On the Multi-Dimensional Controller and Stopper Games

Similar documents
Prof. Erhan Bayraktar (University of Michigan)

STOCHASTIC PERRON S METHOD AND VERIFICATION WITHOUT SMOOTHNESS USING VISCOSITY COMPARISON: OBSTACLE PROBLEMS AND DYNKIN GAMES

On continuous time contract theory

Non-Zero-Sum Stochastic Differential Games of Controls and St

Random G -Expectations

Asymptotic Perron Method for Stochastic Games and Control

Viscosity Solutions of Path-dependent Integro-Differential Equations

Nonlinear representation, backward SDEs, and application to the Principal-Agent problem

Some aspects of the mean-field stochastic target problem

Multi-dimensional Stochastic Singular Control Via Dynkin Game and Dirichlet Form

Stochastic optimal control with rough paths

Solution of Stochastic Optimal Control Problems and Financial Applications

Proving the Regularity of the Minimal Probability of Ruin via a Game of Stopping and Control

Weak solutions of mean-field stochastic differential equations

Differential Games II. Marc Quincampoix Université de Bretagne Occidentale ( Brest-France) SADCO, London, September 2011

Weak Dynamic Programming Principle for Viscosity Solutions

Minimal Supersolutions of Backward Stochastic Differential Equations and Robust Hedging

HJB equations. Seminar in Stochastic Modelling in Economics and Finance January 10, 2011

BSDEs and PDEs with discontinuous coecients Applications to homogenization K. Bahlali, A. Elouain, E. Pardoux. Jena, March 2009

Brownian motion. Samy Tindel. Purdue University. Probability Theory 2 - MA 539

Optimal Trade Execution with Instantaneous Price Impact and Stochastic Resilience

American Game Options and Reected BSDEs with Quadratic Growth

Optimal Stopping under Adverse Nonlinear Expectation and Related Games

On the Bellman equation for control problems with exit times and unbounded cost functionals 1

A new approach for investment performance measurement. 3rd WCMF, Santa Barbara November 2009

ON THE FIRST TIME THAT AN ITO PROCESS HITS A BARRIER

Deterministic Dynamic Programming

A Model of Optimal Portfolio Selection under. Liquidity Risk and Price Impact

Mean-field SDE driven by a fractional BM. A related stochastic control problem

Quasi-sure Stochastic Analysis through Aggregation

The Wiener Itô Chaos Expansion

Generalized Hypothesis Testing and Maximizing the Success Probability in Financial Markets

Sébastien Chaumont a a Institut Élie Cartan, Université Henri Poincaré Nancy I, B. P. 239, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy Cedex, France. 1.

OPTIMAL SOLUTIONS TO STOCHASTIC DIFFERENTIAL INCLUSIONS

Lecture 17 Brownian motion as a Markov process

Brownian Motion. 1 Definition Brownian Motion Wiener measure... 3

Reflected Brownian Motion

Regularity of the Optimal Exercise Boundary of American Options for Jump Diffusions

Numerical Approximations of Stochastic Optimal Stopping and Control Problems

A class of globally solvable systems of BSDE and applications

The Real Option Approach to Plant Valuation: from Spread Options to Optimal Switching

Fundamental Inequalities, Convergence and the Optional Stopping Theorem for Continuous-Time Martingales

Continuous Time Finance

ON THE POLICY IMPROVEMENT ALGORITHM IN CONTINUOUS TIME

Additional information and pricing-hedging duality in robust framework

Stopping Games in Continuous Time

A weak dynamic programming principle for zero-sum stochastic differential games

Backward Stochastic Differential Equations with Infinite Time Horizon

Deterministic Minimax Impulse Control

UNCERTAINTY FUNCTIONAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS FOR FINANCE

PROBABILITY: LIMIT THEOREMS II, SPRING HOMEWORK PROBLEMS

Numerical Approximations of Stochastic Optimal Stopping and Control Problems

CONNECTIONS BETWEEN BOUNDED-VARIATION CONTROL AND DYNKIN GAMES

A Concise Course on Stochastic Partial Differential Equations

ROOT S BARRIER, VISCOSITY SOLUTIONS OF OBSTACLE PROBLEMS AND REFLECTED FBSDES

Large Deviations Principles for McKean-Vlasov SDEs, Skeletons, Supports and the law of iterated logarithm

