arxiv: v1 [math.pr] 28 Nov 2016

Transcription

1 Backward Sochasic Differenial Equaions wih Nonmarkovian Singular Terminal Values Ali Devin Sezer, Thomas Kruse, Alexandre Popier Ocober 15, 2018 arxiv: v1 mah.pr 28 Nov 2016 Absrac We solve a class of BSDE wih a power funcion f(y) = y q, q > 1, driving is drif and wih he erminal boundary condiion ξ = 1 B(m,r) c (for which q > 2 is assumed) or ξ = 1 B(m,r), where B(m, r) is he ball in he pah space C(0, T ) of he underlying Brownian moion cenered a he consan funcion m and radius r. The soluion involves he derivaion and soluion of a relaed hea equaion in which f serves as a reacion erm and which is accompanied by singular and disconinuous Dirichle boundary condiions. Alhough he soluion of he hea equaion is disconinuous a he corners of he domain he BSDE has coninuous sample pahs wih he prescribed erminal value. AMS 2010 class: 35K57, 35K67, 60G40, 60H30, 60H99, 60J65 Keywords: Backward sochasic differenial equaions / Reacion-diffusion equaions / Singulariy / Non-Markovian erminal condiions 1 Inroducion One of he firs poins emphasized in an inroducory ordinary differenial equaions (ODE) course is ha he soluion of an ODE may explode in finie ime; he equaion dy d = yq, (1) wih q > 1 serves as he primary example. Indeed, specify he erminal value y T = o (1) and y. = ((q 1)(T )) 1 p, < T, 1/p + 1/q = 1, (2) will be he corresponding unique soluion of (1) (p is he Hölder conjugae of q). Now le W be a sandard Brownian moion and {F } be is naural filraion. For a erminal condiion ξ F T, one can hink of he backward sochasic differenial equaion (BSDE) Y s = Y + s f(y r )dr + s Z r dw r, 0 < s < < T, (3) Y T = ξ, (4) Middle Eas Technical Universiy, Insiue of Applied Mahemaics, Ankara, Turkey, devin@meu.edu.r Universiy of Duisburg-Essen, Thea-Leymann-Sr. 9, Essen, Germany, homas.kruse@uni-due.de Laboraoire Manceau de Mahémaiques, Universié du Maine, Avenue Olivier Messiaen, Le Mans, Cedex 9, France. alexandre.popier@univ-lemans.fr 1

2 f(y) = y y q 1, Y coninuous 1 on 0, T, as a sochasic generalizaion / perurbaion of he ODE(1) because for ξ = idenically, one can se Z = 0 and reduce (3) o (1) for which Y = y is he unique soluion. Bu ξ is a random variable and can also be chosen equal over a measurable se A F T and a finie random variable over A c. Can one solve he BSDE (3,4) wih such erminal condiions? An analysis of his and relaed quesions began wih he aricle 19, where W is assumed o be d-dimensional. 19 proved in paricular ha here exiss a pair of processes (Y min, Z min ) adaped o he filraion F saisfying (3) and where Y min saisfies almos surely (a.s.) lim Y min ξ = YT min. (5) T In oher words, he process Y min is a coninuous process on 0, T ), whose lef-limi as goes o T exiss a.s. and dominaes he erminal condiion ξ = YT min. Moreover, Y min of 19 is minimal: for any oher pair (Ŷ, Ẑ) saisfying (3) and one has lim inf T Ŷ ξ, (6) Y min Ŷ, a.s., 0, T. (7) Following 12 we will refer o any pair saisfying (3) and (6) as a super-soluion of he BSDE (3,4). Thus (Y min, Z min ) is he minimal super-soluion of he BSDE (3,4). To srenghen (5) o he a.s. equaliy lim Y min = YT min = ξ (8) T and hence solving he BSDE (3,4) for general ξ F T urns ou o be a difficul problem. The aricle 19 proved (8) for ξ of he form ξ = g(w T ), where he funcion g : R R + { } saisfies {g = } is closed and for any compac subse K of {g < }, Eg(W T )1 K (W T ) <. Because ξ is a deerminisic funcion of W, such erminal condiions are referred o as Markovian. To he bes of our knowledge, o delineae he class of ξ F T for which he BSDE (3,4) has a soluion Y on 0, T sill remains an open problem. The goal of he presen work is o consruc soluions o he BSDE (3,4) for a class of non-markovian final condiions ξ F T ; we will also prove ha he soluions we consruc are equal o he minimal supersoluions (Y min, Z min ) of 19, which will imply ha (8) holds for he erminal condiions we rea. To he bes of our knowledge, he presen work is he firs o derive hese ypes of resuls for non-markovian singular erminal condiions. The class of ξ which we will focus on is bes explained using he canonical pah space Ω. = C(0, T, R), he se of all R-valued coninuous pahs ω on 0, T, equipped wih is sup norm ω. = sup ω(), 0,T and a family of Wiener measures {P x, x R}, under which he canonical process W (ω) = ω() is a sandard Brownian moion wih iniial condiion W 0 = x. As before F = (F ) 0 T is he canonical filraion generaed by W. Then F T is he he Borel field of Ω corresponding o he sup norm and he basic F T -measurable random variables are he indicaor 1 The requiremen ha Y be coninuous on 0, T is naural- oherwise one could solve he SDE (3) arbirarily on 0, T ) and se Y T = ξ; hus he erminal condiion ξ would have no bearing on he behavior of (Y, Z) on 0, T ). 2

3 funcions of open /closed subses of C(0, T ). The open and closed subse of C(0, T ) are generaed by balls wih respec o he norm and he simples balls in urn are hose cenered around consan funcions. Thus we arrive a he class of erminal values we would like o cover: ξ 1 = 1 B(m,r) c or ξ 2 = 1 B(m,r) (9) where B(m, r) is he ball {ω : ω m r}, for some m R and r > 0. To simplify noaion we will assume hroughou ha m = r = L/2 for some L > 0 for which he expressions for ξ in (9) become ξ 1 = 1 B(L/2,L/2) c and ξ 2 = 1 B(L/2,L/2) ; all of wha follows rivially exends o arbirary m R and r > 0. The Markovian erminal condiions provide (via Iô s formula) he connecion beween BSDE and a class of semilinear / quasilinear parabolic PDE 18. In he case of singular erminal condiions of he ype g(x T ) where g can ake he value +, he associaed parabolic PDE is coupled wih singular boundary condiions; a considerable number of aricles appeared over he las several decades (see 2, 3, 15, 6, 14 and he references herein) sudying he PDE V V + V q = 0, (10) where denoes he Laplace operaor, allowing for singular erminal values. The same PDE (10) is direcly relaed o he BSDE (3,4) and will play a key role in our analysis below. See 19, Secion 4 for more on he link beween he BSDE (3,4) and he PDE (10). The main idea of he presen paper for he soluion of he BSDE (3,4) for ξ of he form (9) is o reduce he quesion o a Markovian problem in he random ime inerval 0, τ T where τ. = { 0, ) : W {0, L}}. For τ < T, he erminal condiions given in (9) reduce o consans ξ 1 (ω) = 1 B(m,r) c =, ξ 2 (ω) = 1 B(m,r) = 0, and he SDE (3) reduces o he ODE (1) on (τ, T. Solving i on (τ, T wih he erminal condiion ξ 1 (ω) = gives he soluion Y 1 = y, Z 1 = 0, (τ, T, of he BSDE (3,4) on (τ, T for ξ = ξ 1. Similarly, solving he same ODE on he same ime inerval wih he erminal condiion ξ 2 (ω) = 0 gives he soluion Y 2 = 0, Z 2 = 0, (τ, T, of he same BSDE for ξ = ξ 2. These hen give he value of he soluions Y i a ime τ < T : On he se T < τ, he erminal condiions ξ 1 and ξ 2 reduce o Y 1 τ = y τ, Y 2 τ = 0. (11) ξ 1 (ω) = 0, ξ 2 (ω) =. (12) Nex we solve he same BSDE in he ime inerval 0, T τ using (11) and (12) as erminal condiions. Thus our BSDE is reduced o one wih a Markovian erminal condiion a he random erminal ime τ T. Now Iô s formula provides he connecion beween he soluion of he reduced BSDE o he soluion of he parabolic equaion V xxv V q = 0; (13) 3

