arXiv:2004.12047v2 [math.NA] 29 Dec 2020 ewe prpit aahsae,seScin2frdtis We details. for 2 Section see spaces, W Banach appropriate between where data inbsdo ea–in yeoeao ihhmgnosDirich homogeneous with reads d operator model partial type The stochastic Leray–Lions general condition. a more on a based paper this tion in study we problem, a loihsfrtesohsi parabolic stochastic the for algorithms cal Keywords frglrfli eoiyfil.Teeoe nodrt netgt tur pert investigate noise to white order a in as Therefore, modelled field. be turb compon parabolic velocity can being (deterministic) fluid as that oscillating regular component described slow of is oscillating a it fast of pressure and a combination and unsteady a velocity becomes is rapid Turbulence flow [4 scales, of flows large motion non-Newtonian with the and situations [1] practical diffusion in nonlinear as such processes, h parabolic The inmto,cnegneanalysis convergence method, tion EHD O TCATCEOUINEUTOSWITH EQUATIONS EVOLUTION STOCHASTIC FOR METHODS Date EINADCNEGNEAAYI FNUMERICAL OF ANALYSIS CONVERGENCE AND DESIGN t “ u W T 0 aur ,2021. 1, January : o h rbe.I hswy elyfudtosadpoiet par provide stochastic and approximating foundations GS lay the we equations. way, of this mart convergence weak In of proving existence problem. test. the the of Kolmogorov for proof the independent an and F provide Discrete theorem we using Skorohod by techniques, proved is ysis solutions (GS) Scheme Gradient uinpolmbsdo ea–in yeoeao.Tepro The operator. type Leray–Lions general stochastic a a for the on GDM the based study problem we lution paper, nu this analysing In and models. designing diffusion for Fi etc.), Elements, Galerkin, (Finite continuous methods classical many covering work, Abstract. P p ą p t : q Lpainpolm h rtse st eeo h hoyadnume and theory the develop to is step first the problem, -Laplacian L t , J p ,Θi noe one oanin domain bounded open an is Θ 0, ER ´ Lpaeeuto,sohsi D,nmrclmtos gra methods, numerical PDE, stochastic equation, -Laplace 2 p p r P Θ Lpainpolmocr nmn ahmtclmdl fphysical of models mathematical many in occurs problem -Laplacian M RNO,BNAI ODS N I-GNLE KIM-NGAN AND GOLDYS, BENIAMIN DRONIOU, OME ˆ q 0 du Here, . T , h rdetdsrtsto ehd(D)i eei frame generic a is (GDM) method discretisation gradient The ´ p su Lpaeeuto sapriua ae h ovrec ft of convergence The case. particular a as equation -Laplace div sa is EA–IN OPERATOR LERAY–LIONS p a f p K u, sacniuu prtrwt iergot acting growth linear with operator continuous a is vle inrpoeswt rc ls covariance class trace a with process Wiener -valued ∇ 1. u u p qq 0 Introduction , dt q“ ¨q u “ “ 1 u on 0 f 0 p p u Lpainpolm oiae ythis by Motivated problem. -Laplacian q dW nΘ in p 0 t T , , R in B ˆ q d , p d 0 T , Θ eia cee for schemes merical “ ieVlms Dis- Volumes, nite , ˆ q 1 ntoa Anal- unctional naesolutions ingale ildifferential tial , tcatcevo- stochastic lmcontains blem 2 nparticular, In Θ cnqe for echniques , , ,adteinitial the and 3, ffrnilequa- ifferential in discretisa- dient uec nthe in bulence e boundary let ] However, 9]. suethat assume fluctuations, he ln [51]. ulent - urbation n and ent (1) ri- 2 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE operator Q, for a certain Hilbert space K. Particular choices of a include the p- Laplace operator corresponding to apu, vq “ |v|p´1v for some p P p1, `8q (see also [45] for more general versions), nonlinear and nonlocal diffusion operators of the p´1 p 8 form apu, vq “ Λrus|v| v with Λrus : L pΘq Ñ L pΘ; SdpRqq uniformly elliptic (here, SdpRq denotes the space of symmetric dˆd matrices) – such a model appears in image smoothing with p “ 2 and Λrus “ gp|∇G ˚ u|q, where G is a Gaussian kernel, ˚ is the spatial convolution, and g : R` Ñ R` is smooth and decreasing [17]. If f “ 0 then the noise term vanishes, hence our stochastic model (1) includes deterministic equation as a special case. Some existence and uniqueness results for some particular forms of (1) can be found in the literature. In [20, 38, 39], a quasi-linear version is considered in which apu, ∇uq “ Apuq∇u, and an additional advective term divpBpuqq is added to the model; existence and uniqueness of suitable solutions are proved. [10] consid- ers a non-degenerate version of the p-Laplace model, in which apu, ∇uq “ p1 ` |∇u|qp´2∇u, and proves existence and regularity results. The analysis carried out in [50] only covers the straight p-Laplacian, and is restricted to p ě 2. Our as- sumption on the Leray–Lions operator are more general than in these references, in the sense that we accept models that are fully non-linear with respect to ∇u, and that may be non-monotone (a depending on both u and ∇u, in a non-linear way with respect to ∇u). Moreover, and contrary to these references, we propose an approach that has the double advantage of establishing the existence of a solution to (1), and of proving the convergence of a variety of numerical approximations of this model. Numerical methods of the deterministic version of model (1) (i.e. f “ 0) and their proofs of convergence are studied in [7,16,27,42] and the references cited therein. However, there is no numerical approximation of the stochastic model (1) due to difficulties arising in the nonlinear term and the infinite dimensional nature of the driving noise processes. There is an increasing number of numerical methods for the solution of stochas- tic evolution equations mentioned in the literature [43, 44, 53], where unique mild solutions are required and the approximate schemes are treated in terms of the semigroup approach. However, these assumptions are not applicable for a class of stochastic equations involving strongly nonlinear terms, such as Navier–Stokes, magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), Schr¨odinger, Landau–Lifshitz–Gilbert, Landau– Lifshitz–Bloch and nonlinear porous media equations. The stochastic Navier-Stokes equation [12, 14] and the stochastic Landau–Lifshitz–Gilbert equation [4, 5, 35, 36] are investigated by using the conforming finite element method to approximate their solutions. Furthermore, the convergence of the approximate solutions is also proved which implies the existence of weak martingale solutions. In the recent work [47], a general convergence theory for conforming finite element schemes of stochastic parabolic PDEs is developed by adapting ideas from [4, 5, 12, 14]. All these previous works, however, only deal with conforming approximations, which use for the spatial discretisation a subspace of the Sobolev space appearing in the weak formulation of the continuous problem. This usually imposes restrictions on the types of mesh that can be considered – typically, triangular/tetrahedral or quadrangular/hexahedral meshes. Moreover, conforming methods are known to be ill-suited in some applications, e.g. when mesh locking appears, when inf-sup stabil- ity is sought, or when some physical properties of the model must be respected (such NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 3 as balance and conservativity of approximate fluxes). In such circumstances, non- conforming methods might be better suited; such methods include non-conforming finite elements and finite volume methods, and also recent high-order methods for polytopal meshes with cell and face unknowns – such as Hybrid-High Order schemes and Virtual Element Methods. We refer the reader to [2,8,18,21, 23] and reference therein for detailed presentations of these methods. In this work, we approximate (1) by using the Gradient Discretisation Method (GDM) [26] and an implicit Euler time stepping with uniform time steps. The GDM is a generic convergence analysis framework for a wide variety of methods (conforming or nonconforming) written in discrete variational formulation, and based on independent approximations of functions and gradients using the same degrees of freedom. Several well-known methods fall in the GDM framework, in particular: ‚ Galerkin methods, including the (standard or mass-lumped) conforming Finite Element methods [29], ‚ Nonconforming Finite Element methods, including the (standard or mass- lumped) nonconforming P1 scheme [29] and non-conforming Finite Element methods on polytopal meshes [28], ‚ Symmetric Interior Penalty Galerkin (SIPG) methods [32], ‚ Mixed Finite Element methods [26], ‚ Hybrid Mimetic Mixed methods and Mimetic Finite Difference methods [27], ‚ Hybrid High-Order and Virtual Elements Methods [22]. By writing numerical schemes for (1) and performing their analysis in the GDM framework, we provide a unified convergence result for all these methods. We refer to [22, 33] and to the complete monograph [26] for more details of the GDM and the methods it covers. Because the GDM encompasses non-conforming schemes, the functional spaces for the approximate solutions are not included in the classical (continuous) Sobolev spaces. Therefore, the usual Poincar´einequalities, Sobolev embeddings, Rellich or Aubin–Simon compactness theorems, or trace inequalities cannot be used. In the context of deterministic PDEs, a series of “Discrete Func- tional Analysis” results have been established to mimic these continuous functional analysis tools [26]. Our convergence analysis approach is based on the adaptation of these Discrete Functional Analysis techniques to the stochastic case, the Skorohod theorem and the Kolmogorov test; we show the convergence of the Gradient Scheme (GS) solutions to a weak martingale solution of (1). In this way, an independent proof of the existence of weak martingale solutions for the problem is provided. The paper is organised as follows. In Section 2 we recall the notations of the gradient discretisation method and propose the GS for approximating the stochastic model (1). Weak martingale solutions to (1) are defined and our main result is stated in this section. Section 3 provides priori estimates of approximated solutions and the noise term added at each step of the scheme in various norms. In Section 4, we first show the tightness of the sequence including the GS solutions and then prove the almost sure convergence in a certain norm, up to a change of probability space. The continuity of the limit and the martingale part are also proved in this section. Section 5 is devoted to the proof of the main theorem. Finally, in the Appendix we prove necessary results that are used in the course of the proof. 4 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

