Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 42 references

Quadratic BSDEs with double constraints driven by G-Brownian motion

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Quadratic G-BSDEs with double mean reflections have unique solutions for bounded terminal values, and for unbounded terminals under convexity and exponential moments.

desk verdict The claimed result for quadratic double-mean-reflected G-BSDEs is not proven as stated: the WLOG f=0 reduction in Section 3.1 is unsupported and changes the solution, so Theorem 3.5 is out of reach without a real argument. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.18744 v1 pith:6BO5CA2E submitted 2025-08-26 math.PR

Wei He , Qiangjun Tang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.PR MSC 60H1060H30
keywords G-BrownianmotionquadraticBSDEdoublemeanreflectionbackwardSkorokhodproblemG-BMOmartingaletheta-methodvolatilityambiguity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proves well-posedness for quadratic backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion when the solution is constrained in expectation by two nonlinear loss functions, one from below and one from above. Under bounded terminal data, the solution quadruple exists and is unique in spaces that allow the generator to grow quadratically in the control variable. Under unbounded terminal data, existence and uniqueness hold when the generator is convex or concave in the control variable and the terminal value has exponential moments. The proofs combine G-BMO martingale theory, Girsanov transformation, the backward Skorokhod problem, fixed-point contraction on small intervals, and the θ-method. The result matters because such equations appear in pricing and risk problems where volatility is ambiguous and constraints are imposed only on averages rather than path by path.

What carries the argument

The central representation is Y^U_t = y^U_t + A^U_T − A^U_t, where y is the solution of a standard quadratic G-BSDE and A is the deterministic solution of the backward Skorokhod problem with boundaries l(t,x) = E[L(t, y_t − E[y_t] + x)] and r(t,x) = E[R(t, y_t − E[y_t] + x)]. G-BMO martingales and the G-Girsanov transform linearize the difference of two solutions, making the fixed-point map Γ a strict contraction on sufficiently small intervals. The θ-method handles unbounded terminals by truncating terminal values and generators, proving uniform exponential-moment estimates and Cauchy convergence.

What would settle it

Take a nonzero drift, for example f(t, y, z) = L1 y under Assumption 3.2, and check whether the map Γ obtained from the f = 0 equation remains a contraction: restoring f should introduce an extra term of order L1 T in the estimate (3.8), and for fixed T > 0 the contraction constant may fail to stay below 1. Equivalently, compute the difference between solutions of (3.1) and (3.2) on a small interval; if the difference is not exactly the integral of the f term, the claimed reduction is invalid.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the doubly mean-reflected quadratic G-BSDE (3.1) admits a unique solution (Y, Z, K, A) in S∞_G × BMO_G × ∩_{α≥2} S^α_G × AD when the terminal value is bounded (Theorem 3.5), and a unique deterministic flat solution in E_G(R) × H_G(R) × L_G(R) × AD when the terminal value is unbounded but satisfies exponential-moment assumptions and the generator is convex or concave (Theorem 3.7). The construction represents the reflected solution as the sum of a standard quadratic G-BSDE and a deterministic correction A obtained from the backward Skorokhod problem with barriers built from G-expectations of the loss functions. Uniqueness is obtained by comparison arguments and Skor

Load-bearing premise

The proof assumes, with the sentence 'Without loss of generality, we assume f ≡ 0 in (3.1)', that the drift term f can be dropped without changing the problem; no transformation is shown, so the proof as written applies to the f = 0 equation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The explicit representation Y = y + (A_T − A_t) gives a numerical strategy: solve a standard quadratic G-BSDE and a deterministic Skorokhod problem separately, then add the two pieces.
  • Quadratic generators are now compatible with double mean reflections, extending earlier Lipschitz and single-constraint results to problems such as robust pricing with average-loss constraints.
  • For unbounded terminals, the θ-method produces a convergent sequence of truncated bounded-terminal solutions, so approximations inherit the same Skorokhod conditions in the limit.
  • Uniqueness of the reflection process A is forced by the flat-off Skorokhod conditions, so the correction process is fully determined by the average constraints.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper asserts that setting f ≡ 0 in (3.1) is without loss of generality, but no transformation or construction is given to recover the f ds term; as written, the proof of Theorem 3.5 covers the f = 0 equation (3.2), and a reader should treat the general claim as conditional on that reduction.
  • With f restored, the small-interval contraction estimate would likely acquire an extra Lipschitz term proportional to L1 T, so the admissible interval length may shrink or the contraction may fail for some admissible f.
  • The representation separates the stochastic and deterministic components of the solution, suggesting that continuity of A with respect to perturbations of L, R, and ξ could be tested numerically under the stated assumptions.
  • A natural extension is to multi-dimensional G-Brownian motion or to drop convexity/concavity via comparison principles; the same exponential-moment controls would likely be needed.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies quadratic backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion with double mean reflections, i.e. constraints of the form E[L(t,Y_t)] ≤ 0 ≤ E[R(t,Y_t)] with Skorokhod-type conditions on a deterministic bounded-variation process A. The main results are Theorem 3.5, asserting well-posedness in S^∞_G × BMO_G × ∩_{α≥2} S^α_G × AD for bounded terminal conditions under Assumptions 3.1–3.2, and Theorem 3.7, asserting existence and uniqueness of a 'deterministic flat solution' in EG(R) × HG(R) × LG(R) × AD for unbounded terminal conditions under Assumptions 3.1 and 3.6. The method combines G-BMO martingale techniques, a fixed-point argument, the backward Skorokhod problem, and the θ-method. The bounded-terminal proof relies on decomposing the solution as the sum of a solution to a standard quadratic G-BSDE and a deterministic Skorokhod reflection process; the unbounded-terminal proof uses truncation, uniform exponential estimates, and the θ-method.