1 Brownian Local Time

Approximation of BSDEs using least-squares regression and Malliavin weights

Backward martingale representation and endogenous completeness in finance

Optimal Stopping Problems and American Options

On the monotonicity principle of optimal Skorokhod embedding problem

Regularity of the density for the stochastic heat equation

Strong Solutions and a Bismut-Elworthy-Li Formula for Mean-F. Formula for Mean-Field SDE s with Irregular Drift

A NOTE ON STOCHASTIC INTEGRALS AS L 2 -CURVES

MA8109 Stochastic Processes in Systems Theory Autumn 2013

OPTIMAL STOPPING OF A BROWNIAN BRIDGE

PROBABILITY: LIMIT THEOREMS II, SPRING HOMEWORK PROBLEMS

Recent results in game theoretic mathematical finance

Impulse Control and Optimal Stopping. Yann-Shin Aaron Chen

Functional Limit theorems for the quadratic variation of a continuous time random walk and for certain stochastic integrals

arxiv: v4 [math.pr] 24 Sep 2013

A Change of Variable Formula with Local Time-Space for Bounded Variation Lévy Processes with Application to Solving the American Put Option Problem 1

On the martingales obtained by an extension due to Saisho, Tanemura and Yor of Pitman s theorem

Noncooperative continuous-time Markov games

An Introduction to Malliavin calculus and its applications

Thuong Nguyen. SADCO Internal Review Metting

Weak convergence and large deviation theory

Maximum Process Problems in Optimal Control Theory

Dynamic Risk Measures and Nonlinear Expectations with Markov Chain noise

Uniformly Uniformly-ergodic Markov chains and BSDEs

Quadratic BSDE systems and applications

MATH 6605: SUMMARY LECTURE NOTES

Tools of stochastic calculus

Pseudo-Markovian viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear degenerate PPDEs

Optimal stopping for non-linear expectations Part I

Robust pricing hedging duality for American options in discrete time financial markets

Malliavin Calculus in Finance

A numerical method for solving uncertain differential equations

Weak solutions to Fokker-Planck equations and Mean Field Games

LECTURES ON MEAN FIELD GAMES: II. CALCULUS OVER WASSERSTEIN SPACE, CONTROL OF MCKEAN-VLASOV DYNAMICS, AND THE MASTER EQUATION

13 The martingale problem

Infinite-dimensional methods for path-dependent equations

STRICT LOCAL MARTINGALE DEFLATORS AND PRICING AMERICAN CALL-TYPE OPTIONS. 0. Introduction

LAN property for sde s with additive fractional noise and continuous time observation

Weak convergence and Brownian Motion. (telegram style notes) P.J.C. Spreij

Martingale Representation Theorem for the G-expectation

An Uncertain Control Model with Application to. Production-Inventory System

Optimal portfolio strategies under partial information with expert opinions

Mean-Field Games with non-convex Hamiltonian

Mathematical Methods for Neurosciences. ENS - Master MVA Paris 6 - Master Maths-Bio ( )

Transcription:

On the Multi-Dimensional Controller and Stopper Games Joint work with Yu-Jui Huang University of Michigan, Ann Arbor June 7, 2012

Outline Introduction 1 Introduction 2 3 4 5

Consider a zero-sum controller-and-stopper game: Two players: the controller and the stopper. A state process X α : can be manipulated by the controller through the selection of α. Given a time horizon T > 0. The stopper has the right to choose the duration of the game, in the form of a stopping time τ in [0, T ] a.s. the obligation to pay the controller the running reward f (s, X α s, α s ) at every moment 0 s < τ, and the terminal reward g(x α τ ) at time τ. Instantaneous discount rate: c(s, X α s ), 0 s T.

Value Functions Define the lower value function of the game [ τ V (t, x) := sup inf E e s t α A t τ Tt,T t t + e τ t c(u,x t,x,α u )du f (s, X t,x,α, α s )ds ] c(u,xu t,x,α )du g(xτ t,x,α ), s A t := {admissible controls indep. of F t }, T t t,t := {stopping times in [t, T ] a.s. & indep. of F t}. Note: the upper value function is defined similarly: U(t, x) := inf τ sup α E[ ]. We say the game has a value if these two functions coincide.