4 (11) and (12) sugges he following boundary condiions o accompany he PDE: for ξ 1 and V (0, ) = V (L, ) = y, 0, T, V (x, T ) = 0, 0 < x < L (14) V (0, ) = V (L, ) = 0, 0, T, V (x, T ) =, 0 < x < L (15) for ξ 2. Proposiion 1 of Secion 2 gives he deails of he above reducion. Wih hese seps our problem is reduced o he soluion of he PDE (13) and he boundary condiion (14) for ξ 1 and he boundary condiion (15) for ξ 2. The main difficuly wih he soluion of hese equaions are he disconinuous (a he corners (0, T ), (L, T ) R 2 ) and infinie valued boundary condiions. The mos relevan work ha we have idenified in he lieraure on he soluion of (13) and he boundary condiions (14) and (15) is 15, which conains resuls giving he exisence of weak soluions o he PDE (13) in d space dimensions when coupled wih boundary condiions which are allowed o ake he value +. However, hese resuls occur in 15 in he conex of he compuaion of iniial races and wihin a general framework where boundary condiions and soluions are specified in a weak Sobolevsense; o rea hese quesions he auhors of 15 use PDE and analysis resuls developed by hem over a number of works. We hink ha one can build an argumen saring from resuls in 15 o ge a classical soluion o (13,14) and (13,15) having he regulariy and he boundary coninuiy properies needed for our purposes bu his appears o be a nonrivial ask. In his paper, we follow a differen roue and give a new self conained consrucion of classical soluions of (13,14) and (13,15) saring from classical parabolic PDE heory wih smooh boundary condiions 8 and building on i using smooh approximaion from below of he boundary condiions and elemenary probabilisic echniques. Once he soluion of he BSDE is buil as above, he las sep is o connec hem wih he corresponding minimal supersoluion (Y min, Z min ); his is achieved by an argumen using he approximaing sequence of funcions consruced in he soluion of he PDE. One change in he applicaion of he above seps o he erminal condiions ξ 1 and ξ 2 is he assumpion we make on q: for ξ 1 we need q > 2 whereas q > 1 suffices for ξ 2. This is coupled wih he following change in he argumen: for q > 2, he classical hea equaion V xxv = 0 also has a classical soluion v 0 wih he boundary condiion (14). In he reamen of ξ 1 we use v 0 as an upper bound in consrucing an approximaing sequence for he soluion of (13) and (14), which ensures he coninuiy of he limi of he approximaion a he boundaries. For ξ 2 he corresponding boundary condiion is (15), for which v 0 doesn exis (regardless of he value of q) bu we are able o consruc an upperbound direcly working wih he PDE (13) and he boundary condiion (15) and for his q > 1 suffices. Oher han his, he argumens for ξ 1 and ξ 2 are he same. To reduce repeiion and shoren he paper we give hem in deail for he firs case in Secion 2, he necessary changes for ξ 2 are given in Secion 3. The resuls of hese secions are summarily given in Theorems 1 (Secion 2) and 2 (Secion 3). Boh of hese secions presen numerical examples (graphs of funcions and example sample pahs) of he consruced soluions of he BSDE and hose of he associaed PDE. We would like o noe a connecion beween our resuls and he BSDE heory wih L p erminal condiions. The assumpion q > 2 for ξ 1 implies ha, wih he above reducion of he BSDE (3,4) o he random ime inerval 0, τ T, he reduced erminal condiion will be in L 1 ; hus one can also invoke he exisence resuls of 4 o consruc a soluion for he erminal condiion ξ 1. The reducion o he ime inerval 0, τ T doesn lead o an L 1 erminal condiion for ξ = ξ 2 ; he PDE approach above applies o boh ξ 1 and ξ 2. 4

5 A well known fac in he prior lieraure (see, e.g.,12) is he link beween he BSDE (3,4) and he following sochasic opimal conrol problem: he conrolled process C is C s = c+ s α sds, he running cos is α p and he erminal cos is C T p ξ, where 0 = 0. The random variable ξ is a penaly on he erminal value of C; in paricular he conrolled process is consrained o saisfy C T = 0 if ξ = +. A growing number of aricles sudy varians and generalizaions of his conrol problem (wih ξ = idenically) wih applicaions o liquidaion of porfolios of asses, see 1, 10, 9, 12. The value funcion v of he conrol problem is given by he minimal soluion Y min : v(, x) = x p Y min 12. Therefore, our resuls in Secion 2 and 3 give explici expressions for he value funcion of his conrol problem for ξ = 1 B(m,r) and ξ = 1 B(m,r) c. Secion 4 uses his connecion o derive esimaes on he condiional probabiliies P(B(m, r) F ) and P(B(m, r) c F ), 0, T ). Le us poin ou furher prior lieraure on he soluion of he BSDE (3,4): 19 considers he case where ξ is a funcion g(x T ) where X is he soluion of a forward SDE X = x + 0 b(s, X s )dr + 0 σ(s, X s )dw s ; (for he assumpions on b, σ and q we refer he reader o 19). Since hen, wo works 17, 21 appeared reaing he BSDE (3,4) boh focusing on ξ of he form g(x T ). The work 17 exends he resuls of 19 o he class of backward doubly sochasic SDE (BDSDE in shor). The aricle 17 proves under hese models ha a minimal super-soluion (Y min, Z min ) exiss which is also coninuous a he erminal ime T wih YT min = ξ = g(x T ). The work 21 also considers he BSDE wih hree addiional exensions a) here are an addiional jump erm given by a Poisson random measure; b) he drif erm f(y s ) = Ys q in (3) is replaced wih a general f saisfying a number of condiions which includes as a special case he funcion y y q and c) i works wih a general complee righ coninuous filraion o which all of he given processes are adaped (as in 12); 21 proves ha under hese model assumpions ha he minimal super-soluion Y min o he BSDE is coninuous a he erminal ime wih = ξ = g(x T ) (in 21 jump erms are also allowed in he dynamics of X). Noe ha exisence and minimaliy of (Y min, Z min, U min, M min ) were proved already in 12 (he erms U min and M min come from he Poisson measure and he general filraion). A recen work reaing inegro-parial differenial generalizaions of (10) wih singular erminal condiions is 20, which conains many furher references and a lieraure review on parabolic PDE wih singular boundary condiions, heir connecions o BSDE and heir probabilisic soluions. We indicae several direcions for fuure research in he Conclusion. YT min 2 A firs non-markovian case This secion implemens for he erminal condiion ξ = ξ 1 = 1 B(m,r) c he argumen whose ouline was given in he inroducion. We will denoe by D he domain (0, L) (0, T ). For x (0, L), P x (ξ = + ) = 1 or P x (ξ = 0) = 1 and he problem becomes rivial for such x (he same commen applies o he erminal condiion ξ = 1 B(L/2,L/2) as well). Therefore, will assume he iniial condiion x o saisfy x (0, L); none of he argumens of he presen work depend on he iniial poin W 0 = x beyond his consideraion, hus for ease of noaion we will simply wrie P for P x and always assume x (0, L). We summarize he resuls of his secion in he following Theorem. 5