Significance. If established, the result would be a useful extension of mean-reflected G-BSDE theory: double mean reflections with quadratic generators and unbounded terminal data have not previously been treated in the G-framework. The paper's intended construction — representing the reflecting process A via the backward Skorokhod problem and isolating the quadratic part through G-BMO techniques — is natural and, in the f=0 case, appears viable. The paper also makes use of existing results rather than fitting parameters, and the high-level architecture is coherent. However, the central well-posedness claim as stated is not proved: the reduction to f=0 is asserted rather than justified, and the proof of the bounded-terminal theorem actually solves a different equation. This is a load-bearing gap, not a presentation issue.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1, Eq. (3.1)–(3.2)] The sentence 'Without loss of generality, we assume f ≡ 0 in (3.1)' is load-bearing and unsupported. Lemma 3.3 is stated and proved for (3.2), the fixed-point map Γ in Step 1 of Theorem 3.5 solves (3.2), and the backward-induction equations in Step 2 again contain only the g d⟨B⟩ term. No Girsanov-type transformation, change of measure, or other argument is supplied that recovers the ∫ f ds term from solutions of (3.2). This is not cosmetic: take f≡1, g≡0, ξ=0, L(t,x)=x−2, R(t,x)=x+2, T=1, which satisfies Assumptions 3.1–3.2. Equation (3.1) has the solution Y_t=1−t (Z=K=A=0), while Γ(0) computed from (3.2) is Y=0. Hence the contraction fixed point produced by the proof solves the f=0 equation, not (3.1), and Theorem 3.5 as stated is unproved.
  2. [Theorem 3.7, Step 1] The definition 'Denote ξ^(m) = Y^(m)_{t0+h}' is self-referential: ξ^(m) is the terminal condition of the very process (Y^(m),Z^(m),K^(m),A^(m)) being constructed. In the truncation construction one would expect ξ^(m) to be a truncated version of the original terminal variable ξ (as suggested by the preceding line 'l^(m)=(l∧m)∨(−m) for l=ξ,g0(t)'), but the displayed equality makes the terminal condition depend on the unknown solution. If read literally, this is circular; if it is a typo, the subsequent estimates and convergence proof do not establish the claimed result for the intended truncated data. This needs to be corrected and the argument rewritten.
  3. [Theorem 3.5, Step 2] The global backward-induction step is stated too tersely to be checkable. The line 'Y^{n+1}_T = Y^n_T = ξ' is confusing: Y^{n+1} is not otherwise defined, and the patching of Y,Z,K,A at the grid points T_k requires compatibility of the terminal value of the k-th local solution with the terminal data of the (k+1)-th local solution. The text asserts existence of local solutions on [T_{k−1},T_k] with terminal Y^{k+1}_{T_k}, but the displayed system is not fully specified and the matching of the Skorokhod conditions across intervals is not proved. This is secondary to the f=0 issue, but it further obscures the global claim.
  4. [Assumption 3.2 and Lemma 3.3] Assumption 3.2(ii) includes a bound on ∫|f(t,ω,0,0)|^2 dt, but after the WLOG f=0 reduction this term is never used. More importantly, the uniqueness proof of Lemma 3.3 invokes 'the same argument as Proposition 3.4 in [14]' for the deterministic process A without giving the argument; since the uniqueness of A is an essential part of Theorem 3.5, this reliance on an external proposition should be made precise, especially because the present setting has quadratic g and double mean reflections.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous typos and inconsistent notation: 'calss', 'provids', 'Bsrownian', 'G-Bsrownian', 'admits most one solution' (Theorem 3.9), and inconsistent use of bE versus \hat E. The term 'deterministic flat solution' is used without definition.
  2. [Section 3.2, Eq. (3.10)] Equation (3.10) is introduced as the simplification of (3.1) with f omitted, but no statement explains whether the theorem is intended for the original equation (3.1) or only for (3.10). This ambiguity matters because Theorem 3.7 is stated for (3.10).
  3. [Step 2 of Theorem 3.5] The notation K_t = K^k_t + ∑_{j=1}^{k−1} K^j_{T_j} is not precisely defined: the superscript k on K^k_t should be understood as the k-th local component, but the indexing is not consistent with the previous display.
  4. [References] Reference [38] is given as 'Possamaï, D., Zhou, C.' and used for G-Girsanov results; the paper does not clearly identify which results are quoted from [16] versus [38] in the preliminary section, making verification harder.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No substantive circularity; the only literal self-reference (ξ^(m)=Y^(m)_{t0+h}) is a likely typo and not load-bearing, while the f≡0 reduction is a correctness gap rather than a circular step.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.2, Proof of Theorem 3.7, Step 1 (data definition for (3.16))]
    "Denote ξ(m) = Y (m)_{t0+h}, then by Theorem 3.5, we know that (Y (m), Z(m), K(m), A(m)) ∈ EG(R) × HG(R) × LG(R) × AD is a unique solution to the following quadratic G-BSDE with double mean reflections with data ( ξ(m), g(m)) on [ t0, t0 + h]"