Related Work The game of control and stopping is closely related to some common problems in mathematical finance: Karatzas & Kou [1998]; Karatzas & Zamfirescu; [2005], B. & Young [2010]; B., Karatzas, and Yao (2010), More recently, in the context of 2BSDEs (Soner, Touzi, Zhang) and G-expectations (Peng).

Related Work (continued) One-dimensional case: Karatzas and Sudderth [2001] study the case where X α moves along a given interval on R. Under appropriate conditions, they show that the game has a value; construct explicitly a saddle-point of optimal strategies (α, τ ). Difficult to extend their results to multi-dimensional cases (their techniques rely heavily on optimal stopping theorems for one-dimensional diffusions).

Related Work (continued) Multi-dimensional case: Karatzas and Zamfirescu [2008] develop a martingale approach to deal with this. Again, it is shown that the game has a value and a saddle point of optimal strategies is constructed, the volatility coefficient of X α has to be nondegenerate. the volatility coefficient of X α cannot be controlled.

Our Goal Introduction We intend to investigate a much more general multi-dimensional controller-and-stopper game in which both the drift and the volatility coefficients of X α can be controlled, and the volatility coefficient can be degenerate. Main Result: The game has a value (i.e. U = V ) and the value function is the unique viscosity solution to an obstacle problem of an HJB equation. One can then construct a numerical scheme to compute the value function, see e.g. B. and Fahim [2011] for a stochastic numerical method.

Methodology Show: V is a viscosity supersolution prove continuity of an optimal stopping problem. derive a weak DPP for V, from which the supersolution property follows. Show: U is a viscosity subsolution prove continuity of an optimal control problem. derive a weak DPP for U, from which the subsolution property follows. Prove a comparison result. Then U V. Since U U V V, we have U = V, i.e. the game has a value!!

Outline Introduction 1 Introduction 2 3 4 5

Consider a fixed time horizon T > 0. Ω := C([0, T ]; R d ). W = {W t } t [0,T ] : the canonical process, i.e. W t (ω) = ω t. P: the Wiener measure defined on Ω. F = {F t } t [0,T ] : the P-augmentation of σ(w s, s [0, T ]). For each t [0, T ], consider F t : the P-augmentation of σ(w t s W t, s [0, T ]). T t :={F t -stopping times valued in [0, T ] P-a.s.}. A t :={F t -progressively measurable M-valued processes}, where M is a separable metric space. Given F-stopping times τ 1, τ 2 with τ 1 τ 2 P-a.s., define T t τ 1,τ 2 :={τ T t valued in [τ 1, τ 2 ] P-a.s.}.

Concatenation Given ω, ω Ω and T, we define the concatenation of ω and ω at time as (ω ω ) s := ω r 1 [0,(ω)] (s)+(ω s ω (ω) +ω (ω))1 ((ω),t ] (s), s [0, T ]. For each α A and τ T, we define the shifted versions: α,ω (ω ) := α(ω ω ) τ,ω (ω ) := τ(ω ω ).

Assumptions on b and σ Given τ T, ξ L p d which is F τ -measurable, and α A, let X τ,ξ,α denote a R d -valued process satisfying the SDE: dx τ,ξ,α t = b(t, Xt τ,ξ,α, α t )dt + σ(t, Xt τ,ξ,α, α t )dw t, (1) with the initial condition Xτ τ,ξ,α = ξ a.s. Assume: b(t, x, u) and σ(t, x, u) are deterministic Borel functions, and continuous in (x, u); moreover, K > 0 s.t. for t [0, T ], x, y R d, and u M b(t, x, u) b(t, y, u) + σ(t, x, u) σ(t, y, u) K x y, b(t, x, u) + σ(t, x, u) K(1 + x ), (2) This implies for any (t, x) [0, T ] R d and α A, (1) admits a unique strong solution X t,x,α.

Assumptions on f, g, and c f and g are rewards, c is the discount rate assume f, g, c 0. In addition, Assume: f : [0, T ] R d M R is Borel measurable, and f (t, x, u) continuous in (x, u), and continuous in x uniformly in u M. g : R d R is continuous, c : [0, T ] R d R is continuous and bounded above by some real number c > 0. f and g satisfy a polynomial growth condition f (t, x, u) + g(x) K(1 + x p ) for some p 1. (3)

Reduction to the Mayer form Set F (x, y, z) := z + yg(x). Observe that V (t, x) = sup α A t inf E [ Z t,x,1,0,α τ Tt,T t τ = sup inf E [ F (X t,x,1,0,α α A t τ Tt,T t τ ) ], + Yτ t,x,1,α g(xτ t,x,α ) ] where X t,x,y,z,α τ := (Xτ t,x,α, Yτ t,x,y,α, Zτ t,x,y,z,α ). More generally, for any (x, y, z) S := R d R 2 +, define V (t, x, y, z) := sup inf E [ F (X t,x,y,z,α α A t τ Tt,T t τ ) ]. Let J(t, x; α, τ) := E[F (X t,x,α τ )]. We can write V as V (t, x) = sup inf J(t, (x, 1, 0); α, τ). α A t τ Tt,T t (4)

Conditional expectation Lemma Fix (t, x) [0, T ] S and α A. For any T t,t and τ T,T, ( E[F (Xτ t,x,α ) F ](ω) = J (ω), X t,x,α (ω); α,ω, τ,ω) P-a.s. ( [ ( )]) = E F X (ω),xt,x,α (ω),α,ω τ,ω

Outline Introduction 1 Introduction 2 3 4 5

For (t, x, p, A) [0, T ] R d R d M d, define H a (t, x, p, A) := b(t, x, a) 1 2 Tr[σσ (t, x, a)a] f (t, x, a), and set H(t, x, p, A) := inf a M Ha (t, x, p, A).

Proposition 4.2 The function U is a viscosity subsolution on [0, T ) R d to the obstacle problem of an HJB equation { max c(t, x)w w } t + H (t, x, D x w, Dx 2 w), w g(x) 0. Proof: Assume the contrary, i.e. h C 1,2 ([0, T ) R d ) and (t 0, x 0 ) [0, T ) R d s.t. 0 = (U h)(t 0, x 0 ) > (U h)(t, x), (t, x) [0, T ) R d \(t 0, x 0 ), and max { c(t 0, x 0 )h h } t + H (t 0, x 0, D x h, Dx 2 h), h g(x 0 ) (t 0, x 0 ) > 0. (5)

Proof (continued) Since by definition U g, the USC of g implies h(t 0, x 0 ) = U (t 0, x 0 ) g(x 0 ). Then, we see from (5) that c(t 0, x 0 )h(t 0, x 0 ) h t (t 0, x 0 ) + H (, D x h, D 2 x h)(t 0, x 0 ) > 0. Define the function h(t, x) := h(t, x) + ε( t t 0 2 + x x 0 ) 4. Note that ( h, t h, Dx h, D 2 x h)(t0, x 0 ) = (h, t h, D x h, D 2 x h)(t 0, x 0 ). Then, by LSC of H, r > 0, ε > 0 such that t 0 + r < T and c(t, x) h(t, x) h t (t, x) + Ha (, D x h, D 2 x h)(t, x) > 0, (6) for all a M and (t, x) B r (t 0, x 0 ).

Proof (continued) Define η > 0 by ηe ct := min Br (t 0,x 0 )( h h) > 0. Take (ˆt, ˆx) B r (t 0, x 0 ) s.t. (U h)(ˆt, ˆx) < η/2. For α Aˆt, set { } α := inf s ˆt (s, X ˆt,ˆx,α s ) / B r (t 0, x 0 ) T ˆt ˆt,T. Applying the product rule to Ys ˆt,ˆx,1,α [ h(ˆt, ˆx) = E Y ˆt,ˆx,1,α α α + Y ˆt,ˆx,1,α s ˆt [ > E h( α, X ˆt,ˆx,α Y ˆt,ˆx,1,α h( α, X ˆt,ˆx,α α ) + α α ) h(s, Xs ˆt,ˆx,α ), we get ( ) c h h t + Hα (, D x h, Dx 2 h) + f α ˆt Y ˆt,ˆx,1,α s ] (s, X ˆt,ˆx,α s )ds ] f (s, X ˆt,ˆx,α s, α s )ds + η

Proof (continued) By our choice of (ˆt, ˆx), U(ˆt, ˆx) + η/2 > h(ˆt, ˆx). Thus, [ U(ˆt, ˆx) > E Y ˆt,ˆx,1,α h( α, X ˆt,ˆx,α α ) + α for any α Aˆt. How to get a contradiction to this?? α ˆt Y ˆt,ˆx,1,α s ] f (s, X ˆt,ˆx,α s, α s )ds + η 2,

Proof (continued) By the definition of U, U(ˆt, ˆx) sup α Aˆt E [ E F [ E [ ( )] F Xˆt,ˆx,1,0,α τ ( )] Xˆt,ˆx,1,0,ˆα τ + η, for some ˆα Aˆt. 4 Y ˆt,ˆx,1,ˆα ˆα ] h(, X ˆt,ˆx,ˆα ) + Z ˆt,ˆx,1,0,ˆα + η ˆα ˆα 4 + η 4, The blue part is the weak DPP we want to prove!

Weak DPP I Proposition Fix (t, x) [0, T ] S and ε > 0. For any α A t, Tt,T t, and ϕ LSC([0, T ] R d ) with ϕ U, there exists τ (α, ) Tt,T t such that E[F (X t,x,α τ )] E[Y t,x,y,α ϕ(, X t,x,α ) + Z t,x,y,z,α ] + 4ε.

Continuity of an Optimal Control Problem Lemma 4.3 Fix t [0, T ]. For any τ T t t,t, the function Lτ : [0, t] S defined by L τ (s, x) := sup α A s J(s, x; α, τ) is continuous. Idea of Proof: Generalize the arguments in Krylov[1980].

Proof of Weak DPP I Step 1: Separate [0, T ] S into small pieces. By Lindelöf covering thm, take {(t i, x i )} i N s.t. i N B(t i, x i ; r (t i,x i ) ) = (0, T ] S. Take a disjoint subcovering {A i } i N of the space (0, T ] S s.t. (t i, x i ) A i. Step 2: Construct desired stopping time τ (t i,x i ) in each A i. For each (t i, x i ), by def. of Ū, τ (t i,x i ) T t i t i,t s.t. sup α A ti J(t i, x i ; α, τ (t i,x i ) ) Ū(t i, x i ) + ε. (7) Set ϕ(t, x, y, z) := yϕ(t, x) + z. For any (t, x ) A i, L τ (t i,x i ) (t, x ) L τ (ti,xi ) (t i, x i ) + ε Ū(t i, x i ) + 2ε usc ϕ(t i, x i ) + 2ε lsc ϕ(t, x ) + 3ε.

Proof of the Weak DPP I (continued) Step 3: Construct desired stopping time τ on the whole space [0, T ] S. For any n N, set B n := 0 i n A i and define Step 4: Estimations. τ n := T 1 (B n ) c (, Xt,x,α ) + E[F (X t,x,α τ n n i=0 τ (t i,x i ) 1 Ai (, X t,x,α ) Tt,T t. )] = E [ F (X t,x,α τ n )1 Bn(, Xt,x,α ) ] + E [ F (X t,x,α τ n )1 (B n ) c (, Xt,x,α ) ]

Proof of Weak DPP I (continued) By Lemma 2.4 and Properties 1 & 2, E[F (X t,x,α τ n n ( = J Thus, i=0 n i=0 ) F ](ω) 1 B n((ω), X t,x,α (ω)) (ω), X t,x,α L τ (t i,x i ) ( (ω), X t,x,α [ ϕ ( (ω), X t,x,α E [ F (X t,x,α τ n )1 B E[ ϕ(, X t,x,α n(, Xt,x,α ) (ω); α,ω, τ (t i,x i ) 1 Ai ((ω), X t,x,α (ω)) (ω) ) 1 Ai ((ω), X t,x,α (ω)) (ω) ) + 3ε ] 1 B n((ω), X t,x,α (ω)). )1 B n(, X t,x,α ) ] = E [ E[F (X t,x,α τ ε,n ) F ]1 B n(, X t,x,α )] + 3ε E[ ϕ(, X t,x,α )] + 3ε. ) ]

Proof of Weak DPP I(continued) Step 5: Conclusion. E[F (X t,x,α τ n )] E[ ϕ(, Xt,x,α Now, take n N large enough s.t. E[F (X t,x,α τ n )] E[ ϕ(, Xt,x,α )] + 4ε = E[Y t,x,y,α )]+3ε+E[F (X t,x,α T )1 (A n ) c (, Xt,x,α )]. ϕ(, X t,x,α ) + Z t,x,y,z,α ] + 4ε.

