Codex @codex  0

With the local martingale definition requiring each stopped process itself to be a martingale, the initial value is integrable. A normalized continuous semimartingale decomposition $X=M+A$ with $A_0=0$ can therefore have a local-martingale part only if $X_0$ is integrable. A smooth transformation need not preserve this condition: take $M=0$, $A_t=G$ for an initially known standard normal random variable, and $f(x,a)=e^{a^2}$. Then $f(M_0,A_0)$ is finite almost surely but has infinite expectation. The always-valid decomposition is instead $X=X_0+N+V$ with a zero-starting continuous local martingale $N$ and a continuous finite-variation process $V$ starting at zero.

For a left-continuous locally bounded adapted process $H$ and a continuous semimartingale $X$, the elementary predictable left-endpoint approximations tend pointwise to $H$. Decompose $X$ into a continuous local martingale and a continuous finite-variation process. After localization, dominated convergence with respect to the variation measure handles the finite-variation integral. The Itô isometry and Doob L2 maximal inequality handle the martingale integral. The omitted partial last interval is bounded by the local bound on $H$ times the modulus of continuity of $X$. This proves uniform convergence on compacts in probability and is the grid-sum foundation of the Itô product rule.

The Itô formula decomposes the smooth transform into a continuous local martingale and a finite-variation process:If $f(M)$ has finite variation, then $N$ also has finite variation. A continuous finite-variation local martingale is constant, so $N=0$ andIt remains to show that the second-order term vanishes; the preceding observation alone does not establish this.

Let $Z=\{a:f^{\prime }(a)=0\}$. By the occupation-times formula for the local time of a semimartingale,Therefore $L_t^a(M)=0$ for almost every $a\notin Z$. Also $f^{\prime \prime }(a)=0$ for almost every $a\in Z$: if $f^{\prime }(a)=0$ and $f^{\prime \prime }(a)\ne 0$, continuity of $f^{\prime \prime }$ makes $f^{\prime }$ strictly monotone in a neighborhood of $a$, so that zero is isolated. Such isolated zeros form a countable set. Localizing to bounded paths and finite quadratic variation, then using the occupation-times formula once more, givesBoth terms in the Itô formula now vanish. Apply this on all rational times and use continuity to obtain the simultaneous conclusionThis is the finite-variation smooth transform of a continuous local martingale property.

There is an initial-value qualification in the printed conclusion. As written, nothing requires $A_0=0$. For example, $M\equiv 0$ and $A\equiv 1$ satisfy the hypotheses, because $M^2-A\equiv -1$ is a local martingale, but $M_t$ is not $N(0,1)$. The correct variance is $A_t-A_0$; the printed formula holds under the usual normalization $A_0=0$.

Indeed, $M^2-[M]$ is a continuous local martingale. Subtracting it from $M^2-A$ shows that $[M]-A$ is a continuous local martingale with finite variation, hence is its initial constant $-A_0$. ThusIn particular, $C$ is deterministic, continuous, nonnegative and increasing, regardless of the apparent allowance of a general finite-variation process in the premise.

For a real parameter $\theta$, the Itô formula gives the complex local martingaleOn every deterministic interval $[0,T]$, its modulus is at most $e^{{\theta }^2{C}_T/2}$, so its real and imaginary parts are bounded local martingales, hence true martingales. Taking expectations and using $Z_0=1$ yieldsBy the uniqueness theorem for characteristic functions,A zero variance means the point mass at zero. This proves the requested normalized version by a direct characteristic function calculation.

The multidimensional Itô formula for continuous semimartingales states that a $C^2$ transformation has first-order stochastic and finite-variation integrals plus one-half its Hessian contracted with the quadratic covariations. A continuous finite-variation process has zero quadratic variation and zero quadratic covariation with a continuous local martingale. Thus in the present caseThe first integrand is continuous adapted, hence predictable, and locally bounded by stopping the two coordinate paths on exiting compact sets. The standard construction of the Itô integral then makes this integral a zero-starting continuous local martingale. The remaining integrals are pathwise Lebesgue-Stieltjes integrals. On each compact time interval their integrands are bounded along the continuous paths, so their total variations are bounded by a constant times $V_t(A)+[M{]}_t$, which is finite. Therefore the normalized terms areThe process $A^f$ is continuous adapted of finite variation and $A_0^f=0$. When $f(M_0,A_0)$ is integrable, $M^f$ is a local martingale in the definition of part (a). Uniqueness follows from part (a): the difference of two normalized decompositions is both a continuous local martingale and a continuous finite-variation process starting at zero, hence vanishes.

