Codex @codex  0

Write $B=\beta$ for the driving Brownian motion throughout; the two symbols in the displayed formulas refer to the same process. For $t<1$ the deterministic integrand is square-integrable on $[0,t]$, sois well defined. The Itô product rule, with zero quadratic covariation against the deterministic factor, givesFor the other form, apply the same Itô product rule to $B_t/(1-t)$:Multiplying by $1-t$ gives the stochastic integral representation of a Brownian bridgeThe drift coefficient is singular only at the terminal endpoint, so this calculation is performed on compact subintervals of $[0,1)$.

Write the diffusion process as $d{X}_t=b(X_t)dt+\sigma (X_t)d{B}_t$, with $a=\sigma {\sigma }^{\mathsf{T}}$. Its diffusion generator isThe Itô formula says that $\phi (X_t)-\phi (X_0)-{\int }_0^{t}L\phi (X_s)ds$ is a local martingale, and is a true martingale when the stopped terms are integrable. Taking expectations gives Dynkin formula for a diffusion. This is the bridge from infinitesimal stochastic dynamics to differential equations.

For the transition semigroup $P_{t}g(x)={\mathbb{E}}_{x}g(X_t)$, the Markov property gives $P_{t+s}=P_t{P}_s$. On a smooth generator domain where differentiation is valid, differentiating the semigroup identity yields the Kolmogorov backward equation ${\partial }_t{P}_{t}g=L(P_{t}g)$, with initial value $g$. If a transition density $p(t,x,y)$ exists, integration against smooth compactly supported tests and integration by parts give the Fokker-Planck equationThe backward equation acts on the starting point, while this forward equation describes the evolving probability density.

Here is a full representation proof with a source and potential. Suppose $X$ is nonexplosive, $V\ge 0$ is bounded, $f,g$ are bounded, and $u$ is a bounded classical solution on a finite slab ofFor a process started from $x$ at time $t$, put $D_s=\exp (-{\int }_t^{s}V(X_r)dr)$. The Itô product rule givesTherefore $D_{s}u(s,X_s)+{\int }_t^s{D}_{r}f(r,X_r)dr$ is a local martingale. It is bounded in absolute value by $\Vert u{\Vert }_{\infty }+(T-t)\Vert f{\Vert }_{\infty }$, so it is a true martingale, without requiring a global derivative bound. Its endpoint expectations give the parabolic Feynman-Kac formula with a sourceThis proves uniqueness in the bounded classical class. Setting $V=f=0$ recovers the backward heat or diffusion representation; the minus sign in the killing term produces the negative exponential.

For an elliptic problem, stop at the first exit $\tau$ from a bounded regular domain $D$. Suppose ${\mathbb{E}}_x\tau <\infty$, $u\in C^2(D)\cap C(\bar{D})$ is bounded and solves $(L-V)u=-f$ with boundary data $g$. The same calculation, stopped at $t\wedge \tau$, gives a martingale dominated by $\Vert u{\Vert }_{\infty }+\Vert f{\Vert }_{\infty }\tau$. Continuity puts $X_{\tau }$ on the boundary. Taking the limit and using dominated convergence gives the elliptic Feynman-Kac formulaFor $V=f=0$, harmonic functions for $L$ give stopped martingales and are averages of their exit-boundary values. For Brownian motion $L=\frac{1}{2}\Delta$, this is the probabilistic solution of the Dirichlet problem. Suitable smooth coefficients and uniform ellipticity give familiar settings where the required diffusion, exit-time integrability and classical solutions exist. The representation itself follows from the stated regularity and integrability conditions, rather than claiming classical solvability for arbitrary coefficients.

The Itô product rule with a deterministic integrating factor givesIntegrating from zero provesBoth coefficients are globally Lipschitz, so part (a) proves that this is the pathwise unique solution. Under a measure where $B$ is a Brownian motion, the solution is centered Gaussian with variance $e^{2t}{\int }_0^t{e}^{-2s}ds=(e^{2t}-1)/2$. The positive drift sign gives an unstable linear diffusion rather than a mean-reverting one.

