1 Introduction
The large deviation principle (LDP in short) characterizes the limiting behavior, as , of family of probability measures in terms of a rate function. Several authors have considered large deviations and obtained different types of applications mainly to mathematical physics. General references on large deviations are: Varadhan [1984], Deuschel and Stroock [1989], Dembo and Zeitouni [1998].
Let be the diffusion process that is the unique solution of the following stochastic differential equation (SDE in short)
|
|
|
(1.1) |
where is a Lipschitz function defined on with values in , is a Lipschitz function defined on with values in , and is a standard Brownian motion in defined on a complete probability space . The existence and uniqueness of
the strong solution of (1.1) is standard. Thanks to the work of Freidlin and Wentzell [1984], the sequence converges in probability, as goes to 0, to solution of the following deterministic equation
|
|
|
and satisfies a large deviation principle (LDP in short).
Rainero [2006] extended this result to the case of backward stochastic differential equations (BSDEs in short) and Essaky [2008] and N’zi and Dakaou [2014] to reflected BSDEs.
Gao and Jiang [2010] extended the work of Freidlin and Wentzell [1984] to stochastic differential equations driven by -Brownian motion (-SDEs in short). The authors considered the following -SDE: for every ,
|
|
|
and use discrete time approximation to establish LDP for -SDEs.
The aim of this paper is to establish LDP for -BSDEs. More precisely, we consider the following forward-backward stochastic differential equation driven by -Brownian motion: for every ,
|
|
|
We study the asymptotic behavior of the solution of the backward equation and establish a LDP for the corresponding process.
The remaining part of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present some preliminaries that are useful in this paper. Section 3 is devoted to the large deviations for stochastic differential equations driven by -Brownian motion obtained by Gao and Jiang [2010]. The large deviations for backward stochastic differential equations driven by -Brownian motion are given in Section 4.
2 Preliminaries
We review some basic notions and results about -expectation, -Brownian motion and -stochastic integrals [see Peng, 2010, Hu et al., 2014a; for more details].
Let be a complete separable metric space, and let be a linear space of real-valued functions defined on satisfying: if , , then
|
|
|
where is the space of real continuous functions defined on such that for some and depending on ,
|
|
|
Definition 2.1.
(Sublinear expectation space).
A sublinear expectation on is a functional satisfying the following properties: for all , we have
-
1.
Monotonicity: if , then ;
-
2.
Constant preservation: ;
-
3.
Sub-additivity: ;
-
4.
Positive homogeneity: , for all .
is called a sublinear expectation space.
Definition 2.2.
(Independence).
Fix the sublinear expectation space . A random variable is said to be independent of , , if for all ,
|
|
|
Now we introduce the definition of -normal distribution.
Definition 2.3.
(-normal distribution).
A random variable is called -normally distributed, noted by , , if for any function , the fonction defined by , is a viscosity solution of the following -heat equation:
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
In multi-dimensional case, the function : is defined by
|
|
|
where denotes the space of symmetric matrices and is a given nonempty, bounded and closed subset of which is the space of all matrices.
Throughout this paper, we consider only the non-degenerate case, i.e., .
Let , which equipped with the raw filtration generated by the canonical process , i.e., , for . Let us consider the function spaces defined by
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Definition 2.4.
(-Brownian motion and -expectation).
On the sublinear expectation space , the canonical process is called a -Brownian motion if the following properties are verified:
-
1.
-
2.
For each , the increment and is independent from , for .
Moreover, the sublinear expectation is called -expectation.
Remark 2.1.
For each , is also a -Brownian motion. This is the scaling property of -Brownian motion, which is the same as that of the classical Brownian motion.
Definition 2.5.
(Conditional -expectation).
For the random variable of the following form:
|
|
|
the conditional -expectation , , is defined as follows
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
If , then the conditional -expectation could be defined by reformulating as
|
|
|
For and , we consider the norm . Denote by the Banach completion of under . It is easy to check that the conditional -expectation is a continuous mapping and thus can be extended to .
Definition 2.6.
(-martingale).
A process with , , is called a -martingale if for all , we have
|
|
|
The process is called symmetric -martingale if is also a -martingale.
Theorem 2.1.
[Representation theorem of -expectation, see Hu and Peng, 2009, Denis et al., 2011].
There exists a weakly compact set , the set of probability measures on , such that
|
|
|
is called a set that represents .
Let be a weakly compact set that represents . For this , we define the capacity of a measurable set by
|
|
|
A set is a polar if . A property holds quasi-surely (q.s.) if it is true outside a polar set.
An important feature of the -expectation framework is that the quadratic variation of the -Brownian motion is no longer a deterministic process, which is given by
|
|
|
where , , are refining partitions of . By Peng [2010], for all , ,
Let be the collection of processes in the following form: for a given partition of ,
|
|
|
(2.1) |
where , for all . For and , let , and denote by , the completions of under the norms , respectively.
Let , where is the collection of all bounded and Lipschitz functions on . For and , we set . We denote by the completion of under the norm .
