Reflected BSDEs Driven by Lévy Processes and Countable Brownian Motions ()
Received 25 March 2015; accepted 20 December 2015; published 23 December 2015

1. Introduction
Recently, Y. Ren [1] proved via the Snell envelope and the fixed point theorem, the existence and uniqueness of a solution for the following RBDSDEs driven by a Lévy process and a extra Brownian motion with Lipschitz coefficients, where the obstacle process is right continuous with left limits (càdlàg):

where the
is a forward semi-martingale Itô integrals (see He et al. [2] ) and the
is a backward Itô integral.
Note that, in all the previous works, the equations are driven by finite Brownian motions. In their recent work, Pengju Duan et al. [3] introduced firstly the reflected BDSDEs driven by countable extra Brownian motions:
(1.1)
where the dW is the standard forward stochastic Itô integral and the
is the backward stochastic Itô integral. Under the global Lipschitz continuity conditions on the coefficients f and g, they proved via Snell envelope and fixed point theorem, the existence and uniqueness of the solution for RBDSDEs (1.1). Next, J.-M. Owo [4] relaxed the Lipschitz continuity condition on the coefficient f to a continuity with sub linear growth condition and derive the existence of minimal and maximal solutions to RBSDEs (1.1).
Motivated by [1] [3] [4] , in this paper, we mainly consider the following RBDSDEs driven by a Lévy process and countable Brownian motions, in which the obstacle process is right continuous with left limits (càdlàg):
(1.2)
The paper is devoted to prove the existence and uniqueness of a solution for RBSDEs driven by a Lévy process and countable Brownian motions.
The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we give some preliminaries and notations. In section 3, we establish the main results.
2. Preliminaries and Notations
Throughout this paper, T is a positive constant and
is a probability space on which,
are mutual independent one-dimensional standard Brownian motions and
be a
-valued pure jump Lévy process of the form
independent of
, which correspond to a standard Lévy
measure
satisfying
and
, for every
and for some
.
Let
denote the class of P-null sets of
. For each
, we define
![]()
where for any process
;
,
.
Note that
is an increasing filtration and
is a decreasing filtration. Thus the
collection
is neither increasing nor decreasing so it does not constitute a filtration.
Let us introduce some spaces:
・
denotes the space of real-valued processes
such that
is
-measurable, for a.e.
and
.
・
denotes the sub set of
formed by the
-predictable processes;
・
stands for the set of real-valued, càdàg, random processes
such that
is
- measurable, for any
and
.
・
denotes the space continuous, real-valued, increasing processes
, such that
is
- measurable, for a.e.
,
and
.
・
denotes the set of real valued sequences
such that ![]()
We will denote by
and
the corresponding spaces of
-valued processes
such that
![]()
In the sequel, for ease of notation, we set
.
Furthermore, we denote by
the Teugels Martingale associated with the Lévy process
. More precisely
![]()
where
for all
and
are power-jump processes. That is,
and
for
, with
.
In [5] , Nualart and Schoutens proved that the coefficients
correspond to the orthonormalization of the polynomials
with respect to the measure
, i.e.
. The martingale
can be chosen to be pairwise strongly orthonormal martingale. That is, for all
,
.
Definition 2.1. A solution of a (1.2) is a triplet of
-valued process
, which satisfies (1.2), and
1) ![]()
2) ![]()
3) K is a continuous and increasing process with
and ![]()
Throughout the paper, we let the coefficients
and
, the terminal value
and the obstacle
satisfying the following assumptions:
(H1) for all
,
are
-measurable such that
![]()
(H2) for all
and
,
![]()
where
,
and
are constants with
and
.
(H3)
, i.e.
is a
-measurable random variable such that,
,
(H4) S is a real-valued, càdàg process such that
is
-measurable, for a.e.
and
a.s.,
with
, where
. Moreover, we assume that its jumping times are inaccessible
stopping times (see He et al. [2] ).
3. The Main Results
We first establish the existence and uniqueness result for RBSDEs driven by finite Brownian motions and a Lévy process:
(3.1)
For any
, we have the following existence and uniqueness result.
Lemma 3.2. Assume (H1) - (H4). Then, there exists a unique solution
of Equation (3.1).
Proof. For
, we obtain the existence and uniqueness result due to Y. Ren [1] . For any
, we can prove the desired result following the same ideas and arguments as in Y. Ren [1] : it is a straightforward adaptation of the proofs of Theorem 2 and Theorem 3 in Y. Ren [1] . Firstly, we consider the special case that is the function f and
do not depend on (Y, Z), i.e.
,
, for all
. It suffices to replace suitably
and
in the proof of Theorem 2
respectively by
and
. On the other hand, it suffices to replace
,
, C and
in the proof of Theorem 3 respectively by
,
,
and
. Therefore, we omit the details.
Now, we are ready to establish the main result of this paper which is the following theorem.
Theorem 3.3. Under assumptions (H1)-(H4), there exists a unique solution
of Equation (1.2).
Proof. (Existence.) By Lemma 3.1, for any
, there exists a unique solution of (3.1), denoted by
, i.e.,
and
(3.2)
The idea consists to study the convergence of the sequence
, and to establish that its limit is a solution of (1.2). To this end, we first establish the following estimates:
(3.3)
where
is a non-negative constant independent of n. Indeed, applying Itô’s formula to
, we have
![]()
From assumption (H2) and Young’s inequality, for any
we have
![]()
![]()
Using again Young inequality, we have for any
,
![]()
Since
![]()
we have, for any
,
![]()
Therefore,
![]()
![]()
Consequently,
![]()
We choose
such that,
Then, there exists a constant
, such that
![]()
Applying Gronwall’s inequality, we get
![]()
Therefore, we have the existence of a constant
such that
![]()
which by Burkhölder-Davis-Gundy’s inequality provides
![]()
Now, we show that
is a Cauchy sequence in
. To this end, without loss of generality, we let
. Then, by difference, we obtain
(3.4)
Applying Itô’s formula to
, we get
(3.5)
Taking expectation in both side of (3.5) and noting that
, we have
(3.6)
Using again Young’s inequality, assumption (H2) and the estimates (3.3), we obtain,
![]()
where
.
Therefore, by Gronwall’s inequality, we have
![]()
which, by Burkholder-Davis-Gundy inequality provides
![]()
Well, from assumptions (H1)-(H2), we have
![]()
Consequently, we get,
(3.7)
Moreover, from (3.4) together with Hölder’s and Burkholder-Davis-Gundy’s inequalities, we have
![]()
which, together with assumption (H2) and (3.7), provides
(3.8)
Consequently,
is a Cauchy sequence in
which is a Banach space. Therefore, there exists a process
, such that
(3.9)
Now, let us show that the process
satisfies our Equation (1.2). From Cauchy- Schwarz inequality, together with (H2), we have
![]()
Also, by Burkhölder-Davis-Gundy’s inequality, we get
![]()
and
![]()
Now, from (H1)-(H2) and the fact that
, we have
![]()
which implies that
![]()
Moreover,
![]()
Therefore,
![]()
On the other hand, from the result of Saisho [6] (see p. 465), we have
![]()
Finally, passing to the limit in (3.2), we conclude that
is a solution of (1.2).
(Uniqueness.) Let
be two solutions of (1.2).
Applying Itô’s formula to
, we get
(3.10)
Taking expectation in both side of (3.10) and noting that
, we have
(3.11)
Using again Young’s inequality
and assumption (H2), we obtain,
![]()
Choosing
, we have
, a.e., for all
. So, we have
, a.e., for all
.
On the other hand, since,
![]()
we have
, a.e., for all
. Then, we complete the proof.