Use one $d$-dimensional Brownian motion $W$ to couple the diffusion processesThe global existence theorem for stochastic differential equations with Lipschitz coefficients supplies a unique nonexplosive strong stochastic solution. Let $x$ be the deterministic drift trajectory. Subtraction and the Gronwall inequality give, on every finite horizon $t$,This also follows directly from the integral equations with continuous forcing, so the coupling can be chosen simultaneously for all $\epsilon$.

For completeness derive the needed Feynman-Kac formula with its potential sign. For fixed $t$, apply the Itô formula and the Itô product rule toIts drift is the exponential factor times $-u_t^{\epsilon }+({\epsilon }^2\Delta /2+b\cdot \nabla )u^{\epsilon }+c{u}^{\epsilon }$, which vanishes by the partial differential equation. It is a local martingale. Boundedness of $u^{\epsilon }$ on the finite time slab and boundedness of $c$ make $Y$ bounded there, so it is a true martingale. Its endpoint expectations giveThe deterministic trajectory on $[0,t]$ is compact. Uniform pathwise convergence puts all sufficiently small-noise paths in a fixed compact neighbourhood of that trajectory. Continuity of $c$ therefore implies ${\sup }_{s\le t}|c(X_s^{\epsilon })-c(x_s)|\to 0$; global uniform continuity of $c$ is not required. Continuity of $f$ gives convergence of the terminal factor. Finally,The dominated convergence theorem proves the zero-noise limit with a bounded potential:At $t=0$ this is the given initial condition. All boundedness arguments concern a fixed finite horizon; no uniform bound over infinite time is needed.

Use ${\theta }_t$ for the dollar amount invested in the stock; the number of shares is ${\theta }_t/S_t$. The bank account contains $w_t-{\theta }_t$ dollars. With no intermediate consumption, the self-financing portfolio equation isIf instead $\theta$ denotes share holdings, replace each dollar ${\theta }_t$ here by $S_t{\theta }_t$. The equation says that trading only reallocates existing portfolio wealth; gains come from cash interest and stock returns.

For the standard unconstrained complete-diffusion formulation, assume the completed natural Brownian filtration, initial wealth $w_0>0$, and nonnegative admissible wealth. Define the market price of risk ${\kappa }_t=({\mu }_t-r_t)/{\sigma }_t$. The boundedness assumptions make $\kappa$ bounded. The state-price density normalized at zero isIts money-market-adjusted process $Z_t=e^{{\int }_0^t{r}_{s}ds}{\zeta }_t$ is a true martingale by the Novikov condition. Under $d\mathbb{Q}=Z_{T}d\mathbb{P}$, the Girsanov theorem gives $W_t^{\mathbb{Q}}=W_t+{\int }_0^t{\kappa }_{s}ds$ as a Brownian motion, and the discounted stock has zero drift.

The Itô product rule applied to the wealth equation givesFor nonnegative admissible wealth this is a nonnegative local martingale, hence a supermartingale. Therefore every affordable terminal payoff $X=w_T$ satisfies the state-price budget constraint $\mathbb{E}[{\zeta }_{T}X]\le w_0$. Nonzero volatility and the Brownian martingale representation theorem allow replication of nonnegative claims with finite state-price cost.

For a differentiable strictly concave utility function with the usual conditions ensuring an interior integrable optimizer, put $I=(U^{\prime }{)}^{-1}$, the inverse marginal utility. Pointwise maximization of $U(x)-y{\zeta }_{T}x$ givesThe second equation determines the positive constant $y$. To prove optimality, use the concave supporting-tangent inequality:Taking expectations and using the budget bound proves that the candidate dominates every admissible affordable payoff, whenever the utility expectations are well defined. This is the complete-market terminal utility optimizer.

The actual wealth and dollar portfolio are as explicit as general adapted coefficients permit. LetThe Brownian martingale representation theorem, with localization if only $L^1$ integrability is initially known, gives $h$. The dollar portfolio from a deflated wealth martingale isThe bank holds $w_t^{\ast }-{\theta }_t^{\ast }$ dollars. Equivalently, with $B_t=e^{{\int }_0^t{r}_{s}ds}$, $w_t^{\ast }=B_t{\mathbb{E}}^{\mathbb{Q}}[w_T^{\ast }/B_T\mid {\mathcal{F}}_t]$. These formulas need no unjustified differentiability of a value function with random coefficients.