2. Gradient scheme and main results Before introducing the GS for approximation of (1), we introduce notations and assumptions used in the rest of the paper. 1 p Notations: We let p “ p´1 be the conjugate exponent of p ą 1. To alleviate the formulas, when written without specifying the space, the Lebesgue spaces we consider are those on Θ; so, most of the time, we write Lq instead of LqpΘq. q Correspondingly, }¨}Lq is the norm in L pΘq, x¨, ¨yLp1 ,Lp is the duality product 1 p p 2 between L pΘq and L pΘq (that is, xf,gyLp1 ,Lp “ Θ fg), and x¨, ¨yL the inner product in L2pΘq; we use the same notations in vector-valued Lebesgues spaces q e ş L pΘq for e ě 2. We will use the notation ΘT :“ p0,T q ˆ Θ. In proofs of theorems and lemmas, C will stand for a generic constant that depends only on the data above, and on any constant appearing in the statement of the corresponding theorem or lemma. 2.1. Assumptions. The following standing assumptions will not be enunciated again. 2 ‚ Initial condition. u0 belongs to L . ‚ Leray–Lions operator. The function a : R ˆ Rd Ñ Rd is continuous and d there exists p P p1, `8q and constants c1,c2 such that, for all px, yqP R ˆ R and all z P Rd, p apx, yq ¨ y ě c1|y| (2) p´1 |apx, yq| ď c2p1 ` |y| q (3) papx, yq´ apx, zqq ¨ py ´ zqě 0. (4)

