prob.}, 22:680--702, 1994.
1700:
1701: \bibitem{andore}
1702: R.~F.Anderson and S.~Orey.
1703: \newblock Small random perturbations of dynamical systems with reflecting
1704: boundary.
1705: \newblock {\em Nagoya Math J.}, 60:189--216, 1976.
1706:
1707: \bibitem{harrei}
1708: J.~M. Harrison and M.~I. Reiman.
1709: \newblock Reflected {B}rownian motion on an orthant.
1710: \newblock {\em The Annals of Probab.}, 9:302--308, 1981.
1711:
1712: \bibitem{harwil}
1713: J.~M. Harrison and R.~J. Williams.
1714: \newblock Brownian models of open queueing networks with homogeneous customer
1715: populations.
1716: \newblock {\em Stochastics}, 22:77--115, 1987.
1717:
1718: \bibitem{harwil2}
1719: J.~M. Harrison and R.~J. Williams.
1720: \newblock Multidimensional reflected {B}rownian motions having exponential
1721: stationary distributions.
1722: \newblock {\em The Annals of Probability}, 15:115--137, 1987.
1723:
1724: \bibitem{hobrog}
1725: D.~G. Hobson and L.~C.~G. Rogers.
1726: \newblock Recurrence and transience of reflecting {B}rownian motion in the
1727: quadrant.
1728: \newblock {\em Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc.}, 113:387--399, 1993.
1729:
1730: \bibitem{mal}
1731: V.~A. Malyshev.
1732: \newblock Networks and dyamical systems.
1733: \newblock {\em Adv. in Appl. Probab.}, 25:140--175, 1993.
1734:
1735: \bibitem{meyn}
1736: S.~P. Meyn.
1737: \newblock Transience of multiclass queueing networks via fluid limit models.
1738: \newblock {\em Annals of Applied Probability}, 5:946--957, 1995.
1739:
1740: \bibitem{ngu}
1741: V.~Nguyen.
1742: \newblock Processing networks with parallel and sequential tasks: {H}eavy
1743: traffic analysis and {B}rownian limits.
1744: \newblock {\em Annals of Applied Probability}, 3:28--55, 1993.
1745:
1746: \bibitem{pet}
1747: W.~Peterson.
1748: \newblock A heavy traffic limit theorem for networks of queues with multiple
1749: customer types.
1750: \newblock {\em Math. of Operations Research}, 16:90--118, 1991.
1751:
1752: \bibitem{rei}
1753: M.~I. Reiman.
1754: \newblock Open queueing networks in heavy traffic.
1755: \newblock {\em Math.\ of Oper.\ Research}, 9:441--458, 1984.
1756:
1757: \bibitem{skor}
1758: A.~V. Skorohod.
1759: \newblock {\em Asymptotic Methods in the Theory of Stochastic Differential
1760: Equations}.
1761: \newblock American Mathematical Society, 1987.
1762:
1763: \bibitem{wil}
1764: R.~J. Williams.
1765: \newblock Recurrence classification and invariant measures for reflected
1766: {B}rownian motion in a wedge.
1767: \newblock {\em Ann. Prob.}, 13:758--778, 1985.
1768:
1769: \end{thebibliography}
1770:
1771:
1772: %\bibliographystyle{plain}
1773: %\bibliography{Nec}
1774:
1775:
1776:
1777:
1778:
1779:
1780:
1781:
1782:
1783: % This sample shows the setting for two addresses (two authors)
1784: \Line{\AOPaddress{Department of\\ Electrical Engineering,\\
1785: Technion,\\Israel Institute\\ of Technology,\\
1786: Haifa 32000, Israel}\hfill
1787: \AOPaddress{Department of\\ Statistics,\\
1788: University of\\ North Carolina\\ at Chapel Hill,\\
1789: NC 27599-3260}\hfill
1790: \AOPaddress{Lefschetz Center\\ for Dynamical Systems,\\
1791: Division of\\ Applied Mathematics,\\
1792: Brown University,\\
1793: Providence, RI 02912}
1794: }
1795:
1796: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1797: \end{document}
1798: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1799: