arxiv: v1 [math.pr] 6 Mar 2014

Transcription

1 Quadraic BSDs wih jumps: relaed non-linear expecaions Nabil Kazi-ani Dylan Possamaï Chao Zhou July 27, 218 arxiv: v1 [mah.pr] 6 Mar 214 Absrac In his aricle, we follow he sudy of quadraic backward SDs wih jumps,ha is o say for which he generaor has quadraic growh in he variables z,u), sared in our accompanying paper [15]. Relying on he exisence and uniqueness resul of [15], we define he corresponding g-expecaions and sudy some of heir properies. We obain in paricular a non-linear Doob-Meyer decomposiion for g-submaringales and a downcrossing inequaliy which implies heir regulariy in ime. As a consequence of hese resuls, we also obain a converse comparison heorem for our class of BSDs. Finally, we provide a dual represenaion for he corresponding dynamic risk measures, and sudy he properies of heir inf-convoluion, giving several explici examples. Key words: BSDs, quadraic growh, jumps, non-linear Doob-Meyer decomposiion, dynamic risk measures, inf-convoluion. AMS 2 subjec classificaions: 6H1, 6H3 Research suppored by he Chair Financial Risks of he Risk Foundaion sponsored by Sociéé Générale, he Chair Derivaives of he Fuure sponsored by he Fédéraion Bancaire Française, and he Chair Finance and Susainable Developmen sponsored by DF and Calyon. CMAP, cole Polyechnique, Paris, nabil.kaziani@polyechnique.edu. CRMAD, Universié Paris Dauphine, possamai@ceremade.dauphine.fr. Deparmen of Mahemaics, Naional Universiy of Singapore, Singapore, mazc@nus.edu.sg. Par of his work was carried ou while he auhor was working a CMAP, cole Polyechnique, whose financial suppor is kindly acknowledged. 1

2 1 Inroducion Moivaed by dualiy mehods and maximum principles for opimal sochasic conrol, Bismu sudied in [5] a linear backward sochasic differenial equaion BSD). In heir seminal paper [26], Pardoux and Peng generalized such equaions o he non-linear Lipschiz case and proved exisence and uniqueness resuls in a Brownian framework. Since hen, a lo of aenion has been given o BSDs and heir applicaions, no only in sochasic conrol, bu also in heoreical economics, sochasic differenial games and financial mahemaics. Le us now precise he srucure of hese equaions in a disconinuous seing. Given a filered probabiliy space Ω,F,{F },P) generaed by an R d -valued Brownian moion B and a random measure µ wih compensaor ν, solving a BSDJ wih generaor g and erminal condiion ξ consiss in finding a riple of progressively measurable processes Y, Z, U) such ha for all [,], P a.s. Y = ξ + g s Y s,z s,u s )ds Z s db s U s x)µ ν)ds,dx). 1.1) R d \{} We refer he reader o Secion 2.1 for more precise definiions and noaions. In his paper, g will be supposed o saisfy a Lipschiz-quadraic growh propery. More precisely, g will be Lipschiz in y, and will saisfy a quadraic growh condiion in z, u) see Assumpion 2.2iii) below). he ineres for such a class of quadraic BSDs has increased a lo in he pas few years, mainly due o he fac ha hey naurally appear in many sochasic conrol problems, for insance involving uiliy maximizaion see among many ohers [1] and [12]). When he filraion is generaed only by a Brownian moion, he exisence and uniqueness of quadraic BSDs wih a bounded erminal condiion has been firs reaed by Kobylanski [17]. hen evzadze [31] inroduced a new approach, consising of a direc proof in he Lipschiz-quadraic seing. He uses a fixed-poin argumen o obain exisence of a soluion for small erminal condiion, and hen pases soluions ogeher in he general bounded case. We refer he reader o our paper [15] for more references on he class of quadraic BSDs. In our accompanying paper [15], we exended he fixed-poin mehodology of evzadze o he case of a disconinuous filraion. We proved an exisence and uniqueness resul for bounded soluions of quadraic BSDs. We used a comparison heorem o deduce our uniqueness resul. Noneheless, in his framework wih jumps, we need addiional assumpions on he generaor g for a comparison heorem o hold. We used eiher he Assumpion 2.4, firs inroduced by Royer [29], or a convexiy assumpion on g, which was already considered by Briand and Hu [7] in he coninuous case. his wellposedness resul for bounded quadraic BSDs wih jumps opens he way o many possible applicaions. We can consider he soluion of a BSD as an operaor acing on he erminal condiion, his is he poin of view of he g-expecaions. I has been inroduced by Peng [27] as an example of non-linear expecaion. he g-expecaions have been exended o he case of quadraic coefficiens by Ma and Yao [22], or o disconinuous filraions by Royer [29] and Lin [2]. I is naural in his conex o use hese non-linear expecaions o define non-linear sub- and supermaringales see Definiion 3.1). In his paper, we go furher in he sudy of quadraic BSDs wih jumps by proving a non-linear Doob Meyer decomposiion for 2

3 g-submaringales. As a consequence, we also obain a converse comparison heorem. hese resuls hold rue under he same assumpions as he ones needed for he comparison heorem. When he generaor is convex, we obain a convex operaor, which is hen naurally used o consruc examples of dynamic convex risk measures. Barrieu and l Karoui [2] used quadraic BSDs o define ime consisen convex risk measures and sudy heir properies. We exend here some of hese resuls o he case wih jumps. We prove an explici dual represenaion of he soluion Y, when g is independen of y and convex in z,u). his allows o sudy some paricular risk measures on a disconinuous filraion, like he enropic risk measure, corresponding o he soluion of a quadraic BSD. Finally, we prove an explici represenaion for he inf-convoluion of quadraic BSDs, hus giving he form of he opimal risk ransfer beween wo agens using quadraic convex g-expecaions as risk measures. he inf-convoluion is again a convex operaor, solving a paricular BSD. We give a sufficien condiion for his BSD o have a coefficien saisfying a quadraic growh propery. he res of his paper is organized as follows. In Secion 2, we recall he noaions, assumpions and main resuls of [15], hen in Secion 3, we sudy general properies of quadraic g-maringales wih jumps, such as regulariy in ime and he Doob-Meyer decomposiion. Finally, Secion 4 is devoed o he analysis of a dual represenaion of he corresponding dynamic convex risk measures and o he calculaion of heir inf-convoluion. 2 Preliminaries ) We consider in all he paper a filered probabiliy space Ω,F,{F },P, whose filraion saisfies he usual hypoheses of compleeness and righ-coninuiy. We suppose ha his filraion is generaed by a d-dimensional Brownian moion B and an independen ineger valued random measure µω,d,dx) defined onr +, wih compensaor λω,d,dx). Ω := Ω R + is equipped wih he σ-field P := P, where P denoes he predicable σ-field on Ω R + and is he Borel σ-field on. o guaranee he exisence of he compensaor λω,d,dx), we assume ha for each A in B) and each ω in Ω, he process X := µω,a,[,]) A + loc, which means ha here exiss an increasing sequence of sopping imes n ) such ha n + a.s. and he sopped processes X n are increasing, càdlàg, adaped and saisfy [X ] < +. We assume in all he paper ha λ is absoluely coninuous wih respec o he Lebesgue measure d, i.e. λω,d,dx) = ν ω,dx)d. Finally, we denoe µ he compensaed jump measure We inroduce for 1 < p + he spaces µω,dx,d) = µω,dx,d) ν ω,dx)d. L p ν) := {u, -measurable, such ha u L p ν ) for all }. Since he compensaor ν depends on ω, he maringale represenaion propery do no necessarily hold. ha is why we make he following assumpion. Assumpion 2.1. Any local maringale M wih respec o he filraion F ) has he predicable represenaion propery, ha is o say ha here exis a unique predicable process H 3

4 and a unique predicable funcion U such ha H, U) Z U and M = M + H s db s + U s x) µdx,ds), P a.s. Remark 2.1. his maringale represenaion propery holds for insance when he compensaor ν does no depend on ω, i.e when ν is he compensaor of he couning measure of an addiive process in he sense of Sao [3]. I also holds when ν has he paricular form described in [16], in which case ν depends on ω. 2.1 Noaions We inroduce he following norms and spaces for any p 1. S p is he space of R-valued càdlàg and F )-progressively measurable processes Y such ha [ ] Y p S p := sup Y p < +. S is he space of R-valued càdlàg and F )-progressively measurable processes Y such ha Y S := sup Y < +. H p is he space of R d -valued and F )-predicable processes Z such ha Z p H p := [ ) p 2] Z 2 d < +. J p is he space of predicable and -measurable applicaions U : Ω [,] such ha [ U p J := p ) p 2] U s x) 2 ν s dx)ds < +. Following ang and Li [19] and Barles e al. [1], he definiion of a BSD wih jumps is hen Definiion 2.1. Le ξ be a F -measurable random variable. A soluion o he BSDJ wih erminal condiion ξ and generaor g is a riple Y,Z,U) S 2 H 2 J 2 such ha Y = ξ + g s Y s,z s,u s )ds Z s db s U s x) µdx,ds),, P a.s. 2.1) where g : Ω [,] R R d A) R is a given applicaion and A) := {u : R, B) measurable}. For laer use, we also inroduce he following BMO-ype spaces. BMO is he space of square inegrable càdlàg R d -valued maringales M such ha M BMO := esssup P τ [M M τ ) 2] < +, τ 4

5 where for any [,], is he se of F s ) s -sopping imes aking heir values in [,]. J 2 BMO is he space of predicable and -measurable applicaions U : Ω [,] such ha U 2. J 2 := BMO U s x) µdx,ds) < +. BMO H 2 BMO is he space of Rd -valued and F -progressively measurable processes Z such ha Z 2. H 2 := BMO Z s db s < +. BMO 2.2 he non-linear generaor We now give our quadraic growh assumpion on he generaor g. Assumpion 2.2. [Quadraic growh] i) For fixed y,z,u), g is F-progressively measurable. ii) For any p 1 esssup P τ τ [ τ ) p ] g,,) d < +, P a.s. 2.2) iii) g has he following growh propery. here exis β,γ) R + R + and a posiive predicable process α saisfying he same inegrabiliy condiion 2.2) as g,,), such ha for all ω,,y,z,u) α β y γ 2 z 2 j γu) γ g ω,y,z,u) g,,) α +β y + γ 2 z 2 + j γu), γ where j u) := e ux) 1 ux) ) ν dx). Noice ha j is well defined on L 2 ν) L ν). he nex assumpion is needed for our exisence resul o hold. I concerns he regulariy in he y variable and he differeniabiliy in z and u. Assumpion 2.3. i) g is uniformly Lipschiz in y. g ω,y,z,u) g ω,y,z,u) C y y for all ω,,y,y,z,u). ii) g is C 2 in z and here is θ > and a process r ) H 2 BMO, s.. for all,ω,y,z,u), D z g ω,y,z,u) r +θ z, D 2 zzg ω,y,z,u) θ. iii) g is wice Fréche differeniable in he Banach space L 2 ν) and here are consans θ, δ >, C 1 1+δ, C 2 and a predicable funcion m J 2 BMO s.. for all,ω,y,z,u,x), D u g ω,y,z,u) m +θ u, C 1 1 x ) D u g ω,y,z,u)x) C 2 1 x ) D 2 u g ω,y,z,u) L 2 ν ) θ. 5

6 Remark 2.2. he assumpion i) above is classic in he BSD heory. he assumpions ii) and iii) are generalizaions o he jump case of he assumpions considered by evzadze [31]. hey are useful in our proof of exisence in [15]. Moreover, we recall ha Assumpion 2.3 implies he following, here exiss µ > such ha for all,y,z,z,u) g ω,y,z,u) g ω,y,z,u) φ.z z ) µ z z z + z ), where φ := D z g y,,u) H 2 BMO. Analogously, here exiss µ > such ha for all ω,,y,z,u,u ) g ω,y,z,u) g ω,y,z,u ) ψ,u u µ u u L 2 ν ) where ψ := D u g y,z,) J 2 BMO. u L 2 ν + ) u ) L 2 ν ), Finally, in order o have a comparison heorem, we need o impose eiher one of he following hypohesis. he firs one has been firs inroduced by Royer [29], i implies ha he generaor g is Lipschiz in u. he second one is a convexiy assumpion, i has he advanage of keeping he generaor quadraic in u. Assumpion 2.4. For every y,z,u,u ) here exiss a predicable and -measurable process γ ) such ha g y,z,u) g y,z,u ) γ x)u u )x)ν dx), where here exis consans C 2 > and C 1 1+δ for some δ > such ha C 1 1 x ) γ x) C 2 1 x ). Assumpion 2.5. g is joinly convex in z,u). We proved in [15] he following comparison heorem, used o derive our uniqueness resul. Proposiion 2.1. Le ξ 1 and ξ 2 be wo F -measurable random variables. Le g 1 be a funcion saisfying eiher of he following i) Assumpions 2.2, 2.3i),ii) and 2.4. ii) Assumpions 2.2, 2.3i) and 2.5, and ha g 1,,) + α M where α is he process appearing in Assumpion 2.2iii) and M is a posiive consan. Le g 2 be anoher funcion and for i = 1,2, le Y i,z i,u i ) be he soluion of he BSDJ wih erminal condiion ξ i and generaor g i we assume ha exisence holds in our spaces), ha is o say for every [,] Y i = ξi + gs i Y s i,zi s,ui s )ds Zs i dbs Us i x) µdx,ds), P a.s. Assume furher ha ξ 1 ξ 2, P a.s. and gy 1 2,Z,U 2 2 ) gy 2 2,Z,U 2 2 ), P a.s. hen Y 1 Y 2, P a.s. Moreover in case i), if in addiion we have Y 1 = Y 2, hen for all, Y 1 = Y 2, Z1 = Z2 and U 1 = U2, P a.s. 6

7 he following is our main exisence and uniqueness resul, saed in [15]. heorem 2.1. Assume ha ξ L, and ha he generaor g saisfies eiher i) Assumpions 2.2, 2.3i),ii) and 2.4. ii) Assumpions 2.2, 2.3 and 2.5, and ha g,,) and he process α appearing in Assumpion 2.2iii) are bounded by some consan M >. hen here exiss a unique soluion o he BSDJ 2.1). 3 Quadraic non-linear expecaions wih jumps he heory of g-expecaions was inroduced by Peng in [27] as an example of non-linear expecaions. Since hen, numerous auhors have generalized his resuls, exending hem noably o he case of quadraic coefficiens see Ma and Yao [22]). An exension o disconinuous filraions was obained by Royer [29] and Lin [2]. In paricular, Royer [29] gave dominaion condiions under which a non-linear expecaion is a g-expecaion. We refer he ineresed reader o hese papers for more deails, and we recall for simpliciy some of heir general properies below. Le us sar wih a general definiion. Definiion 3.1. Le ξ L and le g be such ha he BSDJ wih generaor g and erminal condiion ξ has a unique soluion and such ha comparison in he sense of Proposiion 2.1 holds for insance g could saisfy any of he condiions in heorem 2.1). hen for every [,], we define he condiional g-expecaion of ξ as follows where Y, Z, U) solves he following BSDJ g [ξ] := Y, Y = ξ + g s Y s,z s,u s )ds Z s db s U s x) µdx,ds). Remark 3.1. Noice ha g : L Ω,F,P) L Ω,F,P) does no define a rue operaor. Indeed, o each bounded F -measurable random variable ξ, we associae he value Y, which is defined P-a.s., i.e. ouside a P-negligible se N, bu his se N depends on ξ. We canno a priori find a common negligible se for all variables in L, and hen define an operaor g on a fixed domain, excep if we only consider a counable se of variables ξ on which acs g. here is a noion of g-maringales and g-subsuper)maringales. Definiion 3.2. X S is called a g-submaringale resp. g-supermaringale) if g s[x ] resp. )X s, P a.s., for any s. X is called a g-maringale if i is boh a g-sub and supermaringale. he following resuls are easy generalizaions of he classical argumens which can be found in [27] or [2], and are consequences of he comparison heorem. We herefore omi he proofs. Lemma 3.1. { g } is monoonic increasing and ime consisen, i.e. 7

8 ξ 1 ξ 2, P-a.s. implies ha g ξ 1) g ξ 2), P-a.s.,. For any bounded sopping imes R S τ and F τ -measurable random variable ξ τ, Definiion 3.3. We will say ha g is g R g S ξ τ)) = g R ξ τ) P-a.s. 3.1) i) Consan addiive, if for any sopping imes R S, any F R -measurable random variable η R and any F S -measurable random variable ξ S, g R ξ S +η R ) = g R ξ S)+η R, P-a.s. ii) Posiively homogeneous, if for any sopping imes R S, and any posiive F R -measurable random variable λ, g R λξ S) = λ g R ξ S). iii) Convex, if for any sopping imes R S, any random variables ξs 1,ξ2 S ) and any λ [,1], g R λξ1 S +1 λ)ξ 2 S) λ g R ξ1 S)+1 λ) g R ξ2 S). he nex Lemma shows ha he operaor g inheris he above properies from g. Lemma 3.2. i) If g does no depend on y, hen g is consan addiive. ii) If g is posiively homogeneous in y,z,u), hen g is posiively homogeneous. iii) If g is moreover righ coninuous on [,) and coninuous a, hen he reverse implicaions of i) and ii) are also rue. iv) g is convex if g is convex in y,z,u). v) If g 1 g 2, P-a.s., hen g1 g2. If g 1 and g 2 are moreover righ coninuous on [,) and coninuous a, hen he reverse is also rue. Proof. We adap he ideas of he proofs in [2] o our conex wih jumps. i) he proof of he firs propery is exacly he same as he proof of heorem 6.7.b2 in [2], so we omi i. ii) Le g λ,y,z,u) := 1 λ g λy,λz,λu). hen { 1 λ g λξ S) } is a soluion of he BSDJ wih coefficien g λ and erminal condiion ξ S. If g = g λ, hen g λξ S) = λ g ξ S). iii) he reverse implicaions in i) and ii) are direc consequences of Corollary 3.1. iv) Suppose ha g is convex in y,z,u). Le Y i,z i,u i ) be he unique soluion of he BSDJ wih coefficiens g,ξs i ), i = 1,2, and se We have Ỹ = λy 1 +1 λ)y 2, Z = λz 1 +1 λ)z2 and Ũ ) = λu 1 )+1 λ)u2 ). dỹ = [ λg Y 1,Z1,U1 )+1 λ)g Y 2,Z2,U2 )] d λz 1 ) +1 λ)z2 db λu 1 x)+1 λ)u 2 x)) µd,dx) [ = g Ỹ, Z,Ũ)+k,Y 1,Y 2,Z,Z 1,U 2 1,U 2,λ) 8 ] d Z db Ũ x) µd,dx),

9 where k,y 1,Y 2,Z1,Z2,U1,U2,λ) := λg Y 1,Z1,U1 )+1 λ)g Y 2,Z2,U2 ) g Ỹ, Z,Ũ), is a non negaive funcion. hen using Proposiion 2.1 we obain in paricular g λξ1 S +1 λ)ξ2 S ) Ỹ = λ g ξ1 S )+1 λ)g ξ2 S ). v) his las propery is a direc consequence of he comparison heorem 2.1. he reverse implicaion is again a consequence of Corollary 3.1. xample 3.1. hese easy properies allow us o consruc examples of ime consisen dynamic convex risk measures, by appropriae choices of generaor g. Defining g z,u) := γ 2 z γ j γu ), we obain he so called enropic risk measure on our paricular filraion. As proved in [29], if we define g z,u) := η z +η 1 x )u + x)ν dx) C 1 1 x )u x)ν dx), where η > and 1 < C 1, hen g is a convex risk measure wih he following represenaion g ξ) = sup Q [ξ], wih Q Q Q := { Q, dq dp F = µ s db s + ) v s x) µds,dx) } wih µ and v predicable, µ s η, v s + x) η1 x), vs x) C 1 1 x). If we define a linear generaor g by g z,u) := αz +β 1 x )ux)ν dx), α R, β 1+δ for some δ >, hen we obain a linear risk measure, since g will only consis of a linear expecaion wih respec o he probabiliy measure Q, whose Radon-Nikodym derivaive is equal o dq ) dp = αb + β1 x ) µds, dx). In he res of his secion, we will provide imporan properies of quadraic g-expecaions and he associaed g-maringales in disconinuous filraions, which generalize he known resuls in simpler cases. 3.1 Non-linear Doob Meyer decomposiion We sar by proving ha he non-linear Doob Meyer decomposiion firs proved by Peng in [28] sill holds in our conex. We have wo differen ses of assumpions under which his resul holds, and hey are boh relaed o he assumpions under which our comparison heorem 2.1 holds. From a echnical poin of view, our proof consiss in approximaing our generaor by a sequence of Lipschiz generaors. However, he novely here is ha because of he dependence 9

10 of he generaor in u, we canno use he classical exponenial ransformaion and hen use some runcaion argumens, as in [17] and [22]. Indeed, since u lives in an infinie dimensional space, hose runcaion ype argumens no longer work a priori. Insead, inspired by [3], we will only use regularizaions by inf-convoluion, which are known o work in any Banach space. heorem 3.1. Le Y be a càdlàg g-submaringale resp. g-supermaringale) in S we assume ha exisence and uniqueness for he BSDJ wih generaor g hold for any bounded erminal condiion). Assume furher eiher one of hese condiions i) Assumpions 2.2 and 2.4 hold, wih he addiion ha he process γ does no depend on y,z) and ha g,,) +α M, where α is he process appearing in Assumpion 2.2iii) and M > is consan. ii) Assumpions 2.2, 2.3i) hold, g is concave resp. convex) in z,u), g,,) +α M, where α is he process appearing in Assumpion 2.2iii) and M > is consan. hen here exiss a predicable non-decreasing resp. non-increasing) process A null a and processes Z,U) H 2 J 2 such ha Y = Y + g s Y s,z s,u s )ds Z s db s U s x) µdx,ds) A +A, [,]. Remark 3.2. We emphasize ha he wo assumpions in he above heorem are no of he same ype. Indeed, Assumpion 2.4 implies ha he generaor g is uniformly Lipschiz in u, which is a bi disappoining if we wan o work in a quadraic conex. his is why we also considered he convexiy hypohesis on g, which allows us o rerieve a generaor which is quadraic in boh z, u). We do no know wheher hose wo assumpions are necessary or no o obain he resul, bu we remind he reader ha our heorem encompasses he case of he so-called enropic generaor, which has quadraic growh and is convex in z,u). o he bes of our knowledge, his paricular case which was already proved in [25], was he only resul available in he lieraure up unil now. Proof. Firs, if Y is g-supermaringale, hen Y is a g -submaringale where g y,z,u) := g y, z, u). Since g saisfies exacly he same Assumpions as g, and given ha g is convex when g is concave, i is clear ha we can wihou loss of generaliy resric ourselves o he case of g-submaringales. We sar wih he firs resul. Sep 1: Assumpions 2.2 and 2.4 hold. We will approximae he generaor g by a sequence of funcions g n ) which are uniformly Lipschiz in y,z) recall ha under he assumed assumpions, g is already Lipschiz in u). We emphasize ha unlike mos of he lieraure on quadraic BSDs, wih he noable excepion of [3], we will no use any exponenial change in our proof. Building upon he resuls of Lepelier and San Marin [18], we would like o use a sup-convoluion o regularize our generaor. However, due o he quadraic growh assumpion in z, such a sup-convoluion is no always well defined. herefore, we will firs use a runcaion argumen o bound our generaor from above by a funcion wih linear growh. Le us hus define for all n g n y,z,u) := g y,z,u) M +n z γ 2 z 2), 1

11 where he consans α,γ) are he ones appearing in Assumpion 2.3ii). I is clear ha we have he following esimaes M β y γ 2 z 2 1 γ j γu) g n y,z,u) M +β y +n z + 1 γ j γu), and ha g n decreases poinwise o g. We now define for all p n β g n,p y,z,u) := sup { g n w,v,u) p y w p z v }. w,v) Q d+1 his funcion is indeed well-defined, since we have for p n g n,p y,z,u) M + 1 γ j γu)+ sup {β w +n v p y w p z v } w,v) Q d+1 = M +β y +n z + 1 γ j γu). Moreover, by he resuls of Lepelier and San Marin [18], we know ha g n,p is uniformly Lipschiz in y,z) and ha g n,p y,z,u) g y,z,u) as n and p go o +. Finally, we define g n y,z,u) := gn,n y,z,u). hen he g n are uniformly Lipschiz in y,z,u) and decrease poinwise o g. Now, we wan somehow o use he fac ha we know ha he non-linear Doob-Meyer decomposiion holds when he underlying generaor is Lipschiz. Bu his was shown by Royer only when he generaor also saisfies Assumpion 2.4. herefore, we will now verify ha g n inheris Assumpion 2.4 from g. Firs of all, we show ha his is rue for g n. Le u 1,u 2 L ν) L 2 ν) and fix some y,z) R d+1. hen if we have g y,z,u 1 ) M +n z γ 2 z 2 and g y,z,u 2 ) M +n z γ 2 z 2, hen g n y,z,u 1 ) g n y,z,u 2 ) = g y,z,u 1 ) g y,z,u 2 ), and he resul is clear wih he same process γ as he one for g. Similarly, if g y,z,u 1 ) M +n z γ 2 z 2 and g y,z,u 2 ) M +n z γ 2 z 2, hen g n y,z,u1 ) g n y,z,u2 ) =, and he desired resul also follows by choosing he process γ in Assumpion 2.4 o be. Finally, if he remaining case can be reaed similarly) hen g y,z,u 1 ) M +n z γ 2 z 2 and g y,z,u 2 ) M +n z γ 2 z 2, g n y,z,u1 ) g n y,z,u2 ) M +n z γ 2 z 2 g y,z,u 2 ) g y,z,u 1 ) g y,z,u 2 ), and he desired resul follows once more wih he same process γ as he one for g. 11

12 Nex, we show ha g n,p inheris Assumpion 2.4 from g n. Indeed, we have g n,p y,z,u 1 ) g n,p y,z,u 2 n ) sup { g w,v,u 1 ) g n w,v,u 2 ) }, w,v) Q d+1 which implies he resul since he process γ in Assumpion 2.4 does no depend on y,z). Le now Y be a g-submaringale. We will now show ha i is also a g n -submaringale for all n. Le now Y resp. Y n ) be he unique soluion of he BSDJ wih erminal condiion Y and generaor g resp. g n ). Since g n saisfies Assumpion 2.4 and is uniformly Lipschiz in y,z,u), we can apply he comparison heorem for Lipschiz BSDJs see [29]) o obain Y Y Y n, P a.s. Hence Y is a g n -submaringale. We can herefore apply he Doob-Meyer decomposiion in he Lipschiz case see heorem 1.1 in Lin [2] or heorem 4.1 in Royer [29]) o obain he exisence of Z n,u n ) H 2 J 2 and of a predicable non-decreasing process A n null a such ha Y = Y + g n Y s,zs,u n s n )ds ZsdB n s Us n x) µdx,ds) A n +A n. 3.2) Since Y does no depend on n, he maringale par of 3.2) neiher, which enails ha Z n and U n are independen of n. We can rewrie 3.2) as Y = Y + g n Y s,z s,u s )ds Z s db s U s x) µdx,ds) A n +A n. 3.3) Since g n converges poinwise o g, he dominaed convergence heorem implies ha Hence, i holds P a.s. ha for all s [, ] A n s A s := Y s Y + g n sy s,z s,u s ) g s Y s,z s,u s ))ds, P a.s. s g r Y r,z r,u r )dr s Z r db r s U r x) µdx,dr). Furhermore, i is easy o see ha A is sill a predicable non-decreasing process null a. Sep 2: he concave case. We have seen in he above proof ha he main ingrediens o obain he desired decomposiion are he comparison heorem and he non-linear Doob-Meyer decomposiion in he Lipschiz case. As we have already seen in our comparison resul of Proposiion 2.1, Assumpion 2.4 plays, a leas formally, he same role as he concaviy/convexiy assumpion 2.5. Moreover, we show in he Appendix see Proposiion A.1) ha he non-linear Doob-Meyer decomposiion also holds in he Lipschiz case under Assumpion 2.5 insead of Assumpion 2.4. We are herefore led o proceed exacly as in he previous sep. Define hus g n y,z,u) := g y,z,u) M +n z +n u L 2 ν γ ) 2 z 2 1 ) γ j γu). hen g n is sill concave as he minimum of wo concave funcions, converges poinwise o g and verifies M β y γ 2 z 2 1 γ j γu) g n y,z,u) M +β y +n z +n u L 2 ν ). 12

13 hanks o his esimae he following sup-convoluion is well defined for p β n { } g n,p y,z,u) := sup w,v,r) Q d+1 L 2 ν ) g n w,v,r) p y w p z v p u r L 2 ν ), and is sill concave as he sup-convoluion of concave funcions. We can hen finish he proof exacly as in Sep 1, using he comparison heorem of Proposiion 2.1 and he non-linear Doob-Meyer decomposiion given by Proposiion A.1. Remark 3.3. Afer obaining his non-linear Doob-Meyer decomposiion, i is ineresing o wonder wheher we can say anyhing abou he non-decreasing process A apar from saying ha i is predicable). For insance, since we are working wih bounded g-supermaringales, we may hink ha A can also be bounded. However, i is already known for classical supermaringales corresponding o he case g = ) ha his is no rue. Indeed, le X be a supermaringale and le A be he predicable non-decreasing process appearing in is Doob-Meyer decomposiion. hen, he inequaliy X M for all only implies ha [A ) p ] p!m p, for all p 1. Since we have [X X ] = [A A ], we may hen wonder if here could exiss anoher non-decreasing process C bounded bu no necessarily adaped such ha [X X ] = [C C ]. 3.4) his resul is hen indeed rue, and as shown by Meyer [23], if X is càdlàg, posiive, bounded by some consan M, hen if we denoe Ẋ he predicable projecion of X, he non-decreasing process C in 3.4) is given by da C C = M 1 exp c ) s 1 A ) s, 3.5) M Ẋs M Ẋs <s where A c is he coninuous par of A. If we now consider a g-supermaringale Y saisfying eiher one of he assumpions in heorem 3.1, a simple applicaion of Iô s formula shows ha Ỹ := exp γy +γm+γβ ) Y s ds, is a bounded classical supermaringale, which herefore admis he following decomposiion Ỹ = Ỹ + Z s db s + Ũ s x) µdx,ds)+ã, P a.s., 3.6) for some Z,Ũ) H2 J 2 and some predicable non-decreasing process Ã. We can he apply Meyer s resul o obain [Ỹ Ỹ] = [D D ], where D is given by 3.5). hen, applying Iô s formula o lnỹ) in 3.6), we can show afer some calculaions ha Y = Y + g Y s,z s,u s )ds Z s db s U s x) µdx,ds)+a A, where Z,U) H 2 J 2 and A is a predicable process wih finie variaion, and where Z,U,A) can be compued explicily from Z,Ũ,Ã). 13

14 By uniqueness of he non-linear Doob-Meyer decomposiion for Y, A is acually non-decreasing, and we have a resul somehow similar o ha of Meyer, using he relaion beween à and A. I would of course be ineresing o pursue furher his sudy. We end his secion wih a converse comparison resul for our class of quadraic BSDJs, which is a consequence of he previous Doob-Meyer decomposiion. Corollary 3.1. Le g 1 be a funcion saisfying eiher one of he assumpions in heorem 3.1 and g 2 be anoher funcion. We furhermore suppose ha g i,, ) is righ coninuous in [,) and coninuous a, for i = 1,2. For any ξ L, denoe for i = 1,2, Y i,ξ he soluion of he BSDJ wih generaor g i and erminal condiion ξ exisence and uniqueness are assumed o hold in our spaces). If we have Y 1,ξ Y 2,ξ, [,], ξ L, P a.s., hen we have g 1 y,z,u) g 2 y,z,u),,y,z,u), P a.s. Proof. For any ξ L, he assumpion of he Corollary is equivalen o saying ha Y 2,ξ is a g 1 -supermaringale. Given he assumpions on g 1, we can apply heorem 3.1 o obain he exisence of Z 2,ξ,Ũ2,ξ,A 2,ξ ) such ha for any s < we have, P a.s. Y 2,ξ s = Y 2,ξ + gr 1 s ) Yr 2,ξ 2,ξ, Z r,ũ2,ξ r dr Z r 2,ξ db r s s Ũ 2,ξ r x) µdx,dr)+a 2,ξ A 2,ξ s. 3.7) Moreover, if we denoe Y 2,ξ,Z 2,ξ,U 2,ξ ) he soluion of he BSDJ wih generaor g 2 and erminal condiion ξ, we also have by definiion Y 2,ξ s = Y 2,ξ + gr 2 s ) Yr 2,ξ,Zr 2,ξ,Ur 2,ξ dr s Z 2,ξ r db r s U 2,ξ r x) µdx,dr), P a.s. 3.8) Idenifying he maringale pars in 3.7) and 3.8), we obain ha P a.s., Z2,ξ = Z 2,ξ and Ũ 2,ξ = U 2,ξ. Furhermore, his implies by aking he expecaion ha 1 s s [ )] gr 1 Yr 2,ξ,Zr 2,ξ,Ur 2,ξ dr 1 s s [ )] gr 2 Yr 2,ξ,Zr 2,ξ,Ur 2,ξ dr. Now, we finish using he same argumen as in Chen [8]. Le ξ = X where for a given s,y,z,u ), X is he soluion of he SD exisence and uniqueness are classical, see for insance Jacod [13]) X = y gr 2 X r,z,u )dr + z db r + u x) µdx,dr). s s s Leing s +, we obain g 1 s y,z,u ) g 2 s y,z,u ), which is he desired resul. 3.2 Upcrossing inequaliy In his subsecion, we prove an upcrossing inequaliy for quadraic g-submaringales, which is similar o he one obained by Ma and Yao [22] in he case wihou jumps. his propery is essenial for he sudy of pah regulariy of g-submaringales. 14

15 heorem 3.2. Le X ) be a g-submaringale reps. g-supermaringale) and assume ha eiher one of he following holds as usual we assume exisence and uniqueness for he soluion of he BSDJ driven by g wih any bounded erminal condiion) i) Assumpions 2.2, 2.3i),ii) and 2.4 hold, wih he addiion ha g,,) + α M, where α is he process appearing in Assumpion 2.2iii) and M > is consan. ii) Assumpions 2.2, 2.3i) hold, g is concave reap. convex), wih he addiion ha g,, ) + α M, where α is he process appearing in Assumpion 2.2iii) and M > is consan. Se J := γme β 1)/β +γe β X S, and denoe for any θ,1) X := X +kj +1), X := exp k θ 1+J)+ γθ ) 1 θ X [,], where k and k θ are a well-chosen consans depending on θ, C, M, β and γ, he consans in Assumpion 2.2. Le = < 1 <... < n = be a subdivision of [,] and le a < b, we denoe U b a [ X,n], he number of upcrossings of he inerval [a,b] by X j ) j n. hen If i) above holds, here exiss a BMO process λ n, [,]) such ha wih [ ] Ua b [X,n] X S +2kJ +1) + a, b a := ) λ n s +φ s)db s + γ s x) µdx,ds), and where φ and γ are defined in Remark 2.2 and Assumpion 2.4, and such ha [ n ] λ n s 2 ds C 1. If ii) above holds, hen for any θ,1) ] exp [Ua b [X,n] γθ γθ ) 1 θ X S )+exp 1 θ ) a. exp γθ 1 θ ) exp b γθ 1 θ a Proof. As usual, we can resric ourselves o he g-submaringale case. Sep 1: When i) holds. For any j 1,,n, we consider he following BSDJ j j j Y j = X j + g s Ys j,zj s,uj s )ds Zs j db s Us j x) µdx,ds), j, P a.s. 3.9) From Proposiion 3.1 in [15] one has Y j S γm eβ j j 1 ) 1 +γe β j j 1 ) Xj S J. 3.1) β 15

16 We can rewrie 3.9) as follows Y j = X j j j j [ gs Ys j,zj s,uj s ) g sys j,,uj s )] ds [ gs Ys j,,uj s ) g s,,us j )] ds+ j j g s,,)ds ZsdB j s j [ gs,,u j s ) g s,,) ] ds U j sx) µdx,ds), j, P a.s. hen by Remark 2.2, here exis a bounded process η n and φ,λ n ) H 2 BMO wih λ n Z µ j, P a.s., [ j 1, j ], such ha Y j j [ = X j + λ n s +φ s )Zs j +ηsy n s j ] j [ ds+ gs,,us) g j s,,) ] ds j j j + g s,,)ds ZsdB j s Usx) µdx,ds) j j j X j +kj +1) j ) ZsdB j s n Usx) µ j 1 ds,dx), for some posiive consan k and where B n := B λ n s +φ s )ds and µ 1 ds,dx) = µdx,ds) γ s x)ν s dx)ds. Wih our Assumpions, we can once more use Girsanov s heorem and define an equivalen probabiliy measure P n such ha dp n ) dp = λ n s +φ s)db s + γ s x) µdx,ds). n aking he condiional expecaion on boh sides of he above inequaliy, we obain g [ ] Xj = Y j [ ] Pn Xj +kj +1)j ), P a.s., [ j 1, j ]. In paricular, aking = j 1 we have X j 1 g j 1 [ Xj ] P n j 1 [ Xj ] +kj +1)j j 1 ), P a.s. Hence X j ) j=..n is a P n -submaringale. Define now he following quaniies u := b+kj +1) and l := a+kj +1). hen, we can apply he classical upcrossing inequaliy for X, u and l [ ) ] + Pn X l Pn [U u l [ X,n]] u l X S +2kJ +1) + a. b a Noice hen finally ha Ul u[ X,n] = Ua b [X,n], which implies he desired resul. 16

17 Sep 2: When ii) holds. Using he same argumens as in he proof of ii) of Proposiion 2.1, we can show, using he concaviy of g and Assumpion 2.2, ha for any θ,1) θg y,z,u) g,,) +Cθ y +1 θ)m + γ 1 θ θ2 z θ ) γθu γ j 1 θ Cθ y +2 θ)m + γ 1 θ θ2 z θ γ j γθu 1 θ Hence, considering as in Sep 1 for any j =...n, he soluion Y j of 3.9), we can use he same exponenial ransformaion as in Sep 2 of he proof of Proposiion 2.1 o obain ) [ γθ exp 1 θ Y j γθ exp 1 θ X j +γ 2 θ 1 θ M j )+ γc j )] Y j 1 θ s ds ) [ )] CJ γθ exp γ 1 θ +M2 θ) j ) ) exp 1 θ X j expk θ 1+J) j )) [exp for some consan k θ depending on γ, C, M and θ. γθ 1 θ X j As in Sep 1, choosing = j 1 and using he fac ha X is a g-submaringale, we deduce ha X j ) j=..n is a P-submaringale, where X := exp k θ 1+J)+ γθ ) 1 θ X. Define now he quaniies u θ := exp k θ 1+J)+ γθ ) 1 θ b We apply he classical upcrossing inequaliy for X, u θ and l θ ) ] + [ X l θ exp γθ [U uθ l θ [ X,n]] u θ lθ which ends he proof, noicing ha U uθ l θ [ X,n] = U b a [X,n]. )], ). and l θ := exp k θ 1+J)+ γθ ) 1 θ a. γθ ) 1 θ X S )+exp 1 θ ) a, exp γθ 1 θ ) exp b γθ 1 θ a Wih his upcrossing inequaliy in hand, we can argue exacly as in [22] see Corollary 5.6) o obain Corollary 3.2. Le g be as in heorem 3.2. hen any g-subsuper)maringale X admis a càdlàg modificaion and furhermore for any counable dense subse D of [, ], i holds for all [, ] ha he wo following limis exis P a.s. lim X r and lim X r. r, r D r, r D 4 Dual Represenaion and Inf-Convoluion We generalize in his secion some resuls of Barrieu and l Karoui [2] o he case of quadraic BSDs wih jumps. We give a dual represenaion of he relaed g-expecaions, viewed as convex dynamic risk measures and hen we compue in an explici manner he inf-convoluion of wo convex g-expecaions. 17

18 4.1 Dual Represenaion of he g-expecaion We will assume in his secion ha g y,z,u) = g z,u) is independen ofy and ha he funcion g is convex. We will prove a dual Legendre-Fenchel ype represenaion for he funcional g, making use of he Legendre-Fenchel ransform of g. his problem has been reaed by Barrieu and l Karoui [2] in he case of quadraic BSDs, we exend i here o he case of quadraic BSDs wih jumps. In his secion, g will correspond o a ime consisen dynamic convex risk measures. Hence g admis a dual represenaion, as in [2]. In his paricular case of risk measures consruced from backward SDs, he penaly funcion appearing in he dual represenaion is an inegral of he Legendre-Fenchel ransform of he generaor g. he operaor g, viewed as a ime-consisen dynamic convex risk measure has ineresing economic applicaions in insurance. For µ R d and v L 2 ν ), define he Legendre-Fenchel ransform of g in z,u) as follows G µ,v) := sup {µ.z + v,u g z,u)}. z,u) R d L 2 ν ) Le A denoe he space of applicaions v J 2 BMO L ν) such ha here exiss a consan δ > wih v x) 1+δ, P d dν -a.e. heorem 4.1. Le g be a given convex funcion in z,u) and le Assumpions 2.2 and 2.3 hold; assume ha g, ) and he process α appearing in Assumpion 2.2iii) are bounded by some consan M > hen, he exisence and uniqueness of he soluion of he BSDJ wih generaor g and erminal condiion ξ L hold by heorem 2.1 ii)). We hen have i) For any ξ L, g ξ ) = esssup P µ,v) H 2 BMO A where Q µ,v is he probabiliy measure defined by dq µ,v.. dp = µ s db s + { [ ]} Qµ,v ξ G s µ s,v s )ds, P a.s., ) v s x) µds,dx). ii) Moreover, here exis measurable funcions µw, ) and vω,, ) such ha [ ] g ξ ) = Qµ,v ξ G s µ s,v s )ds, P a.s. 4.1) Proof. hanks o he Kazamaki crierion see for insance Lemma 4.1 in [24]), we know ha if µ H 2 BMO and v J2 BMO, hen Γ µ,v := dqµ,v dp is a rue maringale and he probabiliy measure Q µ,v is well defined. g ξ ) is by definiion soluion of g ξ ) = ξ + g s Z s,u s )ds Z s db s U s x) µds,dx) = ξ + Z s db s µ [g s Z s,u s ) µ s.z s v s,u s s ]ds U s x) µ v ds,dx), P a.s., 4.2) 18

19 where B µ := B µ sds is a Q µ,v -Brownian moion and µ v [,],A) := µ[,],a) A v s x)ν s dx)ds is a Q µ,v maringale. By Lemma 3.1 in [15], Z H 2 BMO and U J2 BMO. Le us prove ha we also have Z,J) H 2 Q µ,v ) J 2 Q µ,v ). Indeed, using he number r > 1 given in Proposiion 2.4 of [15] Qµ,v [ ] ] Z s 2 ds = [Γ µ,v Z s 2 ds [ [ Γ r ]) 1/r µ,v Z s 2 ds) q ]) 1/q < +, where 1/r+1/q = 1 and where we used he energy inequaliy 2.3) in [15], we refer he reader o [14] for more deails). he proof for J is he same. Moreover, G µ,v) = sup z,u) R d L 2 ν ) {µ.z + v,u g z,u)} g,), which means ha G µ,v) is Q µ,v d-inegrable. Using hese inegrabiliy properies and he definiion of G, we ake he condiional expecaion in 4.2) o obain g ξ ) Qµ,v [ ] ξ G s µ s,v s )ds. 4.3) By our assumpions, g is C 2 in z and wice Fréche differeniable in u, hen gz,u ) conains a unique elemen, where he subdifferenial g is defined by { } gz,u ) = µ,v) R d L 2 ν ), g z,u ) g Z,U ) µ.z Z ) v,u U, z,u ). We ake µ,v) gz,u ). We have g Z,U ) = µ.z + v,u G µ,v ). We refer o [2] for he measurabiliy of µ and v wih respec o he variable ω. We use Remark 2.2 o wrie g z,u) g z,) + D u g z,) 2 L 2 ν ) u 2 L 2 ν ) +C u 2 L 2 ν ) ) ) g,) +C z 2 +C 1+ u 2 L 2 ν ) C z 2 +C 1+ u 2 L 2 ν ), where C is a consan whose value may vary from line o line. Puing he above esimaion in G leads o G µ,v ) = sup z,u) R d L 2 ν ) {µ.z + v,u g z,u)} { sup v,u C C u 2 L 2 ν ) u L 2 ν ) = 1 4C v 2 L 2 ν C + 1 ) 4C µ 2. } + sup {µ.z γ z R d 2 z 2} 19

20 From his, we deduce ha for ǫ < 1 4C, ) 1 4C ǫ v 2 L 2 ν + µ ) 2) G µ,v )+C ǫ v 2 L 2 ν ǫ µ ) 2 = C g Z,U )+ v,u ǫ v 2 L 2 ν ) +µ.z ǫ µ 2 C g Z,U )+ 1 4ǫ U 2 L 2 ν ) + 1 4ǫ Z 2. Since g Z,U ) 1 2 and U are respecively in H 2 BMO and J2 BMO, using he fac ha ) ) 1 4C ǫ v 2 1 L 2 ν ) 4C ǫ v 2 L 2 ν) + µ 2) and, ) 1 4C ǫ µ 2 we obain ha v is in J 2 BMO and µ is in H2 BMO. ) 1 4C ǫ v 2 L 2 ν + µ ) 2), Furhermore, by our assumpions, v = D u g 1 + δ and v is bounded, hen v A. he inequaliy 4.3) is hus an equaliy, and he represenaion 4.1) holds rue. 4.2 Inf-Convoluion of g-expecaions Le g 1z,u) and g2 z,u) be wo convex funcions such ha g 1 g 2 ),,) = inf { g 1 µ,v)+g µ, v) 2 } >. 4.4) µ,v) R d L 2 ν ) he aim of his Secion is o compue he opimal risk ransfer beween wo economic agens using g1 and g2 as risk measures. he oal risk is modeled by a F -measurable random variable ξ. he opimal risk ransfer will be given hrough he inf-convoluion of he risk measures g1 and g2. A ime, boh agens assess heir risk using a monoone convex moneary risk measure resp. g1 and g2 ). For a given loss level ξ, agen 1 will ake in charge ξ F and ransfer o he second agen a quaniy F, and for his he will pay a premium πf). Agen 1 minimizes his risk under he consrain ha a ransacion akes place, he solves : inf F,π {g1 ξ F +π)} under he consrain g2 F π) g2 ) = 4.5) Binding his las consrain and using he cash-addiiviy propery for g2 gives he opimal price π = g2 F) g2 ) = g2 F). his is an indifference pricing rule for he firs agen, ha is o say he price a which he is indifferen from a risk perspecive) beween enering and no enering ino he ransacion. Replacing π = g2 F) in 4.5) and using he cash-addiiviy propery of g1, he insurer program becomes equivalen o he following one: inf F {g1 ξ F)+ g2 F)} =: g1 g2 ξ ) We are lef wih he inf-convoluion of g1 and g2, problem for which we give some explici soluions in heorem 4.2 and in Secion

21 More precisely, we will show ha, provided ha all he quaniies considered behave well enough and are in he righ spaces, we can idenify he inf-convoluion of g1 and g2 as he soluion of a BSDJ whose generaor is he inf-convoluion of g 1 and g 2. Furhermore, we will explicily consruc wo F -measurable random variables F 1) and F 2) such ha F 1) +F 2) = ξ and We will say ha F 1), F2) g1 g2 )ξ ) = g1 F 1) )+g2 F 2) ). ) is he opimal risk ransfer beween he agens 1 and 2. For his purpose, and for he sake of simpliciy, we will assume hroughou his secion ha he soluions o all he considered BSDJs exis. Noice ha his is no such a sringen assumpion. Indeed, when i comes o he growh condiion of Assumpion 2.2, if we assume ha g 1 has quadraic growh in z and u and is srongly convex in z,u), ha is o say ha here exiss some consan C > such ha g 1 z,u) C ) z 2 + u 2 L 2 2 ν ), is convex, hen, since g 2 is convex, i is classical ha g 1 g 2 also has quadraic growh. Furhermore, we are convinced ha as in he classical resuls by Kobylanski [17] in he coninuous case, his growh condiion should be enough o obain exisence of maximal and minimal soluions o he corresponding BSDJs. Remark 4.1. Noice ha since he generaors are defined on Ω [,] R d L 2 ν) L ν), a quadraic growh in u is equivalen o he exponenial growh assumed in Assumpion 2.2. heorem 4.2. Le g 1 and g 2 be wo given generaors saisfying he assumpions of heorem 4.1. Denoe 1,2 ξ ),Z,U ) he soluion of he BSDJ wih generaor g 1 g 2 and erminal condiion ξ, and le Ẑ1),Û1) ) and Ẑ2),Û2) ) be four predicable processes such ha g 1 g 2 ),Z,U ) = g 1 Ẑ1),Û 1) )+g 2 Ẑ2),Û 2) ) d P a.s. 4.6) hen, i) For any F -measurable r.v F L, ii) Define 1,2 ξ ) g1 ξ F)+ g2 F), P a.s., [,]. 4.7) F 2) := g sẑ2) 2 s,û2) s )ds+ Ẑ s 2) db s + Û s 2) x) µds, dx), and assume ha he BSDJs wih generaors g 1 and g 2 and erminal condiions ξ F 2) and F 2) have a soluion. If furhermore Ẑi) H 2 BMO and Ûi) J 2 BMO, i = 1,2, hen g1 g2 ) ξ ) = 1,2 ξ ) = g1 ξ F 2) )+g2 F 2) ). 4.8) Proof. Ẑ2),Û2) ) is well defined and predicable hanks o Proposiion 8.1 in [2]. For F L, g1 ξ F)+ g2 F) is soluion of d g1 ξ F)+ g2 F)) = gz 1,U 1 1 )+gz 2,U 2 2 ) ) d Z 1 +Z)dB 2 U 1 x)+u 2 x)) µd,dx) = g 1 Z Z 2,U U 2 )+g2 Z2,U2 )) d Z db 21 U x) µd,dx)

22 and g1 ξ F)+ g2 F) = ξ. Since g 1 saisfies he convexiy Assumpion 2.5, hen he funcion z,u) g 1 z Z 2,u U 2 )+ g 2 Z 2,U 2 ) is also convex, and we can apply he comparison heorem which direcly implies inequaliy 4.7). Assume now ha Ẑ i) H 2 BMO and Ûi) J 2 BMO, i = 1,2, and define Fi) by he following forward equaions F 1) := 1,2 ξ ) gs 1 Ẑ1) s,û s 1) )ds+ Ẑ s 1) db s + Û s 1) x) µds, dx), := gs 2 Ẑ2) s,û2) s )ds+ Ẑ s 2) db s + Û s 2) x) µds, dx). hen we have F 2) F i) = F i) + and by uniqueness, F i) = gi we have he equaliy g sẑi) i s,ûi) s )ds Ẑ s i) db s Û s i) x) µds,dx), Fi) ). Moreover, by definiion, we have F1) +F 2) = ξ. Since g 1 g 2 ),Z,U ) = g 1 Ẑ1),Û1) )+g 2 Ẑ2),Û2) ) d P a.s., 4.9) 1,2 ξ ) = g1 F 1) )+g2 F 2) ). We can conclude ha he processes g1 F 1) )+g2 ) and 1,2 ξ ) are soluion of he BSDJ wih coefficiens g 1 g 2,ξ ), by uniqueness we have ha equaliy 4.8) holds. F 2) Remark 4.2. he opimal srucure F 1),F2) ) is defined up o a consan, more precisely, F 1) + m,f 2) m) wih m R is again an opimal srucure. Indeed, he cash-addiiviy propery implies ha g1 F 1) +m)+ g2 F 2) m) = g1 F 1) )+g2 F 2) ). 4.3 xamples of inf-convoluion In his Secion, we use he previous resul on he inf-convoluion of g-expecaions o rea several paricular examples Quadraic and Quadraic We firs sudy he inf-convoluion of wo dynamic enropic risk measure. his example is reaed by Barrieu and l Karoui [2] by a direc mehod, hey find ha he opimal risk ransfer is proporional in he sense ha here exiss a,1) such ha g1 g2 )ξ ) = g1 aξ )+ g2 1 a)ξ ). We rerieve here his resul using heorem 4.2. For his, we firs need o sudy he infconvoluion of he wo corresponding generaors g i, i = 1,2 g i 1 z,u) := z 2 +γ i e ux) γ i 1 ux) ) ν dx), 4.1) 2γ i where γ 1,γ 2 ) R + R +. γ i 22

23 Lemma 4.1. Le g 1 and g 2 be he wo convex generaors defined in equaion 4.1). For any bounded F -measurable random variable ξ, we have, ) ) γ1 γ2 g1 g2 )ξ ) = g1 ξ + g2 ξ. γ 1 +γ 2 γ 1 +γ 2 Proof. We can calculae { 1 g 1 g 2 ),z,u) = inf v } z v 2 v 2γ 1 2γ 2 +inf {γ 1 e wx) γ 1 1 wx) )ν dx)+γ 2 w γ 1 he firs infimum above is easy o calculae and is aained for v := γ 1 γ 1 +γ 2 z. e ux) wx) γ 2 1 ux) wx) ) } ν dx). γ 2 For he second one, we posulae similarly ha i should be aained for w := γ 1 γ 1 +γ 2 u. In order o verify his resul, i is sufficien o prove ha for all x,y) R 2 γ 1 +γ 2 ) e x+y γ 1 +γ 2 1 x+y ) γ 1 e x γ 1 1 x ) +γ 2 e y γ 2 1 y ). 4.11) γ 1 +γ 2 γ 1 γ 2 Se λ := γ 1 /γ 1 +γ 2 ), a := x/γ 1, b := y/γ 2 and hx) := e x 1 x, his is equivalen o hλa+1 λ)b) λha)+1 λ)hb), which is clear by convexiy of he funcion h. herefore, we finally obain g 1 g 2 1 ),z,u) = 2γ 1 +γ 2 ) z 2 +γ 1 +γ 2 ) e ux) γ 1 +γ 2 1 ux) γ 1 +γ 2 ) ν dx). Using he noaions of heorem 4.2, we can compue he quaniy F 2), giving he opimal risk ransfer F 2) = γ 2 + γ 1 +γ 2 Z db + = γ 2 γ 1 +γ 2 ξ 1,2 ξ ) We calculae similarly F 1) and obain Now using Remark 4.2 wih m = γ 2 ) γ1 γ γ 1 +γ 2 ξ, 2 γ 1 +γ 2 ξ is opimal. [ 1 2γ 1 +γ 2 ) Z 2 +γ 1 +γ 2 ) ) U x) µd,dx), ). F 1) = γ 1 γ 1 +γ 2 ξ + γ 2 γ 1 +γ 2 1,2 ξ ). γ 1 +γ 2 1,2 e U x) γ 1 +γ 2 1 U ) ] x) ν dx) d γ 1 +γ 2 ξ ), we obain ha he proporional srucure 23

24 4.3.2 Linear and Quadraic Here, we assume ha d = 1. We sudy he inf-convoluion of a dynamic enropic risk measure wih a linear one corresponding o a linear BSDJ. In his case, we wan o calculae he inf-convoluion of he wo corresponding generaors g 1 and g 2 given by and g 1 z,u) := 1 2γ z 2 +γ e ux) γ 1 ux) ) ν dx), γ gz,u) 2 := αz +β 1 x )ux)ν dx), where γ,α,β) R + R [ 1+δ,+ ) for some δ >. Lemma 4.2. Le g 1 and g 2 be defined in he wo previous equaions. We have, for any bounded F -measurable random variable ξ, g1 g2 )ξ ) = g1 F 1) )+g2 F 2) ), where =ξ α2 γ +γ β1 x ) ln1+β1 x )))ν dx)d αγb γ ln1+β1 x )) µd,dx), F 2) and F 1) = ξ F 2). Remark 4.3. Noice ha F 2) has no longer he linear form wih respec o ξ obained in he previous example. Now, he agen 2 receives he value ξ perurbed by a random value only depending on he daa conained in he filraion, i.e he Brownian moion B and he random measures µ and ν. Proof. We sar by compuing he inf-convoluion in z,u) of he generaors: { } 1 g 1 g 2 ),z,u) = inf v 2γ v 2 +αz v) { +inf γ e wx) γ 1 wx) ) } ν dx)+β 1 x )ux) wx))ν dx). w γ he firs infimum above is easy o calculae and is aained for v := αγ. ) Similarly, i is easy o show ha he funcion w γ e w γ 1 w γ + β1 x )ux) w) aains is minimum a w := γln1+β1 x )). herefore, we finally obain g 1 g 2 ),z,u) =αz α2 γ 2 + β1 x )ux)ν dx) + γ[β1 x ) 1+β1 x ))ln1+β1 x ))]ν dx). 24

25 Noice ha all he quaniies appearing in g 1 g 2 are finie. Indeed, we firs have for any u L 2 ν) L ν) β1 x )ux) β 2 1 x 2 )+ux)) 2, 4.12) and his quaniy is herefore ν -inegrable for all. hen, since β 1+δ, i is also clear ha for some consan C δ > 1+β1 x ))ln1+β1 x )) β1 x ) C δ 1 x 2 ), 4.13) and hus he second inegral is also finie. We can now compue for insance he quaniy F 2), which is given afer some calculaions by ) F 2) = αz +β 1 x )U x)ν dx) d+ Z db + U x) µd,dx) +α 2 γ +γβ 1 x )ln1+β1 x ))ν dx)d αγb γ ln1+β1 x )) µd,dx). Recall ha Z,U) is par of he soluion of he BSDJ wih generaor g 1 g 2 and erminal condiion ξ. Similarly, we can compue he value F 1). Since F1) +F 2) = ξ, we obain ξ = 1 2 α2 γ +γ 1+β1 x ))ln1+β1 x )) β1 x ))ν dx)d gz 2,U )d+ Z db + U x) µd,dx). And finally, we can conclude ha he opimal risk ransfer akes he form F 2) =ξ α2 γ +γ β1 x ) ln1+β1 x )))ν dx)d αγb γ ln1+β1 x )) µd,dx). A Appendix Proposiion A.1. Le g be a funcion saisfying Assumpion 2.2i), which is uniformly Lipschiz in y,z,u). Le Y be a càdlàg g-submaringale resp. g-supermaringale) in S. Assume furher ha g is concave resp. convex) in z, u) and ha g y,z,u) M β y γ 2 z 2 1 γ j γu). resp. g y,z,u) M +β y + γ 2 z ) γ j γu). hen here exis a predicable non-decreasing resp. non-increasing) process A null a and processes Z,U) H 2 J 2 such ha Y = Y + g s Y s,z s,u s )ds Z s db s U s x) µdx,ds) A +A, [,]. 25

26 Proof. As usual, we can limi ourselves o he g-supermaringale case. Le us consider he following refleced BSDJ wih lower obsacle Y, generaor g and erminal condiion Y Ỹ = Y + g s Ỹs, Z s,ũs)ds Z s db s Ũ s x) µdx,ds)+a A, [,] Ỹ Y, [,], where all he above holds P a.s. Ỹs Y s ) da s =, he exisence and uniqueness of a soluion consising of a predicable non-decreasing process A and a riple Ỹ, Z,Ũ) S2 H 2 J 2 follow from he resuls of [11] for insance, since he generaor is Lipschiz and he obsacle is càdlàg and bounded. We will now show ha he process Ỹ mus always be equal o he lower obsacle Y, which will provide us he desired decomposiion. We proceed by conradicion and assume wihou loss of generaliy ha Ỹ > Y. For any ε >, we now define he following bounded sopping ime { } τ ε := inf >, Ỹ Y +ε, P a.s.. By he Skorokhod condiion, i is a classical resul ha he non-decreasing process A never acs before τ ε. herefore, we have for any [,τ ε ] τε Ỹ = Ỹτ ε + g s Ỹs, Z τε τε s,ũs)ds Z s db s Ũ s x) µdx,ds), P a.s. A.1) Consider now he BSDJ on [,τ ε ] wih erminal condiion Y τε and generaor g exisence and uniqueness of he soluion are consequences of he resul of [1] or [19]) τε τε τε Ŷ = Y τε + g s Ŷs,Ẑs,Ûs)ds Ẑ s db s Û s x) µdx,ds), P a.s. A.2) Noice also ha since Y and g,,) are bounded, Ŷ and Ỹ are also bounded, as a consequence of classical a priori esimaes for Lipschiz BSDJs and refleced BSDJs. hen, using he fac ha g is convex in z,u) and ha g y,z,u) M +β y + γ 2 z γ j γu), we can proceed as in he Sep 2 of he proof of Proposiion 2.1 o obain ha for any θ,1) δy 1 θ [ τε ln exp γ M +C Ŷ + C ) γ 1 θ δy s ds+ γ )]) 1 θ δy τ ε τε ) 1 θ)lnc )+C δy s ds+ δy τε, where δy s := Ỹs θŷs and C is some consan which does no depend on θ. Leing θ go o 1, and using he fac ha by definiion Ỹτ ε θy τε ε, we obain τε Ỹ Ŷ Cε+C Ỹs Ŷs ds. A.3) Bu since Y is a g-supermaringale, we have by definiion ha Ŷ Y. Since we assumed ha Ỹ > Y, his implies ha Ỹ > Ŷ. herefore, we can use Gronwall s lemma in A.3) o obain < Ỹ Ŷ C 1 ε, for some consan C 1 >, independen of ε. By arbirariness of ε, his gives us he desired conradicion and ends he proof. 26