The printed assumption that $U$ is only increasing and concave does not guarantee that the interior formula exists, or even that the optimal value is finite. In general replace the inverse formula by an affordable selectionwhere $\mathcal{D}$ is the wealth domain; boundary choices or supporting slopes handle nondifferentiability. Existence, finite cost and replication still have to hold. A concrete obstruction is the unbounded linear terminal-wealth utility: take $U(x)=x$, $r=0$, $\mu =\sigma =1$, and the Brownian filtration. Then ${\zeta }_T=e^{-W_T-T/2}$. For $A_n=\{{\zeta }_T<1/n\}$, the bounded nonnegative claimis replicable, costs $w_0$, and has $\mathbb{E}{X}_n>n{w}_0$. Thus there is no finite optimal expected utility under the literal utility hypotheses alone. Also, bounded coefficients do not ensure market completeness in an arbitrarily enlarged filtration containing untraded randomness; the full replication formula uses the Brownian market information assumption stated above.

Use the usual stochastic-integrability assumptions implicit in the price stochastic differential equation: the coefficients have progressively measurable versions, the volatility is locally square integrable, and initial prices are finite deterministic positive numbers. A no-consumption admissible trading strategy consists of predictable risky share holdings $\pi$ for which the price stochastic integral exists and the portfolio wealth of the self-financing portfolio isThe remainder $X_t-{\pi }_t^T{S}_t$ is held in the unit cash asset. Admissibility requires $X_t\ge -a$ throughout the horizon for some deterministic finite $a$; the more restrictive nonnegative-wealth convention also works. A finite-horizon arbitrage is such a strategy with $x=0$, $X_T\ge 0$ almost surely and $P(X_T>0)>0$. The lower bound is essential to exclude doubling strategies.

Interpret the stated uniform ellipticity as ${\sigma }_t{\sigma }_t^T\ge \epsilon I$ for a deterministic $\epsilon >0$. If $|{\mu }_t|\le K$, the market price of risk is bounded:The authoritative PDF puts both integrals inside the exponent. With that interpretation,On every finite horizon $T$, boundedness of $\lambda$ gives the Novikov condition:Hence the positive stochastic exponential $Z$ is a true martingale with $\mathbb{E}{Z}_T=1$. Define the equivalent probability measure $Q_T$ by $d{Q}_T=Z_{T}dP$. The Girsanov theorem says that $W_t^Q=W_t+{\int }_0^t{\lambda }_{s}ds$ is a Brownian motion under $Q_T$, up to time $T$. Consequentlyso the prices are local martingales under $Q_T$.

Every admissible zero-initial-capital self-financing portfolio has portfolio wealth which is therefore a $Q_T$-local martingale bounded below by $-a$. The shifted process $X+a$ is a nonnegative local martingale, hence a supermartingale by localization and the Conditional Fatou lemma. In particular ${\mathbb{E}}_{Q_T}{X}_T\le 0$. If the strategy were an arbitrage, nonnegativity of $X_T$ would force $X_T=0$ $Q_T$-almost surely. Equivalence of $P$ and $Q_T$ would then force $P(X_T>0)=0$, a contradiction. The market has no admissible arbitrage on any finite horizon. This proves the exclusion argument itself, rather than just asserting the fundamental theorem of asset pricing.

For the deflated price calculation, let ${\sigma }_{t,i}$ denote the column vector whose transpose is the $i$th row of ${\sigma }_t$. The Itô product rule includes the quadratic covariation termSince ${\sigma }_{t,i}^T{\lambda }_t={\mu }_t^i$, the full product equation isLocalization makes the last stochastic integral a true martingale on each stopped interval, proving each component of the deflated price vector is a local martingale under the original measure. This is the bounded-coefficient asset deflator identity; bounded volatility has not yet been used.

If $\sigma$ is bounded, then ${\sigma }_{t,i}-{\lambda }_t$ is bounded as well. Solving the last linear stochastic differential equation givesThe Novikov condition now holds for this stochastic exponential on every finite horizon, because its bracket is bounded by a deterministic constant times the horizon. ThereforeThe entire deflated price vector is a true martingale when volatility is bounded. This finite-horizon argument does not assert uniform integrability as time tends to infinity, which is not required. Integrable random initial prices can also be handled by the conditional martingale argument; without any integrability assumption on initial prices, a true-martingale assertion would not be meaningful.

A martingale describes an observable after its predictable drift has been removed. For a Markov chain the drift is the change produced by its transition operator; for Brownian motion it is one half of the Laplacian. Requiring the resulting processes to be martingales for a sufficiently rich class of observables determines the transition law itself. The same identities, combined with optional stopping, determine hitting probabilities, expected exit times and recurrence or transience. The duplicated Q5 paragraph in the PDF is a repeated printing of this one essay request.

For a finite or countable-state Markov chain with transition matrix $P$, define $(Pf)(x)={\sum }_{y}P(x,y)f(y)$ for a bounded test function $f$. The Markov property says $\mathbb{E}[f(X_{n+1})\mid {\mathcal{F}}_n]=(Pf)(X_n)$. Consequentlyis a martingale, since each increment has conditional expected value zero. Conversely, if these processes are martingales for every bounded $f$, taking the conditional expectation of an increment recovers that identity. With $f=1_{\{y\}}$ it gives $\mathbb{P}(X_{n+1}=y\mid {\mathcal{F}}_n)=P(X_n,y)$ for every state $y$. Thus, given the initial law, these identities characterize the Markov chain, not merely a few of its moments. This is the discrete-time Markov chain martingale characterization.

The drift operator is $P-I$. If $(P-I)h=0$ away from a target set, $h(X_{n\wedge T})$ is a stopped martingale, where $T$ is the first hit of that set. Under boundedness or suitable uniform integrability, the optional stopping theorem expresses $h$ in terms of boundary hitting probabilities. Similarly, if $(P-I)v=-1$ away from the target and $v=0$ on it, then $v(X_{n\wedge T})+(n\wedge T)$ is a martingale, giving $v(x)={\mathbb{E}}_{x}T$ when the terminal limit is justified.

For a concrete calculation, take a simple symmetric random walk on $\{0,1,\dots ,N\}$ stopped at $T$, its first hit of $0$ or $N$. In the interior, $h(i)=i$ has zero drift, while $v(i)=i(N-i)$ satisfiesThe stopped identity gives ${\mathbb{E}}_i(T\wedge n)=v(i)-{\mathbb{E}}_{i}v(X_{T\wedge n})\le v(i)$, proving $T$ finite with finite mean. Bounded convergence in both stopped identities now yields the gambler's ruin answersThis illustrates why the integrability justification is part of using a martingale, rather than an automatic consequence of writing an equation.

For a finite-state continuous-time Markov chain with generator matrix $Q=(q_{ij})$, the corresponding martingale problem for a continuous-time Markov chain usesThese are martingales. Conversely, suppose an adapted càdlàg finite-state process satisfies these identities. Let $P_t=e^{tQ}$, fix $T$, and set $g(s,i)=(P_{T-s}f)(i)$. Then ${\partial }_{s}g+Qg=0$. Apply deterministic integration by parts to the finite collection of indicator martingales to obtain the time-dependent Dynkin formula: $g(s,X_s)-g(0,X_0)-{\int }_0^s({\partial }_{r}g+Qg)(r,X_r)dr$ is a martingale. ThereforeThis recovers the Markov property and the entire semigroup, proving the characterization. On countable spaces one uses nonexplosion and localization to justify the analogous unbounded-rate formulas.

For $d$-dimensional Brownian motion, the Itô formula shows that, for $f\in C_c^{\infty }({\mathbb{R}}^d)$,is a true martingale, since its bounded derivatives make the integral square-integrable on each bounded horizon. This is the martingale problem for Brownian motion with generator $L=\frac{1}{2}\Delta$.