Definition 2.7.
For of the form (2.1), the Itô integral with respect to -Brownian motion is defined by the linear mapping ,
|
|
|
which can be continuously extended to . On the other hand, the stochastic integral with respect to is defined by the linear mapping ,
|
|
|
which can be continuously extended to .
Lemma 2.2.
[BDG type inequality, see Gao, 2009; Theorem 2.1].
Let , and . Then,
|
|
|
|
|
|
where are constants independent of , and .
For , let
|
|
|
is called the -evaluation.
For and , define
|
|
|
and denote by the completion of under the norm .
The following estimate will be used in this paper.
Theorem 2.3.
[See Song, 2011].
For any and , we have .
More precisely, for any , and for all , we have
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
Remark 2.2.
By , we have
|
|
|
Set
|
|
|
then
|
|
|
(2.2) |
where is a constant only depending on and .
3 Large deviations for -SDEs
In this section, we present the large deviations for -SDEs obtained by Gao and Jiang [2010]. The authors use discrete time approximation to obtain their results.
First, we recall the following notations on large deviations under a sublinear expectation.
Let be a Polish space. Let be a family of measurable maps from into and let , be a positive function satisfying as .
A nonnegative function on is called to be (good) rate function if (its level set) is (compact) closed for all .
is said to satisfy large deviation principle with speed and with rate function if for any measurable closed subset ,
|
|
|
and for any measurable open subset ,
|
|
|
In Gao and Jiang [2010], for any , the authors considered the following random perturbation SDEs driven by -dimensional -Brownian motion
|
|
|
where is treated as a -dimensional vector,
|
|
|
and .
Consider the following conditions:
- (H1)
-
, and are uniformly bounded;
- (H2)
-
, and are uniformly Lipschitz continuous;
- (H3)
-
, and converge uniformly to , and respectively.
Let be the space of -valued continuous functions on and the space of -valued continuous functions on with .
Define
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We recall the following result of a joint large deviation principle for -Brownian motion and its quadratic variation process.
Theorem 3.1.
[See Gao and Jiang, 2010; p. 2225].
satisfies large deviation principle with speed and with rate function
|
|
|
For any , let be the unique solution of the following ordinary differential equation (ODE in short)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Theorem 3.2.
[See Gao and Jiang, 2010; p. 2233]. Let , and hold. Then for any closed subset and any open subset in ,
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
For given and , for each , set
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Theorem 3.3.
[See Gao and Jiang, 2010; p. 2227]. Let and let , and hold.
Then for any closed subset and any open subset in ,
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
We immediately have the following result which will be used in the following section.
Corollary 3.4.
Let , and hold. Then for any closed subset and any open subset in ,
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
In the following section, we consider the following -SDE: for every , ,
|
|
|
(3.1) |
where , and are bounded. In order to use the large deviation principle obtained by Gao and Jiang [2010], we will transform the G-SDE (3.1) in the following form:
|
|
|
where , , and .
4 Large deviations for -BSDEs
Hu et al. [2014a] obtained the existence, uniqueness and a priori estimates of the following backward stochastic differential equation driven by -Brownian motion
|
|
|
(4.1) |
where is a decreasing -martingale, under standard Lispchitz conditions on , in and the integrability condition on . The unique solution of the BSDE (4.1) is the triple . The solution of an SDE is one process, say . The solution of a "traditional" BSDE is a pair , the solution of a BSDE driven by a -Brownian motion is a triplet.
To establish large deviation principle for -BSDEs, we consider the following forward-backward stochastic differential
equation driven by -Brownian motion (we use Einstein convention): for every , ,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
are deterministic functions and satisfy the following assumptions:
- (A0)
-
, and are bounded, i.e., there exists a constant such that
|
|
|
where is the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of a matrix .
- (A1)
-
and for ;
- (A2)
-
and are continuous in ;
- (A3)
-
There exist a positive integer and a constant such that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It follows from Peng [2010], Hu et al. [2014a] that, under the assumptions , the -BSDE (4.2) has a unique solution . Moreover, for any , we have , and is a decreasing -martingale with and .
We consider the following deterministic system: for every , ,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.3) |
|
|
|
|
|
Lemma 4.1.
Let (A0), (A1) and (A3) hold. Then
-
1.
Let . For any , there exists a constant , independent of , such that
|
|
|
(4.4) |
-
2.
Moreover, satisfies a large deviation principle with speed and with rate function
|
|
|
where be the unique solution of the following ODE
|
|
|
Proof.
Let , we have
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then, there exists a constant ,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For ,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So taking the -expectation, it follows from the BDG inequality that
|
|
|
Therefore, by Gronwall’s inequality,
|
|
|
Set . Thanks to Remark 2.1, is a -Brownian motion. Then, we have . Therefore, by the uniqueness of the solution of the -SDEs, it is easy to check that is the solution of the following -SDE:
|
|
|
where , and have already been defined at the end of Section 3. Therefore, in view of assumption (A0), the proof follows by virtue of Corollary 3.4.
Proposition 4.2.