    As written, the approximating solution Y^(m) for the unbounded-terminal proof is declared to be the unique solution of (3.16) with data whose terminal value is Y^(m)_{t0+h}. Thus the object being constructed appears in its own input data; existence of Y^(m) is assumed before it is built, so the definition is circular. This is load-bearing because the subsequent Cauchy/convergence argument for Theorem 3.7 is applied to these Y^(m). However, the immediately preceding truncation setup (ξ^(m) for ξ, g0) and the phrase 'Similar to [18]' indicate the intended terminal data was the bounded ξ^(m), so this reads as a typo; treating it literally would make the proof vacuous, but the context suggests the circle is not intentional.

full rationale

Most of the derivation chain is self-contained. Lemma 3.3/Theorem 3.5 solve the f=0 equation (3.2) using the backward Skorokhod problem and G-BMO fixed point; these are standard external tools. The uses of [14] (same first author) for Lipschitz-type auxiliary facts are not circular because those cited lemmas are not the target quadratic result and are independent claims. The 'Without loss of generality, we assume f≡0' reduction is a proof gap, not circularity: no fitted parameter or self-citation is involved; the concern is whether the f ds term can be restored, which is a correctness matter. The self-referential ξ^(m)=Y^(m)_{t0+h} line is the only literal circular step; because it appears to be a typo for the truncated terminal ξ^(m) introduced just before, we do not raise the score above 2. No parameters are fitted and no prediction reduces to its input by construction in the main bounded-terminal argument.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles or entities. Its key additional axiom beyond standard G-expectation tools is the unproved reduction f=0, which is exactly the premise that breaks the stated Theorem 3.5. The regularity assumptions on L,R and the convexity/exponential-moment assumptions are explicit modeling conditions.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption G-expectation framework with a weakly compact representing set P and nonlinear expectation bE (Section 2.1).
    The entire model relies on the sublinear expectation and its representation by a set of probabilities, taken from Peng's theory and [6].
  • domain assumption G-BMO exponential martingales are symmetric G-martingales and the G-Girsanov theorem holds (Lemmas 2.11-2.14).
    Used to linearize differences of solutions in the contraction argument; quoted from [16].
  • domain assumption The backward Skorokhod problem with two nonlinear boundaries has a unique solution with the stated continuity estimates (Theorems 2.20 and 2.21).
    Core tool for constructing the reflection process A; taken from [24].
  • ad hoc to paper Assuming f=0 in (3.1) is without loss of generality.
    Stated in Lemma 3.3 without proof; all subsequent arguments use the f=0 equations (3.2) and (3.10), so this is a load-bearing unproved premise.
  • domain assumption Assumption 3.1: loss functions L,R are strictly increasing, bi-Lipschitz, and well separated.
    Needed for the backward Skorokhod problem to apply to the mean constraints.
  • domain assumption Assumption 3.6: for unbounded terminal values, g(t,y,.) is convex or concave and exponential moments of the terminal and the process alpha are finite.
    Used by the theta-method and the exponential estimates in Section 3.2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quadratic BSDEs with double constraints driven by G-Brownian motion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6BO5CA2E

