 Solution

Use the corrected piecewise-deterministic Markov process from part (b). For a smooth test function $f$, its time-dependent infinitesimal generator isIndeed, over an interval of length $h$, deterministic motion contributes $ha(t,x)f^{\prime }(x)$, while a jump has probability $h\alpha (x)+o(h)$ and changes the conditional mean of $f$ by $K_{t}f(x)-f(x)$. Terms involving both drift and a jump contribute only to the remainder. Thus $P_{t,t+h}f=f+h{L}_{t}f+o(h)$.

The Dynkin formula, or this infinitesimal expansion integrated against the current probability distribution, gives the weak evolution identityTake $f\in C_c^{\infty }(\mathbb{R})$, so integration by parts has no boundary contribution. Assuming the displayed jump integrals are finite, Fubini's theorem givesConsequently the forward equation of a piecewise-deterministic Markov process isHere $A_t=L_t^{\ast }$ is the formal adjoint operator acting on probability density functions. Its terms are transport, loss from $x$, and incoming mass from every $y$. In particular, the incoming rate is $\alpha (y)$, evaluated at the departure state. The operator denoted $A$ in the source is generally time-dependent. Because $\int m_t(y,x)dx=1$, the gain and loss integrals cancel; with vanishing transport flux at infinity, $\frac{d}{dt}\int p_t=0$.

The deterministic initial state in part (b) does not actually yield an everywhere smooth full density. For finite times the no-jump contribution is the positive measurewhere ${\delta }_z$ is the Dirac measure at $z$. Smooth jump destination probability density functions cannot remove this positive atom. The density equation above is therefore conditional on the extra density hypothesis, for example with a suitable random initial probability density function. For the specified fixed initial state, write ${\nu }_t$ for the whole probability measure and use insteadThis weak measure evolution includes both the atom and any continuous component. It becomes the displayed partial differential equation whenever ${\nu }_t(dx)=p_t(x)dx$ with the assumed regularity. It does not describe the literal hidden-reset construction without the correction in part (b).