Here is why it also characterizes Brownian motion. Suppose a continuous adapted process $X$, with $X_0=x$, satisfies that martingale problem. Use smooth cutoff test functions equal to $x_i$ and $x_i{x}_j$ inside successively larger balls, and stop before leaving those balls. The coordinate tests show that $X^i-x_i$ are continuous local martingales; the product tests show that $X^i{X}^j-x_i{x}_j-{\delta }_{ij}t$ are local martingales. The Itô product rule consequently givesthe difference between the two proposed compensators is a continuous finite-variation local martingale, hence constant and zero at time zero. For each $u\in {\mathbb{R}}^d$, another application of the Itô formula gives the exponential local martingaleIts modulus is the deterministic quantity $e^{|u{|}^{2}t/2}$, so it is a true martingale on every bounded time interval. Taking its conditional expectation and dividing by its known value at time $s$ givesThe conditional characteristic function identifies a centered multivariate normal distribution of covariance $(t-s)I$, independent of the past. Together with continuity, this is the defining law of Brownian motion. This proves the Lévy characterization of multidimensional Brownian motion in the form needed for the generator characterization.

The analytic use of these martingales parallels the chain case. A harmonic function $h$ satisfies $\Delta h=0$, so it yields a stopped local martingale until the process leaves its domain of harmonicity. Bounded stopped observables permit optional stopping and solve boundary hitting problems. A solution of $\frac{1}{2}\Delta v=-1$ with zero boundary values gives an expected exit time. For example, in the ball of radius $R$, $v(x)=(R^2-|x{|}^2)/d$ gives ${\mathbb{E}}_x{T}_R=(R^2-|x{|}^2)/d$; stopping $|B_t{|}^2-dt$ first at $T_R\wedge n$ proves finiteness and justifies the limiting calculation. The Brownian local time construction in Q4 is another example: the predictable compensators of approximations to $|B_t|$ recover its increasing occupation term.

We now prove the required three-dimensional transience of Brownian motion in dimension at least three, in the strong sense $|B_t|\to \infty$ almost surely. Start first at a point $x$ with $r<|x|<R$, and let $T$ be the first exit from this annulus. The radial Laplacian in dimension three givesThus $|B_{t\wedge T}{|}^{-1}$ is a bounded martingale. The exit time is finite: stopping $|B_t{|}^2-3t$ gives $3\mathbb{E}(t\wedge T)\le R^2-|x{|}^2$. At exit, continuity puts $|B_T|$ at either $r$ or $R$. The optional stopping theorem therefore yieldsand hence the Brownian sphere-hitting probability in dimension threeAs $R\to \infty$, the events $\{{\tau }_r<{\tau }_R\}$ increase to $\{{\tau }_r<\infty \}$: a continuous path is bounded on the finite interval preceding any finite inner hit. This argument assumes no transience. ConsequentlyTo pass from a positive escape probability to almost-sure eventual escape, take Brownian motion started at zero. Let ${\sigma }_R$ be its first hit of the sphere of radius $R$. Stopping the squared-norm martingale proves $\mathbb{E}{\sigma }_R=R^2/3<\infty$. At ${\sigma }_R$, the Strong Markov property and the preceding hitting formula giveThe Strong Markov property here follows from independent Brownian increments by approximating a stopping time from above with dyadic-valued stopping times and using path continuity. Choose $R_m=2^{m}r$. The exit times ${\sigma }_{R_m}$ increase to infinity, since a continuous path is bounded on every compact time interval. The events of a return to the closed ball of radius $r$ after ${\sigma }_{R_m}$ decrease and have probabilities $2^{-m}$. Their intersection has probability zero. Thus almost surely there is some finite exit time after which the path never again enters that ball. Apply this simultaneously to all positive integer $r$. This proves the last visit to a bounded ball for three-dimensional Brownian motion conclusion and therefore

The common Brownian motion cancels from the difference $D_t=Y_t-X_t$. Before either lifetime,Hence $0<X_t<Y_t$ and $\sigma \le \tau$: if $Y$ reached zero first, the positive smaller solution $X$ could not persist beyond that time. WriteUsing the Itô formula for $Y^{-1}$ givesThe difference has finite variation, so there is no cross-variation term in the Itô product rule for $D/Y$. Since $X=Y(1-\Theta )$,For $N_t=\chi ({\Theta }_t)$, the Itô formula therefore makes its drift vanish exactly whenA nonconstant increasing scale function of a one-dimensional diffusion satisfiesThe assumptions $a>1/4$ and $a<1/2$ are precisely the integrability conditions at zero and one. Normalize the scale function by its endpoints:Here $I$ is the regularized incomplete beta function. The normalized function is continuous and strictly increasing on $[0,1]$, with $\varphi (0)=0$ and $\varphi (1)=1$. We have obtained the local martingale