@misc{pith2026250818744,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quadratic BSDEs with double constraints driven by G-Brownian motion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6BO5CA2E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.18744}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, we investigate the well-posedness of quadratic backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion (referred to as G-BSDEs) with double mean reflections. By employing a representation of the solution via G-BMO martingale techniques, along with fixed point arguments, the Skorokhod problem, the backward Skorokhod problem, and the {\theta}-method, we establish existence and uniqueness results for such G-BSDEs under both bounded and unbounded terminal conditions.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [14]

    Mean Reflected Backward Stochastic Differential Equations Driven by G-Brownian Motion with Double Constraints

    He, W., Li, H.: Mean Reflected Backward Stochastic Differential Equations Driven by G- Brownian Motion with Double Constraints. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.09103v1 (2024)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Briand, P., Elie, R., Hu, Y.: BSDEs with mean reflection. Ann. Appl. Probab. 28(1), 482-510 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [2]

    Briand, P., Hu, Y.: BSDE with quadratic growth and unbounded terminal value. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields 136 604-618 (2006) 27

    work page 2006

  4. [3]

    Briand, P., Hu, Y.: Quadratic BSDEs with convex generators and unbounded terminal conditions. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields 141(3), 543-567 (2008)

    work page 2008

  5. [4]

    Cao, D., Tang, S.: Reflected quadratic BSDEs driven by G-Brownian motions, Chinese Ann. Math. Ser. B 41, 873-928 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [5]

    and Matoussi, A.: Reflected and doubly reflected BSDEs with jumps: a priori estimates and comparison

    Cr´ epey, S. and Matoussi, A.: Reflected and doubly reflected BSDEs with jumps: a priori estimates and comparison. Ann. Appl. Probab. 18(5), 2041-2069 (2008)

    work page

  7. [6]

    Potential Anal

    Denis, L., Hu, M., Peng S.: Function spaces and capacity related to a sublinear expectation: application to G-Brownian motion pathes. Potential Anal. 34(2), 139-161 (2011)

    2011

  8. [7]

    C.: Reflected solutions of backward SDE’s, and related obstacle problems for PDE’s

    El Karoui, N., Kapoudjian, C., Pardoux, E., Peng, S., Quenez, M. C.: Reflected solutions of backward SDE’s, and related obstacle problems for PDE’s. Ann. Probab. 25(2), 702-737 (1997)

    work page 1997

Show all 42 references
  1. [8]

    Bulletin des Sciences Math´ ematiques

    Falkowski, A., S lomi´ nski, L.: (2022) Backward stochastic differential equations with mean reflec- tion and two constraints. Bulletin des Sciences Math´ ematiques. 176: 103117

    2022

  2. [9]

    C.: Reflected BSDEs when the obstacle is not right-continuous and optimal stopping

    Grigorova, M., Imkeller, P., Offen, E., Ouknine, Y., Quenez, M. C.: Reflected BSDEs when the obstacle is not right-continuous and optimal stopping. Ann. Appl. Probab. 27(5), 3153-3188 (2017)

    2017

  3. [10]

    Gu, Z., Lin, Y., Xu, K.: Quadratic BSDEs with mean reflection driven by G-brownian motion. Stoch. Dynam. 23(5,) 2350044 (2023)

    2023

  4. [11]

    and Lepeltier, J

    Hamad` ene, S. and Lepeltier, J. P.: Reflected BSDEs and mixed game problem. Stoch. Process. Appl. 85(2), 177-188 (2000)

    2000

  5. [12]

    He, W.: BSDEs driven by G-Brownian motion with non-Lipschitz coefficients. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 505(2), 125569 (2022)

    2022

  6. [13]

    He, W.: Multi-dimensional mean-reflected BSDEs driven by G-Brownian motion with time vary- ing non-Lipschitz coefficients. Stat. Probab. Lett. 206, 109977 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    Hu, M., Ji, S., Peng, S., Song, Y.: Backward stochastic differential equations driven by G- Brownian motion. Stoch. Process. Appl. 124(1), 759-784 (2014)

    2014

  8. [16]

    Hu, Y., Lin, Y., Soumana Hima A.: Quadratic backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion: Discrete solutions and approximation. Stoch. Process. Appl. 128(11), 3724-3750 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    Hu, M., Qu, B., Wang, F.: BSDEs driven by G-Brownian motion with time-varying Lipschitz condition. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 491(2), 124342 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Hu, Y., Tang, S., Wang, F.: Quadratic G-BSDEs with convex generators and unbounded terminal conditions. Stoch. Process. Appl. 153, 363-390 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    Electron