‚ Noise term. Let pΩ, F, F “ pFtqtPr0,T s, Pq be a stochastic basis, that is, pΩ, F, Pq is a probability space and F is a filtration satisfying the usual con- ditions. We assume that one can define on this basis an pFtq-adapted Wiener process W taking values in a separable Hilbert space K with covariance op- erator Q such that TrpQqă8. Then, the process W can be written in the form 8 W ptq“ qkWkptqek , k“1 ÿ where tek, k ě 1u is an orthonormal basis of K made of eigenvectors of Q with the corresponding eigenvalues qk such that 8 2 qk ă8 , k“1 ÿ and tWk , k ě 1u is a family of independent pFtq-adapted real-valued Wiener processes. Let LpK,L2q be the Banach space of bounded linear operators with operator p 2 norm denoted by }¨}LpK,L2q. We assume that the operator f : L Ñ LpK,L q p 2 is continuous and that there exist F1, F2 ą 0 such that, for any v P L X L 2 2 }fpvq}LpK,L2q ď F1}v}L2 ` F2. (5) Remark 2.1 (Example of f). An important example of the operator f arises when K “ L2 and fpvq : L2 Ñ L2 is a Nemytski type operator determined by a bounded continuous function f0 such that rfpvqkspxq“ f0pvpxqqkpxq. NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 5

Remark 2.2 (Case p “ 1). The well-known total-variation-flow (TV-flow) problem y corresponds to the Leray–Lions operator apx, yq “ |y| , which would require us to take p “ 1 in the assumptions above. This case is singular in the analysis of Leray– Lions equations (even in the deterministic and stationary setting), and necessitates specific development that goes beyond the aims of this paper. We refer the reader to [34] for a finite-element analysis of TV-flow, and to [9] for an example of a numerical analysis in the context of Bingham fluids. Some comments on the choice of the noise term are in place. It is a well established practice in physics and mathematics to study the behaviour of a PDE in question under Brownian perturbations, see for example [19] and references therein. Parti- cular physical problems may require other, non-Brownian noises and mathematical analysis of some of them is available, see [48]. Impulsive noise with isolated jumps does not pose new difficulties, when compared to deterministic equations. Noise with infinite intensity of jumps, such as L´evy stable process, is much more chal- lenging and requires a separate analysis. The same applies to noise with memory such as Fractional Brownian Motion. In this paper we consider a physically relevant case of the so-called multiplicative noise fpuqdW . A crucial example is provided by the famous parabolic Anderson model described by the heat equation perturbed by random potential of the form udW , see [37]. The noise of this form assures positivity of solutions with proba- bility one. Our work is a step towards a theory of p-heat equation perturbed by random potential. Other physical motivations for introducing the multiplicative noise include equations of stochastic fluid dynamics [46], quantum field theory [13], the Zakai equation of optimal filtering [19], and nonlinear stochastic Fokker-Planck equation arising in mean field games [15].

2.2. Gradient scheme. We recall here the notions of the gradient discretisation method. The idea of this general analysis framework is to replace, in the weak formulation of the problem, the infinite-dimensional space and continuous opera- tors, respectively, by a finite-dimensional space and reconstruction operators on this space; this set of “discrete” space and operators is called a gradient discretisa- tion (GD), and the scheme obtained after substituting these elements into the weak formulation is called a gradient scheme (GS). The convergence of the obtained GS can be established based on only a few general concepts on the underlying GD. Moreover, different GDs correspond to different classical schemes (finite elements, finite volumes, etc.). Hence, the analysis carried out in the GDM directly applies to all these schemes, and does not rely on the specificity of each particular method; we refer the reader to the monograph [26] for a more detailed introduction to the GDM (see in particular Chapter 1 therein for the general principles, and Part III for some numerical methods covered by the framework). Definition 2.3. D X , , ∇ , I , tpnq “ D,0 ΠD D D n“0,¨¨¨ ,N is a space-time gradient discretisation for homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions, if its elements satisfy ` ` ˘ ˘ the following properties

(i) XD,0 is a finite dimensional vector space of functions of discrete argument and XD,0 encodes homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions. 8 (ii) the function reconstruction ΠD : XD,0 Ñ L is a linear mapping that reconstructs, from an element of XD,0, a function over Θ, 6 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

p d (iii) the linear mapping ∇D : XD,0 Ñ pL q gives a reconstructed discrete gra- dient. It must be chosen in such a way that the mapping XD,0 Q v ÞÑ }∇Dv}Lp Pr0, 8q is a norm on XD,0, 2 (iv) ID : L Ñ XD,0 is an interpolation operator. It is used to create, from the initial condition, a discrete vector in the space of unknowns. (v) tp0q “ 0 ă tp1q ă ¨¨¨ ă tpNq “ T is a uniform time discretisation in the pn`1q pnq sense that δtD :“ t ´ t is a constant time step. vpnq XN`1 For any n“0,¨¨¨ ,N P D,0 , we define piecewise-constant-in-time functions 8 ∇ p d 8 ΠDv : r0`,T s˘ Ñ L , Dv : p0,T s Ñ pL q and dDv : p0,T s Ñ L by: For n “ 0, ¨ ¨ ¨ ,N ´ 1, for any t P ptpnq,tpn`1qs, for almost every (with respect to the Lebesgue measure) x P Θ p0q pn`1q ΠDvp0, xq :“ ΠDv pxq, ΠDvpt, xq :“ ΠDv pxq, 1 pn`1q pn` 2 q pn`1q pnq ∇Dvpt, xq :“ ∇Dv pxq, dDvptq“ dD v :“ ΠDv ´ ΠDv . We now describe the scheme. Algorithm 2.4 (Gradient scheme for (1)). Consider the stochastic basis pΩ, F, F “ P pFtqtPr0,T s, q and pFtq-adapted Wiener process W defined in Assumption 2.1. Set p0q pnq N`1 u IDu u u ω, X :“ 0 and take random variables p¨q “ p ¨q n“0,¨¨¨ ,N P D,0 such that: ` ˘ n ‚ u is adapted to the filtration pFN q0ďnďN defined by n pkq FN :“ σtW pt q, 0 ď k ď nu.