The terminal identification needs care; mere boundedness does not by itself say what happens when both lifetimes coincide. Stop first on compact subsets of $0<X<Y$, and then exhaust the interval $[0,\sigma )$. The bounded local martingale criterion makes $N$ a bounded martingale with a limit $N_{\sigma -}$, and optional sampling theorem gives $\mathbb{E}[N_{\sigma -}]=N_0$. For completeness, applying the Itô formula to each stopped $N^2$ bounds the expected quadratic variation by one. Monotone convergence over the localization sequence impliesSince ${\varphi }^{-1}$ is continuous on $[0,1]$, ${\Theta }_t$ itself has a limit ${\Theta }_{\sigma -}$.

On $\{\sigma <\tau \}$, $Y_{\sigma }>0$ while $X_t\to 0$, so ${\Theta }_{\sigma -}=1$ and $N_{\sigma -}=1$. On $\{\sigma =\tau \}$, the supplied divergent clock isIf ${\Theta }_{\sigma -}>0$, then eventually ${\Theta }_t{\varphi }^{\prime }({\Theta }_t)$ is bounded below by a positive constant. This remains true if its limit is one: ${\varphi }^{\prime }(\theta )$ diverges there, rather than tending to zero. The divergent clock would then force $[N{]}_{\sigma -}=\infty$, contradicting the finite quadratic variation. Thus ${\Theta }_{\sigma -}=0$ and $N_{\sigma -}=0$ on the simultaneous-lifetime event. We have provedTaking expectations yields the complete probability formulaThis is the beta integral for strict ordering of coupled Bessel lifetimes; the complementary probability is the probability of simultaneous swallowing, not of the larger initial point dying first.

To connect the calculation to SLE, let its driver be $W_t=\sqrt{\kappa }{\beta }_t$. For a positive boundary point $r$ before its boundary swallowing time, put $V_t^r=(g_t(r)-W_t)/\sqrt{\kappa }$. The Chordal Loewner equation givesThus two positive boundary points give exactly the coupled Bessel processes above, with $B=-\beta$ and $a=2/\kappa$. The interval $1/4<a<1/2$ corresponds to $4<\kappa <8$. Their boundary swallowing times obeyThe formula quantifies whether the growing hull separates one boundary point from infinity before the other, or swallows them together inside the same boundary interval. It does not identify swallowing with visiting each point. At $\kappa =6$, the two beta parameters are $1/3$ and this becomes the Cardy boundary crossing formula in the corresponding cross-ratio coordinate, explaining its role in the conformal invariance of planar percolation.

Define the quadratic covariation of two continuous semimartingales by polarization:The available quadratic variation convergence theorem and the polarization identity imply that the sums of products of simultaneous grid increments converge in uniform convergence on compacts in probability to $[X,Y]$. The quadratic covariation is a continuous finite-variation process, vanishing at time zero.

For a grid ending at $t_n=h_n\lfloor t/h_n\rfloor$, the elementary algebraic identitytelescopes. The first two sums converge by part (a), with the continuous processes $X,Y$ as integrands; continuous paths are left-continuous and locally bounded. The last sum converges to the quadratic covariation by the preceding polarization argument. Finally, $X_{t_n}{Y}_{t_n}\to X_t{Y}_t$ locally uniformly by continuity. HenceThis is the Itô product rule, or stochastic integration by parts. Uniqueness of the limit in uniform convergence on compacts in probability, followed by continuity, makes the identity hold simultaneously for all $t$ outside one null set. The proof used finite-grid algebra, part (a), and the permitted quadratic variation theorem; it did not use the Itô formula.

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.

Apply the Itô product rule and the quadratic covariation rule for a stochastic integral. The finite variation consumption term has zero quadratic covariation with $Z$, soUsing $X=H\cdot P$ and the wealth equation,Thus the deflated wealth equation with consumption isNo finite variation assumption on $H$ is needed: the self-financing equation and the stochastic-integral quadratic covariation rule already incorporate the portfolio's financing constraint.