In this lecture, it is now time to harvest the fruits of the two previous lectures. This will allow us to finally define the notion of -rough path and to construct the signature of such path.
A first result which is a consequence of the theorem proved in the previous lecture is the following continuity of the iterated iterated integrals with respect to a convenient topology. The proof uses very similar arguments to the previous two lectures, so we let it as an exercise to the student.
Theorem: Let ,
and
such that
and
Then there exists a constant depending only on
and
such that for
This continuity result naturally leads to the following definition.
Definition: Let and
. We say that
is a
-rough path if there exists a sequence
such that
in
-variation and such that for every
, there exists
such that for
,
The space of -rough paths will be denoted
.
From the very definition, is the closure of
inside
for the distance
If and
is such that
in
-variation and such that for every
, there exists
such that for
,
then we define for
as the limit of the iterated integrals
. However it is important to observe that
may then depend on the choice of the approximating sequence
. Once the integrals
are defined for
, we can then use the previous theorem to construct all the iterated integrals
for
. It is then obvious that if
, then
implies that
In other words the signature of a -rough path is completely determinated by its truncated signature at order
:
For this reason, it is natural to present a -rough path by this truncated signature at order
in order to stress that the choice of the approximating sequence to contruct the iterated integrals up to order
has been made. This will be further explained in much more details when we will introduce the notion of geometric rough path over a rough path.
The following results are straightforward to obtain from the previous lectures by a limiting argument.
Lemma: Let ,
. For
, and
,
Theorem: Let . There exists a constant
, depending only on
, such that for every
and
,
If , the space
is not a priori a Banach space (it is not a linear space) but it is a complete metric space for the distance
The structure of will be better understood in the next lectures, but let us remind that if
, then
is the closure of
inside
for the variation distance it is therefore what we denoted
. As a corollary we deduce
Proposition: Let . Then
if and only if
where is the set of subdivisions of
. In particular, for
,
We are now ready to define solutions of linear differential equations driven by -rough paths,
and present the Lyons’ continuity theorem in this setting. Let
be a
-rough path with truncated signature
and let
be an approximating sequence such that
Let us consider matrices . We have the following theorem:
Theorem: Let be the solution of the differential equation
Then, when ,
converges in the
-variation distance to some
.
is called the solution of the rough differential equation
Proof: It is a classical result that the solution of the equation
can be expanded as the convergent Volterra series:
Therefore, in particular, for ,
which implies that
with . From the theorems of the previous lectures, there exists a constant
depending only on
and
such that for and
big enough:
As a consequence, there exists a constant such that for
big enough:
This already proves that converges in the supremum topology to some
. We now have
and we can bound
Again, from the theorems of the previous lectures, there exists a constant , depending only on
and
such that for and
big enough
where is a control such that
. Consequently, there is a constant
, such that
This implies the estimate
and thus gives the conclusion
With just a little more work, it is possible to prove the following stronger result whose proof is let to the reader.
Theorem: Let be the solution of the differential equation
and be the solution of the rough differential equation:
Then, and when
,
We can get useful estimates for solutions of rough differential equations. For that, we need the following analysis lemma:
Proposition: For and
,
Proof: For , we denote
This is a special function called the Mittag-Leffler function. From the binomial inequality
Thus we proved
Iterating this inequality, times we obtain
It is known (and not difficult to prove) that
By letting we conclude
This estimate provides the following result:
Proposition: Let be the solution of the rough differential equation:
Then, there exists a constant depending only on
such that for
,
where .
Proof: We have
Thus we obtain
,
and we conclude by using estimates on iterated integrals of rough paths together with the previous lemma