‚ for any function φ P XD,0 and almost every ω P Ω, 1 pn` 2 q pn`1q pn`1q ∇ ∇ 1 dD u, ΠDφ L2 ` δtDxapΠDu , Du q, DφyLp ,Lp pnq pn`1q @ D “ fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDφ L2 . (6) Here ∆pn`1qW :“ W ptpn`1qq´ W ptpnq@q. D Remark 2.5 (Computing a solution to the gradient scheme). At each time step and for each realisation of W , (6) requires us to solve a non-linear system to com- pute upn`1q. Specifically, this system is a (deterministic) stationary Leray–Lions problem. Solution strategies for such non-linear systems are well-known and involve either fixed-point algorithms, or Newton algorithms (which have to be smoothed in the case p ă 2 to avoid the singularity where ∇u “ 0). For the pure p-Laplace problem, more efficient strategies can also be invoked that are based on conjugate gradients for the corresponding minimisation problem, see [6] and reference therein. In order to establish the stability and convergence of GS (6), sequences of space- time gradient discretisations pDmqmPN are required to satisfy consistency, limit- conformity and compactness properties [26]. The consistency is slightly adapted here to account for the non-linearity we consider. In the following, we let p “ maxt2,p1u.

Definition 2.6 (Consistency). A sequence pDmqmPN of space-time gradientp dis- cretisations in the sense of Definition 2.3 is said to be consistent if p 1,p ‚ for all φ P L pΘqX W0 pΘq, letting

p p SDm pφq :“ min }ΠDm w ´ φ}Lp `}∇Dm w ´ ∇φ}L , wPXDm ` p ˘ NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 7

we have SDm pφq Ñ 0 as m Ñ8, 2 2 ‚ for all φ P L , ΠDm IDm φ Ñ φ in L as m Ñ8

‚ δtDm Ñ 0 as m Ñ8.

It follows from the consistency property that there exists a constant Cu0 ą 0 not depending on m such that 0 p q 2 }ΠDm u }L ď Cu0 . (7)

Definition 2.7 (Limit-conformity). A sequence pDmqmPN of space-time gradient discretisations in the sense of Definition 2.3 is said to be limit-conforming if, for 1 1 1 all φ P W div,p pΘq :“tφ P Lp pΘqd : divφ P Lp pΘqu letting

∇Dm vpxq ¨ φpxq` ΠDm vpxqdivφpxq dx Ω WDm pφq :“ max ˇ ż ˇ, vPXD zt0u ˇ ` }∇D v} p ˘ ˇ m ˇ m L ˇ ˇ ˇ we have WDm pφq Ñ 0 as m Ñ8.

Definition 2.8 (Compactness). A sequence pDmqmPN of space-time gradient dis- cretisations in the sense of Definition 2.3 is said to be compact if

lim sup TDm pξq“ 0, ξÑ0 mPN where }ΠD vp¨ ` ξq´ ΠD v} p Rd m m L p q Rd TDm pξq :“ max , @ξ P , p vPXDm zt0u }∇Dm v}L with ΠDm v extended by 0 outside Θ. Remark 2.9. Let us recall the usual definition of compactness of a family of GDs p is [26]: for any pvmqmPN such that vm P Dm for all m and p}∇Dm vm}L qmPN is p bounded, the sequence pΠDm vmqmPN is relatively compact in L . Definition 2.8 is actually an equivalent characterisation of this compactness property [26, Lemma 2.21], which is more suitable for the analysis of time-dependent problems. Indeed,

TDm pξq enables an estimate of the space-translates of ΠDm v which, when combined with time-translates, are at the core of space-time compactness results (such as the Aubin–Simon and Kolmogorov theorems). A sequence of GDs that is compact also satisfies another important property: the coercivity [26, Lemma 2.10].

Lemma 2.10 (Coercivity of sequences of GDs). If a sequence pDmqmPN of space- time gradient discretisations in the sense of Definition 2.3 is compact, then it is coercive: there exists a constant Cp such that

p }ΠDm v}L max ď Cp, @m P N. p vPXDm zt0u }∇Dm v}L Finally, we will need sequences of GDs that satisfy the following discrete Sobolev embeddings. As shown in [26], and especially in Appendix B therein, such embed- dings are known for all classical gradient discretisations. Definition 2.11 (Discrete Sobolev embeddings). A sequence of gradient discreti- ˚ sations pDmqmPN satisfies the discrete Sobolev embeddings if there exists p ą p N and C ě 0 such that, for all m P and all vm P XDm,0, it holds }ΠDm v}Lp˚ ď p C}∇Dm v}L . 8 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

Remark 2.12. Examples of GDs satisfying consistency, limit-conformity, compact- ness and discrete Sobolev embeddings are provided in [26, Part III]. In particular, it is shown therein that all classical schemes (conforming and non-conforming finite elements, some finite volume methods, etc.) correspond to such GDs. 2.3. Main results. The solution to (1) is understood in the following sense. Definition 2.13. Given T P p0, 8q, a weak martingale solution pΩ, F, F, P,W,uq to (1) consists of (a) a filtered probability space pΩ, F, F, Pq with the filtration satisfying the usual (normal) conditions [19, page 71], (b) a K-valued F-adapted Wiener process with the covariance operator Q, (c) a progressively measurable process u : r0,T sˆ Ω Ñ Lp such that 2 (1) There is a ball Bw of L , endowed with the weak topology, such that, P-a.s. ω P Ω, up¨,ωqP Cpr0,T s; Bwq. E 2 (2) suptPr0,T s }uptq}L2 ă8; E ´ p ¯ (3) }u} p 1,p ă8; L p0,T ;W0 pΘqq 1,p p P (4) for´ every t Pr0,T s, for¯ all ψ P W0 pΘqX L pΘq, -a.s.: t p ∇ ∇ uptq, ψ L2 ´ u0, ψ L2 ` apupsq, upsqq, ψ Lp1 ,Lp ds ż0 @ D @ D @t D “ fpuqps, ¨qdW psq, ψ L2 , ż0 where the stochastic integral above@ is the ItˆointegralD in L2pΘq.