6 Theorem 1. If q > 2 hen here is a funcion u which is C in he x variables and C 1 in he variable and coninuous on D \ {(L, T ), (0, T )} saisfying he PDE (13) wih he boundary condiion (14) such ha 1. Y = { u(w, ), < τ T, y, τ T, Z = { u x (W, ), < τ T, 0, τ T. (16) solve he BSDE (3, 4) wih ξ = ξ 1 = 1 B(L/2,L/2) c; in paricular, Y is coninuous on 0, T, 2. We have (Y min, Z min ) = (Y, Z); in paricular (8) holds. Proof. Proposiion 1 of subsecion 2.1 proves ha given any classical soluion u of (13) and he boundary condiion (14), he processes (Y, Z) defined as in (16) saisfy he BSDE (3,4) and he Y process is coninuous on 0, T. Proposiion 2 of subsecion 2.2 consrucs a classical soluion u of (13) and he boundary condiion (14). Finally, Proposiion 3 proves Y = Y min for he u consruced in Proposiion 2, which implies in paricular ha, for ξ = ξ 1, (8) holds. Remark 1. As poined ou in he inroducion, he connecion beween he BSDE (3,4) and he PDE (13) is well known for Markovian erminal condiions. The above resul says ha he same connecion coninues o hold when ones uses he non-markovian ξ 1 as erminal condiion for he BSDE. We give several numerical examples and simulaion of our resuls in subsecion Reducion o hea equaion wih reacion As oulined in he inroducion, our approach o solving he BSDE (3,4) ξ = 1 B(L/2,L/2) c will be by breaking he problem ino wo random ime inervals 0, τ T ) and (τ T, T ; on he laer he problem reduces o he rivial (1) wih he erminal value y T =. The value of he unique soluion y τ a τ hen provides he erminal condiion over he inerval 0, τ T ); hus we end up wih a Markovian problem and can aack i via he associaed PDE. These are he main ideas underlying he nex proposiion. Proposiion 1. Suppose u : D R is C in he x variable and coninuously differeniable in he variable over D, coninuous on D \ {(L, T ), (0, T )} and saisfies he PDE (13) and he boundary condiion (14) in he classical sense. Then he pair (Y, Z) of (16) saisfies he BSDE (3, 4) and is coninuous on 0, T. Proof. We begin by proving ha Y is coninuous on 0, T. Firs consider he case {τ < T }. By assumpion u is coninuous on D \ {(L, T ), (0, T )}. Therefore, u is coninuous on 0, L 0, τ, 0, τ 0, T. In addiion, W has coninuous sample pahs. Then u(w, ) is he composiion of wo coninuous maps on 0, τ and herefore is a coninuous funcion on ha inerval. On he oher hand, by definiion (16) Y = y for > τ; and he coninuiy of y on τ, T implies he same for Y ; finally he coninuiy of Y a τ follows from he boundary condiion (14) and he definiion of Y given in (16): u(w τ, τ) = y τ = Y τ. Thus we see ha Y is coninuous on 0, T on he se {τ < T }. The even {τ = T } is of measure zero, hus i only remains o consider he case {τ > T }. By definiion (16) Y = u(w, ), 6

7 0, T for ω {τ > T }. The coninuiy of he sample pah of W and he compacness of 0, T imply ha here exiss δ > 0 such ha W (ω) δ, L δ, 0, T, (17) for ω {τ(ω) > T }. By assumpion u is coninuous on δ, L δ 0, T. Then Y = u(w, ), 0, T is he composiion of wo coninuous funcions and hence coninuous. This proves he coninuiy of Y on 0, T. By definiion Y T = y T 1 {τ<t } + u(w T, T )1 {τ>t } = 1 B(L/2,L/2) c + u(w T, T )1 {τ>t }. The fac (17) and ha u saisfies (14) imply u(w T, T )1 {τ>t } = 0. This and he las display imply Y T = ξ 1, i.e., ha Y saisfies he erminal condiion (4) wih ξ = ξ 1. I remains o prove ha for fixed s < < T (3) holds almos surely. On he se {τ s}, Y r = y r and Z r = 0 for r s, and (3) reduces o y = y s + s y q rdr, which is equivalen o (1) of which y is a soluion; his esablishes ha (3) holds over {τ s}. Recall ha by assumpion, u is smooh in x, coninuously differeniable in in D and coninuous on D \ {(L, T ), (0, T )}. In paricular, u is coninuous on any 0, L 0, for < T. On he se {τ > s} apply Iô s formula o u(w r, r) beween s and τ o ge τ τ Y τ = Y s + x (W r, r)dw r + u(w r, r)dr + 1 τ xx u(w r, r)dr. s s 2 s Tha u saisfies (13) implies τ Y τ = Y s + = Y s + s τ τ x u(w r, r)dw r + which implies (3) for {τ > }. Finally, for {τ (s, )}: s s u q (W r, r)dr τ Z r dw r + s Yr q dr, (18) Y = Y τ + τ Y q r dr. Subsiuing he righ side of (18) for Y τ in he las display gives Y = Y s + s Z r dw r + s Y q r dr, where we have used Z r = 0 for r (τ, ), which finishes he proof ha (Y, Z) saisfies (3). 7

8 2.2 Soluion of he hea equaion wih reacion This subsecion proves he key ingredien of Theorem 1, i.e., he exisence of a classical soluion u of (13) and he boundary condiion (14). Equaion (13) is ofen referred o as a reacion-diffusion equaion where V q is he reacion erm 7, Example 1, page 535. The main difficuly wih (13) and (14) is he disconinuiy and unboundedness of he boundary condiion near he corners (L, T ) and (0, T ) in R 2. The nex proposiion assers he exisence of u and gives is regulariy properies (he funcion v 0 is defined in (19)). Define v 0 (x, ). = E x, yτ 1 {τ<t }, (19) where he subscrip (x, ) of he expecaion operaor denoes condiioning on W = x. The funcion v 0 will play a key role in our consrucion of he soluion u. Proposiion 2. There is a unique funcion 0 u v 0 which is C in he x variable and coninuously differeniable in he variable over D and is coninuous on D \ {(L, T ), (0, T )} and which solves (13) and (14). An inermediae sep in he proof of Proposiion 2 will be o show ha v 0 of (19) solves he classical hea equaion V xxv = 0, (20) over D = (0, L) (0, T ), wih he same boundary condiion (14) (see subsecion below). In his, he assumpion q > 2 and he following fac will play a key role: q > 2 implies ha 1 < 1 p < 0 and hus he soluion (2) is inegrable: T Following noaion parallel o ha of 8 define 0 y s ds <. (21) B 0. = {(x, ), x (0, L), = 0 }, B. = {(x, ), x (0, L), = T }, S. = D \ {B 0 B}; hese ses are depiced in Figure 1. The proof of Proposiion 2 will proceed as follows: 1. q > 2 implies ha v 0 solves (in he classical sense) he linear hea equaion (20) and he boundary condiion (14) (see Lemmas 1 and 2 in subsecion below), 2. Approximae (14) by a sequence of smooh boundary condiions o which sandard classical PDE heory applies and yields classical soluions. The soluions of he approximaing equaions are monoone in he approximaion parameer, and heir limi is our candidae soluion u. Iô s formula implies an expecaion represenaion for he approximae soluions. The soluion v 0 of he hea equaion in he firs sep gives us he necessary bound o invoke he dominaed convergence heorem o infer ha u saisfies he same expeced value represenaion as he prelimi funcions (see Lemma 4 and (30)). 3. Esablish he regulariy properies of u (see Lemma 5); we do his in wo differen ways. The firs approach relies only on probabilisic argumens and is elemenary and direc, i uses he following elemens: a) explici formulas for he densiy of he hiing ime τ = inf{ : W {0, L}} and he densiy of W over sample pahs resriced o say in he inerval (0, L) upo ime b) Duhamel s principle and c) he expeced value represenaion of u. The second approach is based on analyic argumens for parabolic uniformly ellipic PDE. 8

9 x = L x S B 0 = 0 B B = T x = 0 S Figure 1: The domain and is boundaries 4. Esablish he coninuiy properies of u (Lemma 6), 5. Once enough regulariy is proved, he proof ha u acually solves he PDE follows from Iô s formula, he expecaion represenaion of u and he srong Markov propery of W. The above elemens are pu ogeher in he Proof of Proposiion 2 given a he end of subsecion Soluion of he classical hea equaion wih singulariies a he corners The classical heory of Brownian moion and of he classical hea equaion sugges ha v 0 is he unique soluion of (20) and he boundary condiion (14). Le us prove ha v 0 is finie and ha i indeed solves (20) and (14). Equaion 5, (4.1) (or Iô s formula and direc compuaion) implies he following formula for he disribuion funcion of τ condiioned on W = x: P x, (τ s) = 1 + P x,0 (W s A c ) P x,0 (W s A) (22) where A =. n Z {2nL + 0, L}, x 0, L and s >. Subsiue A in (22) and change variables o rewrie (22) as P x, (τ s) = 1 + ( (2n+2)L x (2n+1)L x ) 1 s e y2 /2 s dy e y2 /2 dy. n Z 2π (2n+1)L x 2nL x s s For x (0, L), he derivaive of he las display wih respec o s gives he densiy of τ: f τ (x,, s). = (s ) 3/2 2π ((2n + 1)L x)e ((2n+1)L x) 2(s ) n Z 2 (2nL x)e (2nL x)2 2(s ) (23) (for x {0, L}, τ = and P x, (τ > s) = 0 idenically for s > and indeed he righ side of (22) is idenically 0 for x {0, L}); Figure 2 shows he graph of f τ for = 2, L = 4, x = 3.5 9

10 f_ au s Figure 2: The graph of f τ, = 2, L = 4, x = 3.5 For (x, ) D, wrie he expecaion in (19) in erms of he densiy f τ : v 0 (x, ) = T f τ (x,, s)y s ds = T f τ (x,, s)((q 1)(T s)) 1 p ds. (24) The formula (23) and he behavior of x log(x) around 0 imply ha f τ is coninuous and smooh wih coninuous derivaives over he region δ 1, L δ 2, ) for any δ i > 0 wih δ 1 < L δ 2. Therefore from (21) we deduce ha v 0 (x, ) < for (x, ) D and v 0 has he same regulariy as f τ in compac subses of D. Inegrabiliy of y (21), he boundedness of f τ in compac subses of D, (24) and he dominaed convergence heorem also imply v 0 (x, ) 0 for x (0, L) and T. Furhermore, for any < T, f τ is coninuous as a funcion of (x, s) on any compac srip 0, L T δ, T as long as < T δ. This and (21) imply T δ v 0(x, ) f τ (x,, s)y s ds ɛ (25) for any ɛ > 0 when δ > 0 is small enough. Noe T δ f τ (x,, s)y s ds = E x, yτ 1 {τ<t δ}. P x, (τ = T δ) = 0, and s y s 1 {s<t δ} is a coninuous and bounded funcion for s T δ. Now choose any sequence ( n, x n ) (, x), x {{0, L}} and < T. The law of he ieraed logarihm 11, Theorem 9.23 implies ha he hiing ime τ converges o as n. These imply lim E (x n n, n) yτ 1 {τ<t δ} = y. This and (25) imply v 0 (x n, n ) y. Le us record wha we have proved so far as a lemma: Lemma 1. The funcion v 0 defined in (19) has he inegral represenaion (24), is smooh in D (wih coninuous derivaives of all orders in compac subses of D) and coninuous on D \ B and saisfies he boundary condiion (14). Nex we will use Iô s formula and he regulariy of v 0 o show ha in fac i is a soluion o he hea equaion (20). 10

11 Lemma 2. v 0 solves (20). Proof. Suppose here is (x 0, 0 ) D such ha 1 2 v 0 2 x 2 (x 0, 0 ) + v 0 (x 0, 0 ) 0. (26) Le δ > 0, be so ha 0 < x 0 δ < x 0 + δ < L and 0 + δ < T. By he previous proposiion v 0. is smooh on he compac se N x0 = x0 δ, x 0 + δ 0, 0 + δ wih coninuous derivaives of all orders. Le τ δ be he firs ime he process (, W ) his N x0. By definiion τ δ < τ T. Condiioning on F τδ, he srong Markov propery of he Brownian moion and he definiion of v 0 imply v 0 (x 0, 0 ) = E x0, 0 v 0 (W τδ, τ δ ). (27) Iô s formula applied o v 0 upo ime τ δ gives E x0, 0 v 0 (W τδ, τ δ ) v 0 (x 0, 0 ) (28) τδ ( = E x0, v 0 x 2 (W s, s) + v ) 0 (W s, s) ds. (27) implies ha he lef side of he las display equals 0. Bu he coninuiy of v 0 + v x 2 0 on N x0, τ δ 0 and (26) imply ha he righ side of (28) is nonzero, which is a conradicion. Hence, (26) canno happen and v 0 indeed solves (20) in D Treaing he V q erm Equipped wih he classical soluion v 0 of he hea equaion (20) and he boundary condiion (14) we will proceed as follows o consruc a classical soluion o (13) and (14): define a family of boundary condiions y m,n approximaing y (decreasing in m and increasing in n) which are smooh upo D saisfying he exisence uniqueness resuls from he classical heory of parabolic PDE 8. This gives us a family of funcions u m,n, solving (13) wih boundary values y m,n and which, by Iô s formula, have expeced cos represenaions. This, he dominaed convergence heorem and (21) give, upon aking limis of {u m,n }, a candidae soluion u, which also has he same expeced cos represenaion as he prelimi funcions u m,n. We will hen use he expeced cos represenaion of u o improve our knowledge of u s regulariy. The nex lemma is a consequence of he maximum principle 2 and is well known for BSDE wih monoone generaor. Lemma Suppose u 0 0 and u 1 0 are wo bounded smooh soluions of (13) such ha u 0 D\B0 u 1 D\B0. Then u 0 u 1 on D. 2. Assume ha u 0 is a coninuous soluion of (13) wih u 0 K on D \ B 0. Then u 0 K on D. 2 The maximum principle also holds under much more weaker assumpions (see among ohers Lemma 2.7 in 15 or Lemma 1.6 in 16). 11

12 Proof. v = (u 0 u 1 ) saisfies v xxv 1 Rv = 0 (29) 2 where R = (u q 0 uq 1 )/(u 0 u 1 )1 u0 u 1 > 0 and he boundary condiion u 0 u 1 0 on D\B 0. Iô s formula implies v(x, ) = E x, e τ T R(W s,s)ds v(w τ T, τ T ) 0. For he second claim of he lemma, we use he same esimae wih u 1 = 0: u 0 (x, ) = E x, e τ T R(W s,s)ds u 0 (W τ T, τ T ). The nex lemma idenifies our candidae soluion o he PDE (20) and he boundary condiion (14). Lemma 4. There exiss a measurable funcion 0 u v 0 which saisfies u(x, ) = E x, e τ uq 1 (W s,s)ds y τ 1 {τ<t } (30) or equivalenly for (x, ) D. τ T u(x, ) = E x, u q (W s, s)ds + y τ 1 {τ<t }, (31) Proof. Define y (n). = y 1/n. Hence for any 0, T, y (n) ((q 1) 1 p )n p 1. Define ψ : D\B R and ψ n : D\B R as follows: ψ(x, T ) = ψ n (x, T ) = 0, x (0, L), ψ(x, ) = y, (x, ) S, ψ n (x, ) = y (n), (x, ) S. The funcion ψ describes exacly he boundary condiion (14). Noe ha ψ and ψ n are disconinuous a he corners B and ψ n ψ. We will now approximae ψ n by a sequence of smooh ψ m,n so ha we can invoke 8, Theorem 9, page 205. This resul requires ha ψ m,n C 2+δ for δ (α, 1), where α is he Hölder consan associaed wih he boundary S, and ψ m,n ψ m,n 2 x 2 ψm,n q = 0 (32) on B. To ge he desired sequence, begin wih wo funcions (linear in x): ψ (0) m,n(x, ). = y (n) 1 xm/2, ψ (L) m,n(x, ). = y (n) 1 (L x)m/2. 12

13 Le η : R 0, 1, η C be as follows: η < 0 on (0, 1), η 0, η(x) = 1 for x 0, η(x) = 0, for x > 1; one possible choice is / η(x) = e 1 (2y 1) 2 1 dy e 1 (2y 1) 2 dy. Now define (x 0) 1 ψ m,n (x, ) = ψ (0) m,n(x, )η ( m 2 ) x 1 + ψ (L) m 1 m,n(x, )η 0 ( m 2 (L x) 1 m 1 for m > 2/L 1. The resuling sequence ψ m,n of funcions are nonnegaive and smooh, decreasing in m wih limi ψ n and hey all saisfy (32). Figure 3 shows he graph of ψ m,n for m = 5, n = 10, L = 3 and T = 1. ) ; Figure 3: ψ m,n, m = 10, n = 50, L = 3, T = 1 Now we consider he PDE (13) wih he boundary condiion V D\B0 = ψ m,n. (33) ψ m,n ((q 1) 1 p )n p 1 = γ n,q implies ha i suffices for our purposes o look for a soluion u m,n γ n,q (see Lemma 3). The f(v). = V q erm in (13) is coninuous in he inerval 0, γ n,q and in paricular i saisfies 8, equaion (4.10), page 203 Vf(V) A 1 V 2 + A 2, V 0, γ n,q, for consans A 1, A 2 0, and being monoone iself, i rivially saisfies 8, equaion (4.17), page 205, which requires f be bounded by a monoone funcion. These imply ha 8, 13

14 Theorem 9, page 205 is applicable, and herefore, he PDE (13) and he boundary condiion (33) have a classical soluion u m,n ha is coninuous in D. Iô s formula gives u m,n (x, ) = E x, e τ T um,n(w q 1 s,s)ds ψ m,n (W τ T, τ T ) (34) τ T = E x, u q m,n(w s, s)ds + ψ m,n (W τ T, τ T ). ψ m,n 0 and Lemma 3 imply u m,n 0. The funcions ψ m,n are decreasing in m and increasing in n and hey are all bounded; his and Lemma 3 imply ha u m,n is decreasing in m and increasing in n. Then we can define and 0 u n. = lim m u m,n 0 u. = lim n u n. The represenaion (34), u m,n 0, ψ m,n y, and he definiion (19) of v 0 imply u m,n v 0. Then by he above definiions u v 0. Now he dominaed convergence heorem (where y τ 1 {τ<t } serves as he dominaing funcion), v 0 <, and aking limis in (34) give u(x, ) = E x, e τ T u q 1 (W s,s)ds y τ 1 {τ<t } τ T = E x, u q (W s, s)ds + y τ 1 {τ<t }. Our nex ask is o esablish ha u is smooh in D. Lemma 5. The funcion u of (30) is C in x and coninuously differeniable in over D. We will give wo differen proofs for Lemma 5. The firs is based on Duhamel s principle and uses he densiy of W s, s > on 0, L over he se {0 < W u < L, u, s}; his proof is based on fairly elemenary calculaions and in ha sense direc. We will define a number of funcions (U 1, U 2, U 3 and U 4 ) in his proof, which will also be used in he proof of he coninuiy of u on D \ B in Lemma 6 below. The second proof uses general analyic resuls on he soluion of uniformly ellipic parabolic PDE. For he firs proof we need he densiy P(W s dx, τ > s) whose formula is given as 5, Equaion (4.1); le us rederive i using our noaion. Parallel o (22) one firs wries P x, (W s (0, a), 0 < W u < L, u (, s)) (35) = P x,0 (W s A a ) P x,0 (W s B a ), for a (0, L) and where A a. = n Z {2nL + (0, a)} and B a. = n Z {2nL + (2L a, 2L)}; he ideniies A L = A and B L = A c L = Ac imply ha (22) is a special case of (35). Subsiuing A a and B a in (35) and he normal disribuion of W s give P x, (W s (0, a), 0 < W u < L, u (, s)) = n Z ( a+2nl x 1 s 2π 2nL x s e y2 /2 dy 2nL x s 2nL a x s e y2 /2 dy ). 14

15 Differeniae he las display o ge he densiy of W s on (0, a) when he sample pah of W is consrained o say in 0, L over he ime inerval, s: f W (x,, s) =. 1 ( ) e (a+2nl x) 2 2(s ) e (2nL a x)2 2(s ). (36) 2π(s ) n Z The above display implies ha f W is smooh for s > and x (0, L) in all variables wih coninuous derivaives of all orders. Now we proceed wih he firs proof of Lemma 5. Proof. Wrie u as he sum where U 1 (x, ). = E x, τ T u(x, ) = U 1 (x, ) + v 0 (x, ), (37) u q (W s, s)ds, v 0 (x, ) = E x, yτ 1 {τ<t }. We already know ha v 0 saisfies he condiions lised in he proposiion. I ress o show he same for U 1. Firs, 0 u v 0 implies 0 U 1 v 0. (38) Fix an arbirary T > δ > 0. We will now show ha U 1 is smooh in (0, L) (0, T δ), δ being arbirary, his will show U 1 is smooh on (0, L) (0, T ). For < T δ, he srong Markov propery of W and condiioning on F τ (T δ) imply ha we can wrie U 1 in wo pieces as follows: τ (T δ) U 1 (x, ) = E x, u q (W s, s)ds + U 1 (W T δ, T δ)1 {τ>t δ} = U 2 (x, ) + U 4 (x, ), (39) where U 2 (x, ) =. τ (T δ) E x, u q (W s, s)ds, U 4 (x, ). = E x, U1 (W T δ, T δ)1 {τ>t δ}. Le us wrie U 4 using he densiy f W given in (36): U 4 (x, ) = L 0 f W (x,, T δ, y)u 1 (y, T δ)dy. Tha 0 v 0 is coninuous on D \ B implies ha i is in paricular bounded on 0, L 0, T δ. This and (38) imply ha U 1 (, T δ) is bounded by he same bound. This, he exisence and he coninuiy of he derivaives of f W in x and imply ha U 4 is smooh in (0, L) 0, T δ and is coninuous on 0, L 0, T δ). To sudy U 2 we will use Duhamel s principle: τ (T δ) T δ U 2 (x, ) = E x, u q (W s, s)ds = E x, 1 {s<τ} u q (W s, s)ds. 15

