2244 CHAPTER 65. STOCHASTIC INTEGRATION

Theorem 65.5.3 The stochastic integral 65.5.7 is well defined. It also is a continuousmartingale and does not depend on the choice of J and U1. Furthermore,

E

(∣∣∣∣∫ t

aΦ(s)dW

∣∣∣∣2H

)=∫ t

aE(||Φ||2

L2(Q1/2U,H)

)ds

Proof: First of all, it is obvious that it is well defined in the sense that the same stochas-tic process is obtained from two different sequences of elementary functions. This followsfrom the isometry of Proposition 65.1.5 with U1 in place of U and Q1/2U in place of U0.Thus if {Ψn} and {Φn} are two sequences of elementary functions converging to Φ ◦ J−1

in L2([a,T ]×Ω;L2

(JQ1/2U,H

)),

E

(∣∣∣∣∫ T

a(Φn (s)−Ψn (s))dW

∣∣∣∣2H

)=∫ T

aE(||(Φn−Ψn)◦ J||2

L2(Q1/2U,H)

)ds (65.5.8)

Now for Φ ∈L2 (U1,H) and {gk} an orthonormal basis for Q1/2U,

||Φ◦ J||2L2(Q1/2U,H) ≡

∑k=1|Φ(J (gk))|2H = ||Φ||2

L2(JQ1/2U,H)

because, by definition, {Jgk} is an orthonormal basis in JQ1/2U. Hence 65.5.8 reduces to∫ T

aE(||(Φn−Ψn)||2L2(JQ1/2U,H)

)ds

which is given to converge to 0. This reasoning also shows that the sequence{∫ t

a ΦndW}

is indeed a Cauchy sequence in L2 (Ω,H).Why is

∫ ta ΦdW a continuous martingale? The integrals

∫ ta ΦndW are martingales and

so, by the maximal estimate of Theorem 62.5.3,

P

([sup

t∈[a,T ]

∣∣∣∣∫ t

aΦndW −

∫ t

aΦmdW

∣∣∣∣H≥ λ

])≤ 1

λ2 E

(∣∣∣∣∫ T

a(Φn−Φm)dW

∣∣∣∣2)

=1

λ2

∫ T

aE(||(Φn−Φm)◦ J||2

L2(Q1/2U,H)

)ds

=1

λ2

∫ T

aE(||(Φn−Φm)||2L2(JQ1/2U,H)

)ds (65.5.9)

which is given to converge to 0 as m,n→ ∞. Therefore, there exists a subsequence {nk}such that

P

([sup

t∈[a,T ]

∣∣∣∣∫ t

aΦnk dW −

∫ t

aΦnk+1dW

∣∣∣∣H≥ 2−k

])≤ 2−k.

Consequently, by the Borel Cantelli lemma, there is a set of measure zero N such that if ω /∈N, then the convergence of

∫ ta Φnk dW to

∫ ta ΦdW is uniform on [a,T ] . Hence t→

∫ ta ΦdW

is continuous as claimed.

2244 CHAPTER 65. STOCHASTIC INTEGRATIONTheorem 65.5.3 The stochastic integral 65.5.7 is well defined. It also is a continuousmartingale and does not depend on the choice of J and U,. Furthermore,e(|fo ® saw )-[ E(Il®lz,(qveu.n)) 4sProof: First of all, it is obvious that it is well defined in the sense that the same stochas-tic process is obtained from two different sequences of elementary functions. This followsfrom the isometry of Proposition 65.1.5 with U; in place of U and Q!/?U in place of Up.Thus if {‘¥,,} and {®,,} are two sequences of elementary functions converging to ®o J~!in L? ({a,T] x Q;Z (JO'/?U,H)),“(Now for ® € 4 (U;,H) and {g,} an orthonormal basis for Q!/7U,J (nis)—¥a(naw2 rT) =| E (|l(@n—¥n) oJl24 (uzun) 45 (65.5.8)coIIPo||z, (Q'/2U,H) = L| J (8x) Vin = —_ Pll oun, H)because, by definition, {/g;,} is an orthonormal basis in Jo!/ 2U. Hence 65.5.8 reduces tom[ (®, —®,,) dWJasupte[a,T]T2| E (Iie —¥n)Il-4(002u.n)) dswhich is given to converge to 0. This reasoning also shows that the sequence { f iM ®,dw }is indeed a Cauchy sequence in L? (Q,H).Why is fi @dW a continuous martingale? The integrals [ iM ®,dW are martingales andso, by the maximal estimate of Theorem 62.5.3,1 2(|e [[ ez )te[a,T] A1 /? 2- 7, (ite -d.)rl gen)1 /7 2~ =| E (Il(@n— Oni, ou20.4)) 4 (65.5.9)which is given to converge to 0 as m,n — oo. Therefore, there exists a subsequence {n;}such thatr( [ ©, dW — [ ®y,,,d wf > a ) <2,Consequently, by the Borel Cantelli lemma, there is a set of measure zero N such that if @ ¢N, then the convergence of [' ®,,dW to [' dW is uniform on [a, 7]. Hence t + |’ dWis continuous as claimed.