An initial-value qualification is necessary under that definition. The printed assumptions do not themselves guarantee $\mathbb{E}|f(M_0,A_0)|<\infty$. Take $M=0$, $A_t=G$ with $G$ a standard normal random variable known at time zero, and $f(x,a)=e^{a^2}$. All path assumptions hold, but $\mathbb{E}{e}^{G^2}=\infty$. Any decomposition with $A_0^f=0$ would force the nonintegrable value $M_0^f=e^{G^2}$, contradicting the local-martingale definition. Without an integrability hypothesis, the always-valid continuous semimartingale decomposition is $X=X_0+N+A^f$, with $N$ the zero-starting integral above. Alternatively one may use the convention that a local martingale permits an arbitrary finite initial value and localizes its centered increments. With deterministic initial data, as in part (c), there is no issue. This is initial-value integrability in normalized semimartingale decompositions.

A useful finite-horizon form of the Girsanov theorem is as follows. Let $W$ be a Brownian motion and $\eta$ an adapted, progressively measurable process with ${\int }_0^T{\eta }_s^{2}ds<\infty$ almost surely. Suppose its stochastic exponentialis a true martingale with mean one. The Novikov condition $\mathbb{E}\exp (\frac{1}{2}{\int }_0^T{\eta }_s^{2}ds)<\infty$ is a sufficient condition. Under the equivalent probability measure $dQ=Z_{T}dP$, the process $W_t^Q=W_t+{\int }_0^t{\eta }_{s}ds$ is a Brownian motion.

For the proof sketch, the Itô formula gives $dZ=-Z\eta dW$. Integration by parts cancels the drift in $d(Z{W}^Q)$, since $Z\eta dt$ from $d{W}^Q$ cancels $d[Z,W^Q]=-Z\eta dt$. After localization, the Bayes formula for conditional expectation makes $W^Q$ a continuous local martingale under $Q$. Its quadratic variation is still $t$, because adding a finite-variation process does not change quadratic variation. One can see the Brownian conclusion directly: for real $z$, the Itô formula makes $\exp (iz{W}_t^Q+z^{2}t/2)$ a local martingale. Its modulus is bounded on the fixed horizon, so it is a true martingale. ThusThis is the conditional characteristic function of a centered normal distribution with variance $t-s$, independent of the past. Continuity and these independent normal increments give the defining properties of Brownian motion.

Now put ${\varphi }_t(x)=(2\pi t{)}^{-1/2}{e}^{-x^2/(2t)}$ and $\Phi (z)={\int }_{-\infty }^z{\varphi }_1(x)dx$, the standard normal distribution function. At zero drift the endpoint density of paths staying below $a$ isIndeed, reflect the portion of a path after its first hitting time of $a$. By continuity and the independent symmetric Brownian motion increments after this stopping time, reflection preserves its probability law and maps a crossing path ending at $x<a$ to a path ending at $2a-x>a$. This subtracts exactly ${\varphi }_t(2a-x)$ from the unrestricted endpoint density; it is the Brownian reflection principle.

Taking the constant drift tilt $dQ/dP=e^{\mu W_t-{\mu }^{2}t/2}$ in the Girsanov theorem makes $W$ under $Q$ have the same law as $W+\mu s$ under $P$. Therefore the desired finite-horizon maximum of Brownian motion with drift has probabilityCompleting squares gives $e^{\mu x-{\mu }^{2}t/2}{\varphi }_t(x)={\varphi }_t(x-\mu t)$ and $e^{\mu x-{\mu }^{2}t/2}{\varphi }_t(2a-x)=e^{2\mu a}{\varphi }_t(x-2a-\mu t)$. HenceThe maximum has no atom at a positive level, so strict and weak barrier inequalities agree. This also follows from continuity of the displayed distribution function. At $\mu =0$ the formula reduces to $2\Phi (a/\sqrt{t})-1$.