16 v 0 u 0 and Fubini s heorem imply Define U 2 (x, ) = T δ E x, 1{s<τ} u q (W s, s) ds. (40) U 3 (x,, s). = E x, 1{s<τ} u q (W s, s) and wrie (40) in erms of U 3 (his is Duhamel s principle): U 2 (x, ) = T δ The funcion U 3 can be wrien in erms of he densiy f W as U 3 (x,, s) = L 0 U 3 (x,, s)ds. (41) f W (x,, s, y)u q (y, s)dy. (42) Once again, for s < T δ, 0 u q is uniformly bounded above by a consan. This, he smoohness of f W in x imply ha U 3 is smooh in x and on (0, L) (0, T δ) for < s. U 3 is smooh in is x variable, herefore U 2 is also smooh in x over he region (0, L) (0, T δ). This, he smoohness of U 4 and (39) imply he same for U 1 ; he smoohness of U 1 in x and (37) imply he smoohness of u in x. Now we will derive he regulariy of u in he variable. Le us begin wih coninuiy of U 2 in : ake any sequence n, wih 0 < n, < T δ and x (0, L). The coninuiy of U 3 in he variable implies ha he sequence of funcions converge almos surely o s 1 {s>n}u 3 (x, n, s) s 1 {s>} U 3 (x,, s) on he se (0, T δ). This and he bounded convergence heorem imply U 2 (x, n ) U 2 (x, ), i.e., U 2 is also coninuous in he variable on he se (0, L) (0, T δ). Thus we have: U 2, U 4 are boh coninuous on (0, L) (0, T δ). This and (39) imply ha U 1 is coninuous over he same domain, his and (37) imply he same for u. Now going back o (42) we see ha his implies ha U 3 is also coninuous in he s variable. The coninuiy of U 3 in all of is variables, (41) and he fundamenal heorem of calculus ell us ha U 2 is differeniable in and U 2 T δ = U 3 (x,, ) + = u q (x, ) + T δ U 3 (x,, s)ds U 3 (x,, s)ds, which, in paricular, is a coninuous funcion on (0, L) (0, T δ). Finally, his, he regulariy of U 4 and (39) imply ha U 1 is differeniable in wih coninuous derivaive over he domain (0, L) (0, T δ), which in is urn, along wih (37) imply he same for u. This finishes he smoohness claims of he lemma on u. 16

17 We now give an alernaive proof of he same lemma using classical bu deep resuls on parabolic PDE wih a regularizaion boosrap argumen. We know from Lemma 4 ha u, by consrucion, is he limi of a sequence u m,n of classical soluions of he PDE (13) wih he boundary condiion (33). The comparison principle (Lemma 3) implies ha for any m, n we have: 0 u m,n (x, ) y on 0, L 0, T. Thus he soluions are bounded from above by a funcion independen of n and m. This will be useful in he proof below. Second proof of Lemma 5. Now fix ɛ > 0. On 0, L 0, T ɛ, u m,n is bounded (uniformly in n and m) by y T ɛ. Moreover he smooh funcion u m,n saisfies on (0, L) (0, T ɛ) u m,n xxu m,n = (u m,n ) q = f m,n wih he Hölder coninuous laeral boundary condiion y (n) (and a bounded erminal condiion u m,n (x, T ɛ)). Here f m,n is a bounded funcion. We can apply 13, Theorem III.10.1 (Condiions (1.2) and (7.1) of 13 are rivially saisfied in our seing). Therefore for any η > 0, u m,n is in H α,α/2 (η, T η 0, T ɛ) (space of funcions which α-hölder coninuous in he space variable x and α/2-hölder coninuous in he imes variable ). The value of α > 0 and he Hölder norm of u m,n does no depend on m and on n. In oher words he Hölder norm of u m,n is bounded by some consan C α depending only on η and ɛ. Moreover we already know ha u m,n converges poinwise o u n (as m goes o + ) and u n converges o u (when n ends o + ) 3. Therefore u n and u are in H α,α/2 (η, L η 0, T ɛ) and heir Hölder norms are bounded by he same consan C α. Then u m,n is he soluion of he same problem bu now wih more regular funcions f m,n and u m,n (, T ɛ). Thus from 13, Theorem IV.10.1, we know ha u m,n is in H 2+α,1+α/2 (η, L η 0, T ɛ η) for any ɛ > 0 and η > 0 and he norm esimaes don depend on n and on m, bu only on he Hölder norm of f n,m on η, L η 0, T ɛ η and he upper bound on u m,n. Thus he same propery holds for u. In oher words u is a classical soluion on (0, L) 0, T ). This regularizaion argumen can be ieraed in order o obain ha u is C. Lemma 6. u of (30) is coninuous on D \ B. Proof. Remember ha v 0 is coninuous on B and akes he value 0 here. This and 0 u v 0 imply he coninuiy of u on B. By definiion u(x, ) = y = v 0 (x, ) for (x, ) S. We already know ha v 0 is coninuous on S. Furhermore, by definiion, U 1 = 0 on S; hese and (37) imply ha i suffices o show U 1 (x n, n ) 0 (43) for {(x n, n ) D, wih (x n, n ) (x, ) S. For his, we will use (39) wih δ > 0 saisfying < T δ and he definiions of U 2 and U 4. As (x n, n ) (x, ) S, τ. This and he boundedness of u q on 0, L 0, T δ implies U 2 (x n, n ) 0. Lasly, τ implies ha 1 {τ>t δ} converges o 0 almos surely. This and he boundedness of U 1 on over 0, L 0, T δ imply U 4 (x n, n ) 0. These and (39) esablish (43). We can now complee he proof of Proposiion 2: 3 The Arzela-Ascoli heorem implies ha u m,n (up o a subsequence) converges o some funcion ũ H α,α/2 (η, L η 0, T ɛ). Here ũ = u since poinwise convergence has been proved before. 17

18 Proof of Proposiion 2. By consrucion u saisfies (14). Lemma 5 says ha he funcion u is smooh on D. Thus Iô s formula and he represenaion formula in Lemma 4 imply ha u saisfies (13); he deails of a parallel argumen have already been given in Lemma 2 and are omied. Lemma 6 says ha u is coninuous on D \ B; (43), v 0 (x, ) = y on S and (37) imply ha u(x, ) = y on S; u v 0 and v 0 = 0 on B imply u = 0 on B. These imply ha u saisfies he boundary condiion (14). Nex we prove he uniqueness claim, i.e., if 0 u 1 v 0 is any oher soluion of he PDE (20) and he boundary condiion (14), coninuous on D \ B hen u 1 = u mus hold. Proceeding as in he proof of Lemma 3 define v = u 1 u and R = (u q 1 uq 0 )/(u 1 u)1 u1 u > 0. Now v saisfies he PDE (29), v D = 0, and is coninuous on D\ B. These and Iô s formula imply v(x, ) = E x, e T 1/n ( R(W s,s)ds v W T 1, T 1 n n ) 1 {τ>t 1/n}. The above display, R 0, v u u 1 2v 0 and Jensen s inequaliy imply v(x, ) E x, 2v 0 (W T 1, T 1 ) 1 n n {τ>t 1/n}. The expecaion represenaion (19) of v 0 implies ha he second expecaion above converges o 0 wih n. This proves v = Connecion o he minimal super-soluion I remains o esablish he connecion beween he soluion of he BSDE consruced above and he minimal supersoluion (Y min, Z min ) of he BSDE (3,4). Proposiion 3. Le Y and Z be he soluion of he BSDE (3,4) defined in (16) where for u we ake he soluion of he PDE (13) and he boundary condiion (14) consruced in Proposiion 2. Then (Y, Z) = (Y min, Z min ). Proof. I follows from (3) and he definiion of he Iô inegral ha i suffices o prove Y = Y min. The inequaliy Y Y min follows from he minimaliy propery (7) of Y min. To finish he proof we simply need o prove he converse inequaliy. Recall ha u is defined as he limi of a sequence of funcions u n (see he proof of Lemma 4). Using he same ideas as used in he proofs of Lemma 5 one can prove ha for any n, he funcion u n is smooh and is a classical soluion of he PDE (13) in D. Moreover, as in he case of u, u n is coninuous on D \ B and saisfies he boundary condiion: Define u n (0, ) = u n (L, ) = y (n) = y 1/n, 0, T, u n (x, T ) = 0, 0 < x < L. Y n {. un (W, ), < τ T, = y (n), τ T, Z n {. x u n (W, ), < τ T, = 0, τ T. Sraighforward modificaions of previous argumens show ha (Y n, Z n ) solves he BSDE (3) wih erminal condiion ( ) 1 ξ n = y (n) n T 1 B(L/2,L/2) c = q 1 1B(L/2,L/2) c. q 1 18