    Klimsiak, T.: Reflected BSDEs with monotone generator. Electron. J. Probab. 17, 1-25 (2012)

    2012

  12. [20]

    Klimsiak, T.: BSDEs with monotone generator and two irregular reflecting barriers. Bull. Sci. Math. 137(3), 268-321 (2013) 28

    2013

  13. [21]

    Kobylanski, M.: Backward stochastic differential equations and partial differential equations with quadratic growth. Ann. Probab. 28, 558-602 (2000)

    2000

  14. [22]

    P., Quenez, M

    Kobyla´ nski, M., Lepeltier, J. P., Quenez, M. C., Torres, S.: Reflected BSDE with superlinear quadratic coefficient. Probab. Math. Stat. 22, (2002)

    2002

  15. [23]

    Li, H.: The Skorokhod problem with two nonlinear constraints. Probab. Math. Stat. 43(2), 207- 239 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    Li, H.: Backward stochastic differential equations with double mean reflections. Stoch. Process. Appl. 104371 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    Li, H., Peng, S.: Reflected backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion with an upper obstacle. Stoch. Process. Appl. 130, 6556-6579 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    Li, H., Peng, S., Soumana Hima, A.: Reflected solutions of backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion. Sci. China Math. 61(1), 1-26 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.10939v1 (2025)

    Li, H., Shi, J.: Mean field backward stochastic differential equations with double mean reflections. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.10939v1 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    Backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion with double reflections

    Li, H., Song, Y. Backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion with double reflections. J. Theor. Probab. 34, 2285-2314 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    Stochastic 92(5), 659-683 (2020)

    Liu, G.: Multi-dimensional BSDEs driven by G-Brownian motion and related system of fully nonlinear PDEs. Stochastic 92(5), 659-683 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Liu, G., Wang, F.: BSDEs with mean reflection driven by G-Brownian motion. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 470, 599-618 (2019)

    2019

  23. [31]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.06868 (2021)

    Lu, H., Song, Y.: Forward-backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Brownian motion. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.06868 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Pardoux, E., Peng, S.: Adapted Solutions of Backward Stochastic Equations. Syst. Control Lett. 14, 55-61 (1990)

    1990

  25. [33]

    Stochastic Analysis and Applications, 541-567, Abel Symposium, 2, Springer, Berlin (2007)

    Peng, S.: G-expectation, G-Brownian Motion and Related Stochastic Calculus of Itˆ o type. Stochastic Analysis and Applications, 541-567, Abel Symposium, 2, Springer, Berlin (2007)

    2007

  26. [34]

    Peng, S.: Multi-Dimensional G-Brownian Motion and Related Stochastic Calculus under G- Expectation, Stoch. Process. Appl. 118(12), 2223-2253 (2008)

    2008

  27. [35]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1002.4546v1 (2010)

    Peng, S.: Nonlinear Expectations and Stochastic Calculus under Uncertainty. arXiv preprint arXiv:1002.4546v1 (2010)

    2010 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Probability Theory and Stochastic Modelling 95, Springer (2019)

    Peng, S.: Nonlinear Expectations and Stochastic Calculus Under Uncertainty: With Robust CLT and G-Brownian Motion. Probability Theory and Stochastic Modelling 95, Springer (2019)

    2019

  29. [37]

    and Xu, M.: The smallest g-supermartingale and reflected BSDE with single and double L2 obstacles

    Peng, S. and Xu, M.: The smallest g-supermartingale and reflected BSDE with single and double L2 obstacles. In Annales de l’IHP Probabilit´ es et statistiques.41(3), 605-630 (2005)

    2005

  30. [38]

    Possama ¨ ı, D., Zhou, C.: Second order backward stochastic differential equations with quadratic growth. Stoch. Process. Appl. 123(10), 3770-3799 (2013)

    2013

  31. [39]

    Soner, M., Touzi, N., Zhang, J.: well-posedness of Second Order Backward SDEs. Probab. Theory Relat. Fields 153(1-2), 149-190 (2012) 29

    2012

  32. [40]

    Song, Y.: Some properties on G-evaluation and its applications to G-martingale decomposition. Sci. China Math. 54(2), 287-300 (2011)

    2011

  33. [41]

    Wang, F., Zheng, G.: Backward stochastic differential equations driven by G-Bsrownian motion with uniformly continuous generators. J. Theor. Probab. 34(2), 660-681 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    arXiv Preprint arXiv:2409.16574v1 (2024) 30

    Zhao, B.: BSDEs driven by G-Brownian motion with time-varying uniformly continuous genera- tors. arXiv Preprint arXiv:2409.16574v1 (2024) 30

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.