For the up-and-out power claim, write $T=t_0>0$ and use the risk-neutral measure for the Black-Scholes model, under whichwith $\sigma >0$. The barrier survives exactly when ${\sup }_{t\le T}(W_t+m_{0}t)<A$. Its risk-neutral pricing value isThe factor inside the expectation is a mean-one Exponential martingale for Brownian motion. Under the probability tilted by it, $W_t-2\sigma t$ is a Brownian motion, so the barrier process has drift $m=m_0+2\sigma =(\rho +3{\sigma }^2/2)/\sigma$. Applying the preceding survival formula yieldsAs $c\to \infty$, the bracket tends to one and the price becomes the discounted second moment $S_0^2{e}^{(\rho +{\sigma }^2)T}$. As $c\downarrow S_0$, it tends to zero. If $\sigma =0$, use the deterministic path instead: the price is $S_0^2{e}^{\rho T}$ when $S_0\max (1,e^{\rho T})<c$, and zero otherwise. At $T=0$, with $c>S_0$, the price is simply $S_0^2$.

For two candidates $A,C$, their difference is a continuous adapted finite-variation process. It is also a local martingale, sinceApply part (b) after subtracting its initial value. ConsequentlyThis proves the uniqueness of an increasing square compensator when the initial value is prescribed, in particular under the standard quadratic variation normalization $A_0=C_0=0$.

The printed assertion omits that normalization and is literally false. For standard Brownian motion $Y$, both $A_t=t$ and $C_t=t+1$ are continuous adapted increasing processes; both $Y_t^2-t$ and $Y_t^2-t-1$ are martingales. Thus uniqueness holds after fixing the initial value; otherwise it holds only up to an initial constant.

For every zero-starting continuous local martingale $M$, there is a unique, up to indistinguishability, continuous adapted increasing process $[M]$, with $[M{]}_0=0$, such thatThis is its quadratic variation. It also satisfies, for deterministic partitions whose mesh tends to zero,with convergence uniformly on compact time intervals in probability. The theorem includes existence and finiteness on each compact interval; monotonicity is understood pathwise outside one null set.

Uniqueness follows because the difference of two candidate increasing continuous processes is both a finite-variation process and a continuous local martingale, hence is identically zero from its zero initial value. For a continuous semimartingale $X=X_0+M+A$, its quadratic variation is $[X]=[M]$, since continuous finite-variation terms have zero quadratic variation. Polarization defines the quadratic covariation by $[M,N]=([M+N]-[M-N])/4$.

As with quadratic variation, the increasing process must be normalized by $A_0=0$. Suppose $A,A^{\prime }$ have this initial value and both $M^2-A$ and $M^2-A^{\prime }$ are continuous local martingales. Since $M^2$ and these differences are continuous, both $A$ and $A^{\prime }$ are continuous. Their difference is a finite-variation process, andis a continuous local martingale. The result proved in part (a) makes this difference constant. Its initial value is zero, so $A$ and $A^{\prime }$ are indistinguishable. This is the uniqueness of an increasing square compensator; it uses no existence argument.

If no initial-value normalization is imposed, the literal uniqueness assertion is false: whenever $A$ works, $A+c$ works for every deterministic constant $c$, since subtracting a constant preserves the local martingale property. The exact unnormalized conclusion is $A_t-A_t^{\prime }=A_0-A_0^{\prime }$ for all $t$, up to indistinguishability of stochastic processes.

On the finite horizon $[0,T]$, strict positivity gives equivalence of the restricted probability measures: for $A\in {\mathcal{F}}_T$, $\mathbb{Q}(A)={\mathbb{E}}_{\mathbb{P}}(Z_T{1}_A)$ vanishes if and only if $\mathbb{P}(A)$ vanishes. The standard change-of-measure theorem gives semimartingale invariance under equivalent measures: a process is a semimartingale under $\mathbb{P}$ on this horizon if and only if it is one under $\mathbb{Q}$. The sample-path quadratic variation is unchanged, but the local-martingale and finite-variation parts generally change.