19 1 y_ n=1000, m=100 n=10,m= Figure 4: On he lef, he graph of u m,n wih m = 100 and n = 50; on he righ, he graph of u m,n over x = 1.5 for m = 100, n = 10 (hin) and n = 1000 (hick), and y (dashed line). In all compuaions L = 3 and T = 1 Since he minimal soluion (Y min, Z min ) consruced in 19 is he increasing limi of soluions of he same BSDE bu wih erminal condiion ξ m (as m goes o + ), he comparison principle implies Y n Y min a.s. for any 0, T. Bu u n converges o u and from (16) we obain he desired inequaliy. 2.4 Numerical examples Le us give several numerical examples for he PDE soluions consruced above and he resuling soluion Y of he BSDE. The lef side of Figure 4 shows he graph of u m,n wih L = 3 and T = 1, m = 100 and n = 50 compued using a finie difference approximaion of he PDE wih x = 0.1 and = The righ side of he same figure shows he graph of u m,n over he line x = L/2 = 1.5 for m = 100 and n = 10 and n = 150 as well as he graph of y ; noe u 100,10 (1.5, ) < u 100,1000 (1.5, ) < y in he figure, as expeced. Figure 5 shows wo randomly sampled sample pahs of he Brownian moion W wih W 0 = L/2 = 3/2 and he corresponding pah for Y, compued using (16) where we use a numerical approximaion of u m,n wih m = 100 and n = 1000 o approximae u. 3 The case ξ = 1 B(m,r) Our resuls for he erminal condiion ξ = 1 B(L/2,L/2) parallel hose for ξ = 1 B(L/2,L/2) c, wih wo differences: 1) we need o replace he upperbound v 0 of subsecion wih a new upperbound ū and 2) q > 1 is enough for he exisence of soluions; see he discussion below for more on hese changes. 19

20 Figure 5: Numerically compued rajecories of W (hin ligh pah) and Y (hick dark) (lef wih explosion, righ wihou); Y is compued using (16) wih u m,n approximaing u wih m = 100 and n = 1000; L = 3 and T = 1 Theorem 2. Suppose q > 1. There exiss a funcion v which is C in he x variable and C 1 in he variable and coninuous on D \ {(L, T ), (0, T )} and which solves he PDE (13) wih he boundary condiion (15) (i.e., (45) below)) such ha 1. The processes Y = { v(w, ), < τ T, 0, τ T, Z = { v x (W, ), < τ T, 0, τ T. solve he BSDE (3, 4) wih ξ = 1 B(L/2,L/2), and in paricular, Y is coninuous on 0, T, 2. (Y min, Z min ) = (Y, Z) and (8) hold. The seps for he proof of Theorem 2 apply verbaim o he curren case excep for he consrucion of he soluion of he PDE; for his reason we only give an ouline and poin ou he necessary changes. Breaking as we do in Secion 2.1 he BSDE ino he inervals 0, τ T and τ T, T, his case can be reduced o he soluion of he PDE (13) now wih he boundary condiion (44) V (0, ) = V (L, ) = 0, 0, T, V (x, T ) =, 0 < x < L. (45) The consrucion given in Secion 2.2 for he PDE (13) and he boundary condiion (14) allow one o solve he same PDE now wih he boundary condiion (45) excep for he differences poined ou above: in he presen case we no longer have he upperbound v 0 o serve as an upperbound in convergence and coninuiy argumens. The role of v 0 will now be played by he limi ū of a decreasing sequence of soluions of (13). And because we no longer need v 0 we no longer need he assumpion q > 2 and can work wih q > 1. The deails are given in he ouline below: 1. Firs proceed as in Secion 2.2, Lemma 4, o consruc a classical soluion ū n o (13) on 0, L 0, T 1/n wih he boundary condiion V (0, ) = V (L, ) = 0, 0, T 1/n, V (x, T 1/n) = y T 2/n, 20

21 0 < x < L, coninuous on 0, L 0, T 1/n {(0, T 1/n), (L, T 1/n)} saisfying he expecaion represenaions (of ype (30) and (31)): ū n (x, ) = E x, e T 1/n ū q 1 n (W s,s)ds y T 2/n 1 {τ T 1/n} (46) or equivalenly ū n (x, ) = E x, for (x, ) 0, L 0, T 1/n. τ (T 1/n) ū q n(w s, s)ds + y T 2/n 1 {τ T 1/n}, (47) 2. By Lemma 3 for any (x, ) 0, L 0, T 1/n, ū n (x, ) y. Hence for n 1 < n 2 and for any x 0, L, ū n2 (x, T 1/n 1 ) y T 2/n1. Again by comparison principle (Lemma 3), for any (x, ) 0, L 0, T 1/n 1, ū n2 (x, ) ū n1 (x, ). Then, for fixed (x, ) 0, L 0, T ), (x, ) will be in he domain of ū n (x, ) for n n 0 for some n 0 and he sequence {u n (x, ), n n 0 } will be decreasing in n; call is limi ū(x, ), i.e., ū n (x, ) ū(x, ), n +. The represenaions (46) and (47) and he dominaed convergence heorem imply ū(x, ) = E x, e τ r ū q 1 (W s,s)dsū(w r, r), (48) τ r ū(x, ) = E x, ū q (W s, s)ds + ū(w r, r), (49) for any < r < T and any x 0, L. Moreover we have (x, ) 0, L 0, T ), 0 ū(x, ) y. 3. The sufficien differeniabiliy of ū is proved exacly as in he proofs of Lemma 5. This implies (via Iô s formula) ha ū solves (13). 4. Nex we consruc an increasing approximaing sequence v n by solving he PDE (13) on 0, L 0, T wih he boundary condiion V (0, ) = V (L, ) = 0, 0, T, V (x, T ) = y T 1/n, 0 < x < L, and coninuous on D \ B. 5. Lemma 3 implies ha he sequence v n is increasing. Define v. = lim n v n. 6. Lemma 3 and he fac ha (x, ) y 1/n solves (13) imply ha v n (, T 1/n) y T 2/n, which, along wih Lemma 3 and he definiion of ū n imply from which v n ū n, v ū follows. Argumens in subsecion 2.2 now applied o v (wih ū providing he dominaing funcion) imply ha v has represenaions of he form (48) and (49), is infiniely differeniable in he x variable and coninuously differeniable in he variable on (0, L) (0, T ) and ha i solves (13). 21