1 Remark 2.14 (Weak solution). The usage of the dual Lp,Lp spaces is mandated by the growth in ∇u of the nonlinear Leray–Lions function apu, ∇uq. As seen in [45] for example, the standard energy space for this operator is W 1,ppΘq; this is the space in which estimates can be obtained (using u itself as a test function) that lead to existence of a solution. Hence, due to the growth assumption (3), apu, ∇uq is p1 d expected to belong to L pΘq . On the contrary, the time derivative Btu is linear in u, 2 which is why the L duality product uptq, ψ L2 naturally appears when integrating this term against a test function. @ D Remark 2.15 (Continuity of the solution). The weak continuity of upω, ¨q : r0,T s Ñ ´1 Bw implies its continuity r0,T s Ñ H pΘq for the standard norm topology on H´1pΘq. The main result of this paper is the following theorem, which states the existence of a solution to the GS and its convergence, up to a subsequence, towards a weak martingale solution of the continuous problem. 2 Theorem 2.16. Assume that we are given an initial data u0 P L pΘq and T ą 0. Let pDmqmPN be a sequence of gradient discretisations that is consistent, limit- conforming, compact, and satisfies the discrete Sobolev embeddings. For every m ě 1, there exists a random process um solution to the gradient scheme (Algorithm 2.4 with D :“ Dm).

Moreover, there exists a weak martingale solution pΩ, F, pFtqtPr0,T s, P, W, uq to (1) in the sense of Definition 2.13, and a sequence tumu of random processes defined on r r r r Ă r r NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 9

Ω with the same law as um, so that up to a subsequence, the following convergences hold r P p ΠDm um Ñ u, ´ a.s. in L pΘT q P p ∇Dm um Ñ ∇u, ´ a.s. in L pΘT q . r r r w ` ˘ Remark 2.17. The existence of a weakr solution to (1) is obtained as a by-product of the convergence analysis.r This existencer is not assumed a priori, and no regularity property is required on the continuous solution to get the convergence of the GDM. Remark 2.18 (Convergence to a strong solution for models with uniqueness). Theorem 2.16 ensures the convergence of a certain subsequence of the gradient dis- cretisations to a solution of equation (1) under fairly general conditions that yield the existence of a weak martingale solution only. The almost sure convergence of the subsequence can be proved only on a new probability space via the Skorohod the- orem. Stronger results can be obtained for specific models, which admit a unique pathwise solution. In this case the gradient scheme converges to a strong solution of equation (1) on the initial probability space. Remark 2.19 (Driving noise). In this paper we simplify the presentation by con- sidering the algorithm driven by Gaussian increments. In other words, we discretise Brownian Motion in time but not in space. For purposes of computations one would need to approximate the Wiener process by random walks that are discrete in space and time. By Donsker-type theorems, it is well known that normalised random walks converge weakly to a Brownian Motion; hence, all our arguments can eas- ily incorporate this additional discretisation. Note that, after using the Skorohod theorem, we would need to also establish the convergence of discrete martingales to stochastic integrals with respect to Wiener process. Such results follow from the BDG inequalities in UMD spaces for martingales without continuity assumptions, see a recent result of [52]. An excellent discussion of this problem (among many others) can be found in [12, 47].

3. A priori estimates We first provide a priori estimates for the solution u to (6) and then deduce its existence in the following lemma. For legibility, we drop the index m in sequences of gradient discretisations, and we simply write D instead of Dm.

Lemma 3.1. There exists at least one uD solution to the Algorithm 2.4 and there exists a constant Cf,a,T,Q,u0 ą 0 depending only on f, a, T, Q and u0 such that

N´1 E pnq 2 p pn`1q pnq 2 max }ΠDu }L2 `}∇Du} p ` }ΠDu ´ ΠDu }L2 1ďnďN L pΘT q « n“0 ff ÿ ď Cf,a,T,Q,u0 . (8) We also have for any integer number q ě 1

1 E pnq 2q p2q´ max }ΠDu }L2 `}∇Du} p ď Cf,a,T,Q,u0,q. (9) 1ďnďN L pΘT q „  Proof. 10 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

A priori estimates on ΠDu in (8). We first prove a priori energy estimates of solution u. We choose the test function pn`1q φ “ u P XD,0 in (6) and use the following fundamental identity 1 1 pa ´ bqa “ pa2 ´ b2q` pa ´ bq2, @a,b P R, (10) 2 2 to write