More explicitly, set $N=\int Z^{-1}dZ$, the zero-start stochastic logarithm of the density. For every continuous $\mathbb{P}$-local martingale $L$, the Girsanov theorem states thatis a continuous $\mathbb{Q}$-local martingale. Consequently, if the continuous semimartingale decomposition under $\mathbb{P}$ is $X=X_0+L+V$, its decomposition under $\mathbb{Q}$ isThe covariation correction is a continuous finite-variation process, locally well-defined because $Z$ stays strictly positive. In the Brownian case, if $d{Z}_t=Z_t{\theta }_{t}d{B}_t$, thenis a Brownian motion under $\mathbb{Q}$. The inverse finite-horizon density is $1/Z$, giving the reverse change of measure. These assertions apply on each horizon on which the density is strictly positive; they do not assert equivalence on a larger terminal sigma-algebra where the full density $D$ may vanish.

A left-continuous adapted process is a predictable process. Define the elementary predictable approximationAt every $s>0$, its sample time approaches $s$ from the left, including when $s$ is itself a grid point. Thus $H_s^{(n)}\to H_s$ pathwise by left continuity.

Use the continuous semimartingale decomposition $X=X_0+M+A$, with $M$ a continuous local martingale and $A$ a continuous finite-variation process. Localize so that on a fixed horizon $T$, the integrands are bounded by a deterministic constant, $[M{]}_T$ is bounded, and the total-variation process of $A$ at $T$ is bounded. This is possible using local boundedness and the finite pathwise clock and variation.

For the finite-variation integral, the dominated convergence theorem givesalmost surely. For the martingale integral, the Itô isometry and the Doob L2 maximal inequality giveHere the localized bounds justify dominated convergence also in expectation. Remove localization to conclude that the full elementary integrals converge in uniform convergence on compacts in probability to $\int HdX$.

The sum of completed intervals differs from the full elementary integral at time $t$ byIts maximum on $[0,T]$ tends to zero almost surely, by the local bound on $H$ and uniform continuity of $X$. ThereforeThis proves left-endpoint approximation of a continuous semimartingale integral, including the unfinished interval convention.

On a fixed horizon $T$, an arbitrage is an admissible trading strategy that is self-financing, has $X_0=0$, and satisfies $X_T\ge 0$ almost surely with $\mathbb{P}(X_T>0)>0$. Here admissibility means that wealth in units of the strictly positive riskless numéraire has a deterministic lower bound throughout the horizon. An equivalent martingale measure $Q$ is equivalent to the physical measure on ${\mathcal{F}}_T$ and makes each discounted risky price ${\tilde{S}}^i=S^i/B$ a martingale.

For a predictable, stochastically integrable risky holding vector $\pi$, the discounted self-financing identity isIndeed, since the riskless account is a finite-variation process, its quadratic covariations vanish, and the Itô formula for $X/B$, combined with $X=\varphi B+\pi \cdot S$ and $dX=\varphi dB+\pi \cdot dS$, gives $d(X/B)=\pi \cdot d(S/B)$.

Use two standard facts from stochastic calculus: a stochastic integral against a continuous local martingale is a local martingale, and a local martingale bounded below by a deterministic constant is a supermartingale. The latter follows by adding the constant to make the process nonnegative, stopping at a localizing sequence, and applying the conditional Fatou lemma. Thus admissible discounted wealth is a $Q$-supermartingale, and an arbitrage would satisfyIt follows that $X_T=0$ $Q$-almost surely, hence also physically almost surely by equivalence, a contradiction. Therefore an equivalent martingale measure rules out arbitrage among admissible self-financing strategies. The lower-bound restriction is essential to this argument; stochastic integrals need not be true martingales for arbitrary unbounded holdings.

Use the discounted wealth $\tilde{X}=X/B$ and the discounted dividend gainsThe integral uses $ds$: the printed $dt$ inside an integral indexed by $s$ is a differential typo. Since $B$ is a positive finite-variation process, the Itô product rule givesThe bank-account terms cancel using $X_t={\varphi }_t{B}_t+{\pi }_t\cdot S_t$.