22 7. The funcions v and ū boh saisfy he boundary condiion (45) by definiion. I remains o show ha hey are coninuous on D \ B. The coninuiy of ū on he laeral boundary {(0, ), (L, ), < T } follows from 0 ū ū n and he coninuiy of ū n on he same boundary. 0 v ū implies hen he coninuiy of v on he laeral boundary. The coninuiy of v along B follows from he coninuiy of v n along he same boundary and v v n. This and ū v finally imply he coninuiy of ū along B. The above algorihm gives us wo classical soluions ū, v of he PDE (13) and he boundary condiion (45) saisfying ū v. In (44) we use he smaller of hese soluions o define our soluion of he BSDE (3,4) wih ξ = 1 B(m,r). Tha (Y, Z) hus defined saisfies (3,4) as well as he proof of coninuiy of Y on 0, T proceed exacly as in he proof of Proposiion 1. The proof ha (Y, Z) = (Y min, Z min ) proceeds as in he proof of Proposiion 3 given in subsecion 2.3 and follows from v n v. We illusrae he compuaions above wih several numerical examples in Figures 6 and 7. The lef side of Figure 6 shows he graph of ū 50, compued numerically using finie differences; he righ side of he same figure shows he graphs of ū 5 (1, ) and ū 50 (1, ) and y. Figure 7 shows wo ses of sample pahs of W and Y wih W 0 = L/2 = 1 and where Y is approximaed by ū 50 (W, ) for < τ; in all compuaions L = 2 and T = 1. Figure 6: On he lef, graph of ū 50 ; on he righs graphs of ū 5 (1, ), ū 50 (1, ) and y, 0, 1; T = 1 and L = 2 4 The Conrol Inerpreaion We nex poin ou a conrol inerpreaion of he BSDE (3,4) or more precisely of he BSDEs (3,8) and (3,5). We consider he case of a general F T -measurable erminal condiion ξ possibly aking he value + wih posiive probabiliy. We use his connecion o a sochasic conrol problem o derive a sufficien (Lemma 7) and a necessary (Lemma 8) condiion for he coninuiy lim T Y min = ξ of Y min a T. Finally, we apply our findings from Secions 2 and 3 o derive esimaes abou he limiing behavior of condiional probabiliies P A as T for A = B(m, r) c F T and A = B(m, r) F T (Corollary 1). 22

23 Figure 7: Two rajecories of W and Y (lef wih explosion, righ wihou). Le us assume p > 1 and as before q denoes is Hölder conjugae; for an arbirary ξ F T, ξ 0, consider he sochasic opimal conrol problem V (c,, ω) =. T essinf (p E 1) p 1 α s p ds + CT α p ξ α A(,c) F, (50) C α u. = c + u α s ds, u, T, 0, T, c R, where he se of admissible conrols A(, c) consiss of all progressively measurable processes α such ha α L 1 (, T ) P-a.s and we assume 0 = 0. From he verificaion Theorems 1, Theorem 1.3 or 12, Theorem 3, we know ha V (c,, ω) = c p Y min (51) where Y min is he minimal super-soluion of he BSDE (3, 4) consruced in hese works 4. In paricular, lim T V (c,, ω) c p ξ(ω) holds P-a.s. Moreover, an opimal conrol for (50) is given by αs = (q 1)Cs α hus C α u = c exp (q 1) u (Y s ) q 1 ds, Y s q 1, and for u T. The link (51) beween he value funcion V and Y min will give wo resuls concerning he coninuiy of Y min in a general seing. Firs, we show lim T Y min < already implies coninuiy. Lemma 7. Le Y min be he minimal super-soluion of he BSDE (3,4). Then he following implicaion holds for almos all ω Ω. If lim Y min (ω) <, T hen he pah Y min (ω) is coninuous a T, i.e. i holds ha lim T Y min (ω) = ξ(ω). 4 In 12 only he weak erminal consrain lim inf T Y min ξ was esablished. In he presen seing, i follows from he resuls in 19 ha acually he limi lim T Y min exiss and consequenly lim T Y min ξ holds. 23

24 ( Proof. Le C = exp (q 1) 0 (Y min s ) ) q 1 ds (which is he opimal conrol in (50) for = 0 and c = 1). Since Y min is nonnegaive, i follows ha C is coninuous a T : lim T C = C T 0, 1. We know from he analysis of he conrol problem (see 1, proof of Theorem 4.2) ha T Y min C p = E (p 1) p 1 α s p ds + ξ C T p F. (52) The righ side of (52) decomposes ino a semimaringale M + A wih and T M = E (p 1) p 1 α s p ds + ξ C T p F 0 A = (p 1) p 1 α s p ds. Since Y 0 = EM T <, he process M is a rue maringale. In paricular, M is coninuous. A is coninuous by he fundamenal heorem of calculus. Therefore, he righ side of (52) converges o M T + A T = ξ C T p as T, i.e. lim Y min C p = ξ C T p. T Therefore, on he se {C T > 0} we have lim T Y min = ξ. Moreover, he definiion of C implies ha if C T (ω) = 0, hen lim T Y min (ω) = and consequenly {lim T Y min < } {C T > 0}. This complees he proof. Remark 2. The ideniy (52) is equivalen o he represenaion (30) in Lemma 4 (replace by u(w, ) and ake expecaion). Y min The nex resul gives a necessary condiion for coninuiy. We use he shorhand noaion P ξ = = E1 {ξ= } F. Lemma 8. Le Y min be he minimal super-soluion of he BSDE (3,4) and suppose ha coninuiy condiion (8) holds for Y min. Then we have a.s. on {ξ < } sup 0,T 0 P ξ = <. (T ) p 1 Proof. For < T le α A(, 1) be an arbirary sraegy wih associaed posiion pah C α ha has finie coss: T E (p 1) p 1 α s p ds + CT α p ξ F <. Take for example he opimal sraegy. Then we have T E (p 1) p 1 α s p ds + CT α p ξ F T (p 1) p 1 E 1 {C α T =0} α s p ds F. 24

25 Jensen s inequaliy yields T α s p 1 for every pah saisfying C α (T ) p 1 T since α has finie coss, i holds ha {ξ = } {CT α = 0}. This implies T E (p 1) p 1 α s p ds + CT α p ξ F (p 1) p 1 P ξ = (T ) p 1. = 0. Moreover, Since he righ side of he above display does no depend on he conrol α, we use (51) o arrive a Y min (p 1) p 1 P ξ = (T ) p 1. Since lim T Y min < if ξ <, his yields he claim. Lemma 8 combined wih our resuls from Secions 2 and 3 allows o derive esimaes on he speed of convergence lim T P A 0 on A c for A = B(m, r) and A = B(m, r) c. This is subjec of he nex corollary. Corollary 1. Le m R and r (0, ). Then on B(m, r) i holds for all p (1, 2) ha and on B(m, r) c i holds for all p > 1 ha P B(m, r) c sup 0,T (T ) p 1 < sup 0,T P B(m, r) <. (T ) p 1 Proof. For he firs resul se ξ = 1 B c (m,r) and le (Y min, Z min ) denoe he minimal super-soluion of (3,4) and le (Y, Z) denoe he soluion of (3,4) consruced in Proposiion 1. In paricular, i holds ha lim T Y = ξ. Minimaliy of Y min and lim T Y min ξ imply ha lim T Y min = ξ. The firs resul hen follows from Lemma 8 (observe ha q > 2 implies ha p < 2). The second resul follows from he same argumen and Lemma 8, his ime used wih he resuls in Secion 3. 5 Conclusion Le us commen on several direc exensions and possible fuure work. The exension of he boundary condiion ξ = 1 B c o 1 B c + g(w T )1 B for g such ha E( g(w T ) 1 B ) < requires only ha we change he erminal condiion (14) V (0, ) = V (L, ) = y, 0, T, V (x, T ) = g(x), 0 < x < L. Simple modificaions of he argumen of Secion 2 would suffice o deal wih his change. Generalizing he erminal condiion ξ = 1 B o 1 B + g(w T )1 B c for g such ha E( g(w T ) 1 B ) < requires he soluion of wo PDE: one mus firs solve (13) over he domain R 0, T where g serves as erminal condiion on he erminal boundary of his domain. The value of he soluion on S = {(L, ), 0, T } {(0, ), 0, T } will hen serve as laeral boundary condiion for he PDE (13) on D. A furher generalizaion involves changing he definiion of he se B o {ω r < X (ω) c < r, 0, T } where X is an SDE driven by W ; his generalizaion would require o modify he second derivaive erm in (13) o he infiesimal generaor of X. Furher generalizaions 25