1 pn`1q 2 1 pn`1q pnq 2 }ΠDu } 2 ` }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 2 L 2 L pn`1q ∇ pn`1q ∇ pn`1q ` δtD apΠDu , Du q, Du Lp1 ,Lp 1 @ pnq 2 pnq pn`1q D pn`1q pnq “ }ΠDu } 2 ` fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDpu ´ u q 2 2 L L pnq p@n`1q pnq D ` fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu L2 . (11) By taking the sum in the@ above equation from n “ 0D to n “ k, for an arbitrary k P t0,...,N ´1u, and using (2), Cauchy–Schwarz inequality and the Young inequality 2 2 b ab ď a ` 4 for the second term in the right hand side, we obtain k k 1 pk`1q 2 1 pn`1q pnq 2 pn`1q p }ΠDu } 2 ` }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 ` c1 δtD}∇Du } p 2 L 4 L L n“0 n“0 ÿ k ÿ 1 p0q 2 pnq 2 pn`1q 2 ď }ΠDu } 2 ` }fpΠDu q} 2 }∆ W } 2 L LpK,L q K n“0 k ÿ pnq pn`1q pnq ` fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu L2 . (12) n“0 ÿ @ D Note that the last term on the right hand side of (12) vanishes when taking its pnq pn`1q expectation since ΠDu is Ftpnq measurable, and thus independent with ∆ W which has a zero expectation. We obtain from (12) k 1 pk`1q 2 1 pn`1q pnq 2 E }ΠDu } 2 ` }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 2 L 4 L ” n“0 ı k ÿ E pn`1q p ` c1 δtD}∇Du }Lp ” n“0 ı ÿ k 1 p0q 2 pnq 2 pn`1q 2 ď }ΠDu } 2 ` E }fpΠDu q} 2 }∆ W } . (13) 2 L LpK,L q K n“0 ÿ “ ‰ By the tower property of the conditional expectation, the independence of the increments of the Wiener process, and the assumption on f we find for the last term E pnq 2 pn`1q 2 }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K E E pnq 2 pn`1q 2 “ “ }fpΠ‰Du q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K|Ftpnq E” “ pnq 2 E pn`1q 2 ‰ı “ }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q }∆ W }K|Ftpnq ” E pnq 2 ı “ δtDpTrQq r}fpΠDu q}“LpK,L2qs ‰ E pnq 2 ď δtDpTrQq F1 r}ΠDu }L2 s` F2 . (14) ` ˘ NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 11

Together with (13), this implies

k E pk`1q 2 p0q 2 E pnq 2 }ΠDu }L2 ď}ΠDu }L2 ` 2pTrQqF2T ` 2pTrQqF1 δtD r}ΠDu }L2 s. n“0 “ ‰ ÿ By applying the discrete version of Gronwall’s lemma to the above inequality and using (7), we obtain E pnq 2 max }ΠDu }L2 ď Cf,a,T,Q,u0 . (15) 1ďnďN It follows from (13)–(15) that “ ‰

N´1 E p pn`1q pnq 2 }∇Du} p ` }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 ď Cf,T,Q,u0 . L pΘT q L n“0 “ ÿ ‰ By taking the maximum of (12) over 0 ď k ď N ´ 1 and applying the expectations, we get

N´1 E pnq 2 p0q 2 E pnq 2 pn`1q 2 max }ΠDu }L2 ď}ΠDu }L2 ` 2 }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K 1ďnďN n“0 “ ‰ k“ ÿ ‰ pnq pn`1q pnq ` 2E max fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu 2 . 0ďkďN´1 L n“0 “ ÿ @ D ‰(16) To bound the last term in the right hand side, we treat the sum as the stochastic integral of a piecewise constant integrand and use the Burkholder–Davis–Gundy inequality: [11, Theorem 2.4]

k pnq pn`1q pnq E max fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu 2 0ďkďN´1 L n“0 ” ÿ ı N´1 @ D E pnq 2 pnq 2 1{2 ď C δtD}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}ΠDu }L2 n“0 ” ÿ ı ` N´1 ˘ n n 2 1{2 E p q 2 p q ď C max }ΠDu }L δtDpF1}ΠDu }L2 ` F2q 0ďnďN´1 n“0 ” ÿ ı ` N´1 ˘ 1E pnq 2 2 E pnq 2 2 ď max }ΠDu }L2 ` C F1 δtD }ΠDu }L2 ` C F2T 4 0ďnďN n“0 “ ‰ ÿ “ ‰ 1E pnq 2 2 E pnq 2 2 ď max }ΠDu }L2 ` C F1T max }ΠDu }L2 ` C F2T. (17) 4 0ďnďN 0ďnďN We use (14)“ to bound the second‰ term in the right“ hand side of‰ (16).

N´1 E pnq 2 pn`1q 2 }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K n“0 ” ÿ ı N´1 E pnq 2 ď pTrQqF1 δtD r}ΠDu }L2 s ` pTrQqF2T n“0 ÿ E pnq 2 ď pTrQqF1T max }ΠDu }L2 ` pTrQqF2T. (18) 1ďnďN “ ‰ 12 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

By using (15), (17) and (18), we deduce from (16) that E pnq 2 max }ΠDu }L2 ď Cf,a,T,Q,u0 , 1ďnďN ” ı which completes the proof of the a priori estimates (8). The existence of at least one solution u to (6) in the Algorithm 2.4 is then done as in the proof of [26, Theorem 2.44]. The adaptiveness (to the filtration) of the solution u can be done exactly as in [3]. Higher moments bound (9). We adapt the ideas from [12], where different type of difficulties had to be dealt with. We will use induction to proof this result. First, from (8) we have the assertion for q “ 1. We assume therefore that (9) holds for any integer numberq ¯ P r1, q ´ 1s, that is, ¯ E pnq 2q max }ΠDu }L2 ď Cf,a,T,Q,u0 ,q¯. (19) 1ďnďN In what follow, we will“ prove that (19) holds‰ forq ¯ “ q. We begin by multiplying pn`1q 2 identity (11) by }ΠDu }L2 and use the positive-definiteness (2) of a to obtain