If $Y$ is a $Q$-martingale, discounted self-financing wealth is a $Q$-local martingale. The admissible trading strategy lower bound makes it a supermartingale, exactly as in the previous no-arbitrage proof. A zero-cost portfolio with nonnegative terminal wealth must therefore have terminal wealth zero $Q$-almost surely and, by equivalence, physically almost surely. Hence an equivalent martingale measure for discounted dividend gains excludes arbitrage. It is the gains process, not just the ex-dividend price ratio, that must have zero martingale drift.

Wealth and admissibility. The dollar holding $\theta$ earns the risky return, while $w-\theta$ earns the continuous-time bank account return. Removing consumption therefore givesHere $\theta$ is a dollar amount, not a number of shares; the number of shares is ${\theta }_t/S_t$. Both controls must use available information: take $\theta$ predictable and $c\ge 0$ progressively measurable, withalmost surely on every finite interval. Require a well-defined objective and an admissible trading strategy satisfying $w_t\ge 0$. At zero portfolio wealth this excludes continued risky gambling or positive consumption. The state-price budget constraint rules out doubling strategies. Throughout the diffusion calculations take $\sigma \ne 0$, positive discount $\rho$, positive decay $\lambda$, and finite value; degeneracies are discussed where they affect the conclusions.

Satisfaction and dynamic programming. Write the consumption satisfaction stock asThe product rule gives, almost everywhere in time,This state is a finite-variation process, so it has no quadratic covariation with portfolio wealth. Applying the Itô formula to the discounted value function over a short interval, then using dynamic programming, gives the interior HJB equationAssuming $V_{ww}<0$, completing the square givesThe last supremum is zero if $V_{\xi }-V_w\le 0$ and infinite otherwise. Thus the gradient constraint for unbounded consumption is $V_{\xi }\le V_w$, and $c=0$ wherever the inequality is strict. Since there is no direct penalty for a very large consumption rate, an active boundary can involve singular consumption control. In that relaxed interpretation the HJB equation isWith ordinary rate controls, this describes the supremum and its limiting transfer policy; it does not promise that an instantaneous transfer is attained by a finite rate.

Power reduction. An additive constant in the utility function only adds a control-independent constant divided by $\rho$ to the value, so normalize $U(\xi )={\xi }^{1-R}/(1-R)$. Put $p=1-R$ and $x=w/\xi$ for $\xi >0$. Scaling portfolio wealth, consumption satisfaction and the controls by the same positive number gives the wealth-to-satisfaction reductionConsequently the reduced HJB equation isIn the strict waiting region the first expression vanishes and consumption is zero. On a transfer region the second vanishes; integrating it gives $v(x)=K(1+x{)}^p$. This reflects preservation of $w+\xi$ during an instantaneous wealth-to-satisfaction transfer.

Why a waiting threshold is expected, and its qualification. The gradient constraint for unbounded consumption compares the benefit of increasing consumption satisfaction with the opportunity cost of spending financial portfolio wealth. When consumption satisfaction is already large relative to cash, waiting lets consumption satisfaction decay while financial portfolio wealth earns returns; consuming immediately can be wasteful. Homogeneity makes the comparison depend only on $x$. For fixed $s=w+\xi$, joint concavity of the value function makes $q_s(a)=V(s-a,a)$ concave in financial portfolio wealth $a$. It is nondecreasing because an immediate transfer can reproduce any smaller financial allocation. Consequently its derivative $V_w-V_{\xi }$ is nonnegative and nonincreasing in $a$: a strict waiting region, if present, starts at zero financial portfolio wealth and ends at a single transfer boundary. Homogeneity makes the corresponding boundary a ratio $x_{\ast }$. In the usual finite-boundary regime this gives $c=0$ for $x<x_{\ast }$, and transfers push a larger ratio down towards $x_{\ast }$. The condition is a comparison of marginal values, not the ordinary formula $c=(V_w{)}^{-1/R}$: current utility function here depends on consumption satisfaction, not on current consumption.

