71.2. INCLUDING STOCHASTIC INTEGRALS 2427

is progressively measurable with respect to the normal filtration Ft determined by a givenWiener process W (t). Also suppose

(t,u,v,w)→ N(t,u,v,w,ω)

is continuous and satisfies the following conditions for C (·,ω)≥ 0 in L1 ([0,T ]) and someµ > 0:

(N(t,u,v,w,ω) ,u)≥−C (t,ω)−µ

(|u|2 + |v|2 + |w|2

). (71.2.3)

Also let f be progressively measurable and f(·,ω) ∈ L2([0,T ] ;Rd

). Let

Φ ∈ L2([0,T ]×Ω;L2

(Q1/2U,Rd

))where U is some Hilbert space, Rd , for example. Also suppose path uniqueness. That is,for each ω, there is at most one solution to the integral equation

u(t,ω)−u0(ω)+∫ t

0N(s,u(s,ω),u(s−h,ω) ,w(s,ω) ,ω)ds

=∫ t

0f(s,ω)ds+

∫ t

0ΦdW, (71.2.4)

Then for h > 0, there exists a unique progressively measurable solution u to the integralequation 71.2.4 where u0 has values in Rd and is F0 measurable. Here u(s−h,ω) ≡u0 (ω) for all s−h≤ 0 and for w0 a given F0 measurable function,

w(t,ω)≡ w0 (ω)+∫ t

0u(s,ω)ds

Proof: The only thing left is to observe that the given estimate is sufficient to obtain anestimate for the solutions to the integral equation for û defined above. Then from Theorem71.1.1, there exists a unique progressively measurable solution for û and hence for u.

Note that the integral equation holds for all t for each ω . There is no exceptional set ofmeasure zero which might depend on the initial condition needed.

What is a sufficient condition for path uniqueness? Suppose the following weak mono-tonicity condition for µ = µ (ω) .

(N(t,u1,v1,w1,ω)−N(t,u2,v2,w2,ω) ,u1−u2)

≥ −µ

(|u1−u2|2 + |v1−v2|2 + |w1−w2|2

)(71.2.5)

Then path uniqueness will hold. This follows from subtracting the two integral equations,one for u1 and one for u2, using the estimate and then applying Gronwall’s inequality.

Recall the Ito formula

u(t)−u0 +∫ t

0Nds =

∫ t

0f ds+

∫ t

0ΦdW

71.2. INCLUDING STOCHASTIC INTEGRALS 2427is progressively measurable with respect to the normal filtration ¥, determined by a givenWiener process W (t). Also suppose(t,u,v,w) > N(t,u,v,w,@)is continuous and satisfies the following conditions for C (-,@) > 0 in L' ({0,T]) and some> 0:(N(t,u,v,w,@) ,u) > —C(t,@) — (ju)? + Iv|? + Iw|”) ; (71.2.3)Also let f be progressively measurable and f (-,@) € L? (0, 7] :R¢). Letbe? ((0. T])xO:Y (o'u,R") )where U is some Hilbert space, R¢, for example. Also suppose path uniqueness. That is,for each @, there is at most one solution to the integral equationw (1,00) —wo(o) + [ N(s,u(s,0),u(s—h,00),w(s.0) 0) dst t— [ f(s,@)ds+ [ baw, (71.2.4)0 0Then for h > 0, there exists a unique progressively measurable solution wu to the integralequation 71.2.4 where ug has values in R¢ and is ¥o measurable. Here u(s—h,@) =Ug (@) for all s—h < 0 and for wo a given Yo measurable function,w(1,0) =wo(@)+ ['u(s,00)dsProof: The only thing left is to observe that the given estimate is sufficient to obtain anestimate for the solutions to the integral equation for Gi defined above. Then from Theorem71.1.1, there exists a unique progressively measurable solution for Gi and hence foru. JNote that the integral equation holds for all t for each @. There is no exceptional set ofmeasure zero which might depend on the initial condition needed.What is a sufficient condition for path uniqueness? Suppose the following weak mono-tonicity condition for u = U(@).(N(t,1,V1,W 1,0) —N (ft, U2, V2, W2,@) ,U) —U)> -uU (ui = up|? + [vi — vol? + [wi — wal”) (71.2.5)Then path uniqueness will hold. This follows from subtracting the two integral equations,one for u; and one for uy, using the estimate and then applying Gronwall’s inequality.Recall the Ito formulaot ot tu(t) uo + f Nas = | fas+ | eaw0 0 0