Outline Introduction 1 Introduction 2 3 4 5

Proposition The function V is a viscosity supersolution on [0, T ) R d to the obstacle problem of an HJB equation { max c(t, x)w w } t + H(t, x, D xw, Dx 2 w), w g(x) 0. (8)

Weak DPP II Proposition Fix (t, x) [0, T ] S and ε > 0. Take arbitrary α A t, Tt,T t and ϕ USC([0, T ] R d ) with ϕ V. We have the following: (i) E[ ϕ + (, X t,x,α )] < ; (ii) If, moreover, E[ ϕ (, X t,x,α )] <, then there exists α A t with αs = α s for s [t, ] such that E[F (X t,x,α τ for any τ T t t,t. )] E[Y t,x,y,α τ ϕ(τ, X t,x,α τ ) + Z t,x,y,z,α τ ] 4ε, (9)

Continuity of an Optimal Stopping Problem Lemma Fix t [0, T ]. Then for any α A t, the function G α (s, x) := is continuous on [0, t] S. inf J(s, x; α, τ) τ Ts,T s Idea: Express optimal stopping problem as a solution to RBSDE and then use continuity results for RBSDE.

Outline Introduction 1 Introduction 2 3 4 5

To state an appropriate comparison result, we assume A. for any t, s [0, T ], x, y R d, and u M, b(t, x, u) b(s, y, u) + σ(t, x, u) σ(s, y, u) K( t s + x y ). B. f (t, x, u) is uniformly continuous in (t, x), uniformly in u M. The conditions A and B, together with the linear growth condition on b and σ, imply that the function H is continuous, and thus H = H.

Result Proposition Assume A and B. Let u (resp. v) be an USC viscosity subsolution (resp. a LSC viscosity supersolution) with polynomial growth condition to (8), such that u(t, x) v(t, x) for all x R d. Then u v on [0, T ) R d.

U (T, ) = V (T, ) Lemma For all x R d, V (T, x) g(x).

Main Result Theorem Assume A and B. Then U = V on [0, T ] R d. In particular, U = V on [0, T ] R d, i.e. the game has a value, which is the unique viscosity solution to (8) with terminal condition U(T, x) = g(x) for x R d.

Thank you very much for your attention! Happy Birthday Yannis!

E. Bayraktar and V.R. Young, Proving Regularity of the Minimal Probability of Ruin via a Game of Stopping and Control, (2010) To appear in Finance and Stochastics. Available at http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.2244. B. Bouchard, and N. Touzi, Weak Dynamic Programming Principle for Viscosity Solutions, SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, 49 No.3 (2011), pp. 948 962. N. El Karoui, C. Kapoudjian, E. Pardoux, S. Peng, and M.C. Quenez Reflected Solutions of Backward SDE s, and Related Obstacle Problems for PDE s, the Annals of Probability, 25 No.2 (1997), pp. 702 737. I. Karatzas and S.G. Kou, Hedging American Contingent Claims with Constrained Portfolios, Finance & Stochastics, 2 (1998), pp. 215 258.

I. Karatzas and W.D. Sudderth, The Controller-and-stopper Game for a Linear Diffusion, The Annals of Probability, 29 No.3 (2001), pp. 1111 1127. I. Karatzas and H. Wang, A Barrier Option of American Type, Applied Mathematics and Optimization, 42 (2000), pp. 259 280. I. Karatzas and I.-M. Zamfirescu, Game Approach to the Optimal Stopping Problem, Stochastics, 8 (2005), pp. 401 435. I. Karatzas and I.-M. Zamfirescu, Martingale Approach to Stochastic Differential Games of Control and Stopping, The Annals of Probability, 36 No.4 (2008), pp. 1495 1527. N.V. Krylov, Controlled Diffusion Processes, Springer-Verlag, New York (1980).

H. Pham, Continuous-time stochastic control and optimization with financial applications, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (2009).