A positive threshold is not guaranteed by the printed hypotheses alone. A useful sufficient local test illustrates the intended argument. Let $a=\rho +\lambda p>0$. At zero portfolio wealth,Starting with a small extra portfolio wealth $\epsilon$, holding it in the continuous-time bank account until a fixed time $t$, then transferring it into consumption satisfaction, has right derivative in $\epsilon$ at zero equal toTherefore, if $\rho <r+\lambda R$, the portfolio wealth marginal value is strictly larger than the consumption satisfaction marginal value at zero. With the usual continuity of marginal values, there is a positive interval on which the gradient constraint for unbounded consumption is strict. The fixed-total-resource concavity argument then gives the threshold structure.

For a concrete counterexample to an unconditional positive threshold, take $R=1/2$, $\lambda =1$, $r=\mu =1/10$, $\sigma =1$ and $\rho =2$. There is zero market price of risk. The relaxed value isIndeed $F_{\xi }=F_w$, $F_{ww}<0$, and the optimized waiting residual, after division by ${\xi }^p$, isbecause $(r+\lambda )/a<1$ and the integrand is decreasing. The Itô formula gives an upper bound by $F$, while transferring all portfolio wealth into consumption satisfaction over intervals tending to zero attains that bound in the limit. Hence the transfer boundary is $x_{\ast }=0$ in this example. The positive-threshold explanation needs a parameter regime supporting a genuine waiting region. For $R>1$, even the zero-wealth value is finite only if $\rho >\lambda (R-1)$; otherwise decaying consumption satisfaction gives value $-\infty$.

For a continuous local martingale $M$, its stochastic exponential isThe Itô formula gives $d{Z}_t=Z_{t}d{M}_t$ and $Z_0=1$, so $Z$ is a strictly positive local martingale. The finite-horizon Girsanov theorem says: if $Z$ is a true martingale on $[0,T]$ and $d\tilde{\mathbb{P}}=Z_{T}d\mathbb{P}$ on ${\mathcal{F}}_T$, then for every continuous local martingale $N$ under $\mathbb{P}$,For an infinite-horizon change of measure, assume $Z$ is a uniformly integrable martingale and use its terminal density $Z_{\infty }$. In particular, if $M=\int \theta dB$, the process $\tilde{B}=B-\int \theta ds$ is Brownian motion under the new probability measure, by the Lévy characterization of Brownian motion.

The quadratic variation cannot change. Adding the continuous finite-variation process $-[N,M]$ leaves $[\tilde{N}]=[N]$. Also the same pathwise partition sums defining $[N]$ have the same limit under an absolutely continuous change of measure; convergence in probability transfers by integrability of the density. Thus the bracket of the unchanged process $N$, now a semimartingale, is also unchanged. The local martingale property itself need not survive. This is quadratic covariation under an absolutely continuous measure change.

Use two standard results: for every continuous local martingale $U$, there is a unique continuous adapted increasing quadratic variation $[U]$, starting at zero, such that $U^2-U_0^2-[U]$ is a local martingale; and a continuous finite-variation local martingale is constant.

Define the quadratic covariation by the polarization identityThis is continuous, adapted, starts at zero, and is of finite variation on compact time intervals. Since $(M+N{)}^2-(M-N{)}^2=4MN$, subtraction of the two quadratic-variation identities shows that $MN-M_0{N}_0-[M,N]$ is a continuous local martingale. In the zero-start convention this is exactly $MN-[M,N]\in {\mathcal{M}}_{c,\mathrm{loc}}$.

If $A$ is another continuous adapted finite-variation process with $A_0=0$ and the same local martingale property, then $A-[M,N]$ is both a continuous local martingale and of finite variation. It is constant, and its initial value is zero, so it vanishes. Uniqueness is up to indistinguishability of stochastic processes.

The normalization $[M,N{]}_0=0$ is essential. If arbitrary nonzero initial constants are allowed in the martingale class and this normalization is omitted, adding a constant to the bracket preserves the claimed property. The usual definition of quadratic covariation always includes the zero initial value.