Let . For any , we have
|
|
|
(4.5) |
where the constant depends on , , , and .
Proof.
By Proposition 4.1 in Hu et al. [2014b], there exists a constant such that
|
|
|
Then
|
|
|
which implies the desired result.
Theorem 4.3.
Let hold. For any , there exists a constant , independent of , such that
|
|
|
Proof.
We consider the following -BSDE: for every , ,
|
|
|
|
|
(4.6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let be the following decreasing -martingale:
|
|
|
Thanks to equation (4.3) and the uniqueness of the solution of the -BSDEs, it is easy to check that is the solution of the -BSDE (4.6).
So, by Proposition 2.16 in Hu et al. [2014b], there exists a constant such that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore, in view of assumption (A3), we have
|
|
|
|
|
(4.7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By Theorem 2.3 and (2.2) in Remark 2.2, for any , we get
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similarly, for any , we get
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then, by Hölder’s inequality, (4.4) in Lemma 4.1 and (4.5) in Proposition 4.2, we can get
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thus
|
|
|
(4.8) |
Furthermore
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore
|
|
|
(4.9) |
So, by virtue of (4.7), (4.8) and (4.9), we have
|
|
|
which leads to the end of the proof.
We have an immediate consequence of Theorem 4.3.
Corollary 4.4.
For any and all in a compact subset of , there exists a constant , independent of , and , such that
|
|
|
Theorem 4.5.
Let hold. For any , there exists a constant , independent of , such that
|
|
|
where is the following decreasing -martingale:
|
|
|
Proof.
Applying Itô’s formula to , we have
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore, in view of assumption (A3), we have
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the other hand,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thus
|
|
|
|
|
(4.10) |
|
|
|
|
|
Then
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, by Theorem 4.3, the BDG inequality and Young’s inequality, for , we obtain that
|
|
|
Then, taking such that , we deduce that
|
|
|
From (4.10), we have
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore, by the same arguments as above, we get
|
|
|
The proof is complete.
Remark 4.1.
As a consequence of Theorems 4.3 and 4.5, we get
|
|
|
where is a positive constant and then the solution of the -BSDE (4.2) converges to where is the solution of the following backward ODE:
|
|
|
and is the following decreasing -martingale:
|
|
|
We recall a very important result in large deviation theory, used to transfer a LDP from one space to another.
Lemma 4.6.
(Contraction principle). Let be a family of probability measures that satisfies the large deviation principle with a good rate function on a Hausdorff topological space , and for , let be continuous functions, with a metric space. Assume that there exists a measurable map such that for any compact set ,
|
|
|
(4.11) |
Suppose further that is exponentially tight.
Then the family of probability measures satisfies the LDP in with the good rate function
|
|
|
Proof.
First, observe that the condition (4.11) implies that for any compact set , the function is continuous on (consequently that is continuous everywhere).
Since is exponentially tight, for every , there exists a compact set such that
|
|
|
For every , set
|
|
|
We have
|
|
|
Given , the first term on the right is zero for small enough, so that
|
|
|
and letting , we obtain
|
|
|
Therefore, the lemma follows from Corollary 4.2.21 p. 133 in Dembo and Zeitouni [1998].
Now consider
|
|
|
(4.12) |
In Hu et al. [2014b] it is shown that is a viscosity solution of the following nonlinear partial differential equation (PDE in short):
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We define the following
|
|
|
(4.13) |
Proposition 4.7.
For any and all ,
|
|
|
Proof.
Using the Markov property of the -SDE and the uniqueness of the solution of the -BSDE (4.2) to show that
|
|
|
Taking , we deduce that , which leads to the end of the proof.
Let be the space of -valued continuous functions on with .
Let and . We define the mapping by
|
|
|
(4.14) |
where is given by (4.12) and by (4.13).
By virtue of (4.14) and Proposition 4.7, for any and all , we have .
We have the following result of large deviations
Theorem 4.8.
Let hold. Then for any closed subset and any open subset in ,
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
where
|
|
|
Proof.
Since the family is exponentially tight (see Lemma 3.4 p. 2235 in Gao and Jiang [2010]), by virtue of Lemma 4.6 (contraction principle) and Lemma 4.1, we just need to prove that , are continuous and converges uniformly to on every compact subset of , as .
Continuity of :
Let and . Let be a sequence in which converges to under the uniform norm.
We set . So, is a sequence in which converges to under the uniform norm. Fix . Since , there exists such that,
|
|
|
(4.15) |
Since is a continuous function in , it follows that is uniformly continuous in where is the closed ball centered at the origin with radius in .
Therefore, there exists such that for and , and , we have
|
|
|
Since there exists such that , , in view of (4.15), for any and for all , we have
|
|
|
Thus
|
|
|
So we conclude that , which proves the continuity of at .
Uniform convergence of :
Let be a compact subset of and let
|
|
|
Obviously, is a compact subset of . Thanks to Corollary 4.4, there exists a positive constant such that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Therefore the uniform convergence of the mapping towards follows.