1 pn`1q 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 }ΠDu } 2 }ΠDu } 2 ´}ΠDu } 2 2 L L L ` 1 pn`1q 2 pn`1q ˘ pnq 2 ` }ΠDu } 2 }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 ď I1 ` I2, (20) 4 L L where pn`1q 2 pnq pn`1q pn`1q pnq 2 I1 :“}ΠDu }L fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDpu ´ u q L2 , pn`1q 2 pnq pn`1q pnq 2 I2 :“}ΠDu }L @fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu L2 . D By using the Cauchy–Schwarz@ and Young inequalities, weD estimate I1 and I2 as follows pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pn`1q 2 I1 ď}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K}ΠDu }L2

1 pn`1q pnq 2 pn`1q 2 ` }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 }ΠDu } 2 4 L L pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 “}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K }ΠDu }L2 `}ΠDu }L2 ´}ΠDu }L2

1 pn`1q pnq 2 pn`1q 2 ` }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 }ΠDu“ } 2 ‰ 4 L L pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 ď}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K}ΠDu }L2 2 pnq 4 pn`1q 4 1 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 ` 4}fpΠDu q} 2 }∆ W } ` }ΠDu } 2 ´}ΠDu } 2 LpK,L q K 16 L L 1 pn`1q pnq 2 pn`1q 2 ´ ¯ ` }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 }ΠDu } 2 , 4 L L and pnq pn`1q pnq pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 2 2 2 I2 “ fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu L2 }ΠDu }L `}ΠDu }L ´}ΠDu }L pnq pn`1q pnq pnq 2 2 ď @fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu DL2 }“ΠDu }L ‰ pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 `@ 4}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ DW }K}ΠDu }L2 2 1 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 ` }ΠDu } 2 ´}ΠDu } 2 . 16 L L ´ ¯ NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 13

By using the above estimates together with (10), we infer from (20) that

1 pn`1q 4 1 pnq 4 pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2 }ΠDu } 2 ´ }ΠDu } 2 ď 5}fpΠDu q} 2 }∆ W } }ΠDu } 2 4 L 4 L LpK,L q K L pnq 4 pn`1q 4 ` 4}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K pnq pn`1q pnq pnq 2 2 ` fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu L2 }ΠDu }L . (21) Using (10) and (21), it@ is easily proved by inductionD on q (the inductive step from pn`1q 2q q to q ` 1 consisting in multiplying this estimate by }ΠDu }L2 ) that

1 pn`1q 2q 1 pnq 2q }ΠDu } 2 ´ }ΠDu } 2 2q L 2q L pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2q ´2 ď 5}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K}ΠDu }L2 pnq 4 pn`1q 4 pnq 2q´4 ` 4}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K}ΠDu }L2 pnq pn`1q pnq pnq 2q´2 ` fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu L2 }ΠDu }L2 . (22) Then, proceeding as in (14),@ the first two terms in the rightD hand side of (21) are estimated as follows E pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2q´2 }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K}ΠDu }L2 pnq 2 pnq 2q ´2 Q E 2 “ ď δtDpTr q rpF1}ΠDu }‰L ` F2q}ΠDu }L2 s, (23) E pnq 4 pn`1q 4 pnq 2q ´4 }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K}ΠDu }L2 2 2 pnq 2 2 pnq 2q´4 Q E 2 “ ď δtDpTr q pF1}ΠDu ‰}L ` F2q }ΠDu }L2 . (24) We note that last term on the right hand“ side of (22) vanishes when taking expecta-‰ tion. Hence, summing (22) from n “ 0 to n “ k (for an arbitrary k “ 0,...,N ´1), taking the expectations and using (15), the above estimates, and the discrete ver- sion of Gronwall lemma, we obtain E pnq 2q max }ΠDu }L2 ď Cf,a,T,Q,u0,q. (25) 1ďnďN By summing (22) from n “ 0“ to n “ k (for‰ an arbitrary k “ 0,...,N ´ 1), and taking the maximum over k and then applying E, we get E pnq 2q p0q 2q max }ΠDu }L2 ď}ΠDu }L2 1ďnďN “ N´1 ‰ E pnq 2 pn`1q 2 pnq 2q ´2 ` 20 }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K}ΠDu }L2 n“0 ” ÿ ı N´1 E pnq 4 pn`1q 4 pnq 2q ´4 ` 16 }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K}ΠDu }L2 ” n“0 ı ÿ k pnq pn`1q pnq pnq 2q´2 ` 4E max fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu 2 }ΠDu } 2 . (26) 0ďkďN´1 L L n“0 ” ÿ @ D ı Proceeding as in (17), the last term of the right hand side is estimated as follows k pnq pn`1q pnq pnq 2q ´2 E max fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu 2 }ΠDu } 2 0ďkďN´1 L L n“0 ” ÿ @ D ı 1 E pnq 2q E pnq 2q ď max }ΠDu }L2 ` CF1T max }ΠDu }L2 2q`1 0ďnďN 0ďnďN “ ‰ “ ‰ 14 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

pnq 2q´2 ` CF2T max E }ΠDu } 2 . 0ďnďN L By using the above inequality, (23)–(25)“ and (15), we‰ obtain from (26) that E pnq 2q max }ΠDu }L2 ď Cf,a,T,Q,u0,q, (27) 1ďnďN which completes the proof” of the inductiveı step.