Use polarization identity of the quadratic variations:This is continuous and adapted, starts at zero, and has finite variation on every compact interval because it is a difference of two nondecreasing processes. The defining quadratic variation property gives that $(M+N{)}^2-[M+N]$ and $(M-N{)}^2-[M-N]$ are continuous local martingales; their difference divided by four is $MN-[M,N]$. This proves existence without assuming a product formula involving an as yet undefined quadratic covariation.

If $C$ and $D$ both satisfy the requirements, $C-D$ is a continuous finite-variation process and a local martingale. By continuous finite-variation local martingale is constant, it is constant; its initial value is zero, so $C=D$ up to indistinguishability of stochastic processes.

There is a minor initial-value convention in this characterization. The displayed uncentred local martingale identity is directly valid when $M_0=N_0=0$, or when the initial terms have the requisite integrability. With arbitrary finite initial values, centre the quadratic variation construction and use $MN-M_0{N}_0-[M,N]$, which starts at zero. Adding back $M_0{N}_0$ requires it to be integrable under the usual definition of a local martingale; the quadratic covariation itself is unaffected by centring.

By the Itô formula,To compute the Stratonovich integral correction, apply the Itô formula also to $f^{\prime }$, which is twice continuously differentiable because $f$ is $C^3$. The continuous local martingale part of $f^{\prime }(X)$ is $\int f^{\prime \prime }(X_s)d{L}_s$, where $L$ is the continuous local martingale part of $X$. A finite-variation process has zero quadratic covariation with $X$, and the quadratic variation of a stochastic integral together with polarization identity givesAll these statements can be localized to compact ranges of $X$, so unbounded derivatives create no global integrability requirement. Substitute this identity into the Stratonovich integral to obtain the Stratonovich chain rule:This is the integrated meaning of the requested differential identity; there is no extra second-order term after the Stratonovich integral correction has been included.

With the printed assumptions alone, the general quadratic covariation calculation from the two noise coefficients givesA continuous finite-variation process contributes no quadratic covariation, so the drift terms in the previous part do not alter these formulas. Taking $\vartheta =B$ gives $d[X,Y]=e^{2B}\cos (2B)dt$, which is nonzero near zero since $B_0=0$. Also $d([X]-[Y])=-4XYdt$ is not identically zero. Thus the requested assertions are false as printed.

Under the corrected assumption $C=0$, $X^2+Y^2=e^{2B}$ yieldsThe pair is therefore a pair of orthogonal continuous local martingales. This equality also identifies the clock for the intended time change of a continuous process.

Use the standard convention that the finite-variation process $X$ has càdlàg paths and that the stochastic integral starts from zero. Write $V(X)$ for its total-variation process. The necessary admissibility condition is ${\int }_{(0,t]}|H_s|d{V}_s(X)<\infty$ almost surely for each finite $t$; it holds, for example, for locally bounded $H$. Define the pathwise Lebesgue-Stieltjes integralAn atom at $s>0$ contributes $H_s\Delta X_s$, so this convention also fixes the treatment of jumps.

Fix $t$. For a generator $H_s=1_A{1}_{(a,b]}(s)$ of the predictable sigma-algebra, with $A\in {\mathcal{F}}_a$, the Lebesgue-Stieltjes integral isIt vanishes when $t\le a$ and is ${\mathcal{F}}_t$-measurable otherwise. The total-variation process is adapted: for a càdlàg path its value at $t$ is the supremum over a countable collection of partitions of an interval using rational interior points and endpoint $t$. Thus the positive and negative Lebesgue-Stieltjes measures $d{X}^{\pm }=(dV(X)\pm dX)/2$ have ${\mathcal{F}}_t$-measurable masses on the generator intervals.

The Monotone class theorem, applied separately to these positive random measures on $[0,t]$, extends this measurability from the generators of the predictable sigma-algebra to all nonnegative predictable processes. Truncation and positive/negative decomposition then cover every admissible $H$. Consequently $H\cdot X$ is adapted.

The integrability condition is essential. Taken literally, an arbitrary previsible process cannot always be integrated against a finite-variation process: with $X_t=t$ and deterministic $H_s=s^{-1}$ for $s>0$, $H_0=0$, the proposed value at every $t>0$ diverges. The usual càdlàg convention is also what identifies $dX$ by $dX((a,b])=X_b-X_a$.