A priori estimates on ∇Du in (9). By using Jensen’s inequality, we obtain from (12) with k “ N ´ 1 that 1 p2q´ p0q 2q }∇Du} p ď C }ΠDu } 2 L pΘT q q L 2q´1 N´1 pnq 2 pn`1q 2 ` Cq }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K ˜ n“0 ¸ ÿ 1 2q´ N´1 pnq pn`1q pnq ` Cq fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu L2 . (28) ˜ n“0 ¸ ÿ @ D We estimate the second term in the right hand side of (28) by using, for γ ě 1,

N´1 γ N´1 γ´1 γ an ď N an, (29) n“0 n“0 ´ ÿ ¯ ÿ which can be proved using Jensen’s inequality on the sum. Applying the above inequality, arguments used in the proof of (14) and invoking (27), we have N 1 ´ q´1 E pnq 2 pn`1q 2 2 }fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}∆ W }K n“0 ” ÿ ı ` N´1 ˘ 1 1 1 2q´ ´1 2q´ E pnq 2q´ pnq 2q ď Cf,QN δtD }ΠDu }L2 `}ΠDu }L2 n“0 ÿ “ ‰ ď Cf,a,T,Q,u0,q, (30) pn`1q 2 r r where we have used the inequality Erp}∆ W }Kq s ď CQ,rpδtDq for all integer r ě 1, see [40, Corollary 1.1]. Proceeding as (17) and using (29), (27), we estimate the third term in the right hand side of (28): N 1 ´ q´1 E pnq pn`1q pnq 2 fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu L2 n“0 “` ÿ @ N 1 D ˘ ‰ ´ q´2 E pnq 2 pnq 2 2 ď C δtD}fpΠDu q}LpK,L2q}ΠDu }L2 n“0 ÿ “` N´1 ˘ ‰ 1 q´2 E pnq 2q´ pnq 2 2 ď C max }ΠDu }L2 δtDpF1}ΠDu }L2 ` F2q 0ďnďN´1 n“0 ÿ “ ` N´1 ˘ ‰ 1 q´1 1E pnq 2q 2 2q´ E pnq 2 2 ď max }ΠDu }L2 ` C δtD F1}ΠDu }L2 ` F2 4 0ďnďN n“0 “ ‰ “` ÿ ˘ 1 ‰ 1E pnq 2 2 E pnq 2q 2 2q´ ď max }ΠDu }L2 ` C F1T max }ΠDu }L2 ` C F2 T 4 0ďnďN 1ďnďN

ď Cf,a,T,“ Q,u0,q, ‰ “ ‰ NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 15 where we have used the Burkholder–Davis–Gundy inequality in the second line, a Young inequality in the fourth line, and (29) in the fifth line. Together with (28) and (30), this implies 1 E p2q´ r}∇Du} p sď Cf,a,T,Q,u0,q, L pΘT q which completes the proof of this lemma.

In order to estimate the time-translate of ΠDu, we will need the following relation. Lemma 3.2. Let u be a solution of the Algorithm 2.4. Then, for all ℓ Pt1,...,N ´ 1u, N´ℓ pn`ℓq pnq 2 pℓq E δtD }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 ď C p0q t . L f,T,Q,p,}ΠD u }L2 n“1 “ ÿ ‰ Proof. For any function φ P XD,0, we deduce from (6) that ℓ´1 pn`ℓq pnq pn`i`1q ∇ pn`i`1q ∇ ΠDu ´ ΠDu , ΠDφ L2 “´δtD apΠDu , Du q, Dφ Lp1 ,Lp i“0 ÿ @ D ℓ´1 @ D pn`iq pn`i`1q ` fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDφ L2 . (31) i“0 ÿ pn`ℓq pnq @ D Choosing φ “ δtDpu ´ u q and taking the sum over n from 1 to N ´ ℓ, we have N´ℓ pn`ℓq pnq 2 δtD }ΠDu ´ ΠDu }L2 n“1 ÿ N´ℓ ℓ´1 2 pn`i`1q ∇ pn`i`1q ∇ pn`ℓq pnq “´δtD apΠDu , Du q, Dpu ´ u q Lp1 ,Lp n“1 i“0 ÿ ÿ N´ℓ ℓ´1@ D pn`iq pn`i`1q pn`ℓq pnq ` δtD fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDu ´ ΠDu L2 n“1 i“0 ÿ ÿ @ D “: I1 ` I2. (32)

We now estimate the expectation of I1 by using (3), H¨older inequality, and Lemma 3.1. N´ℓ ℓ´1 E E 2 ∇ pn`i`1q p´1 ∇ pn`ℓq pnq rI1sď c2 δtD 1 ` | Du | , | Dpu ´ u q| L2 n“1 i“0 ” ÿ ÿ ı N´ℓ @ D pℓq pn`ℓq pnq ď Ct E δtD }∇Dpu ´ u q}L1 n“1 ÿ “ N´ℓ ‰ℓ´1 E 2 pn`ℓq pnq pn`i`1q p´1 ` C δtD }∇Dpu ´ u q}Lp }∇Du }Lp ” n“1 i“0 ı T ÿ ÿ pℓq ď Ct E }∇Duptq}L1 dt ż0 “ N´ℓ ‰ tpn`ℓq E pn`ℓq pnq p´1 ` C δtD }∇Dpu ´ u q}Lp }∇Duptq}Lp dt tpnq ” n“1 ż ı ÿ 1{p pℓq p ď Ct E }∇Du} p L pΘT q ” ı 16 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

pn`ℓq N´ℓ t 1{p1 pℓq 1{pE pn`ℓq pnq p ` Cpt q δtD }∇Dpu ´ u q}Lp }∇Duptq}Lp dt . pnq n“1 żt ” ÿ ´ ¯ ı(33) The second term in the right hand side is estimated as follows:

pn`ℓq N´ℓ t 1{p1 pℓq 1{pE pn`ℓq pnq p Cpt q δtD }∇Dpu ´ u q}Lp }∇Duptq}Lp dt pnq n“1 t ” ÿ ´ ż ¯ ı N´ℓ 1{p pℓq 1{pE pn`ℓq pnq p ď Cpt q δtD }∇Dpu ´ u q}Lp ” ´ n“1 ¯ ÿ pn`ℓq N´ℓ t 1{p1 p ˆ }∇Duptq}Lp dt pnq n“1 żt ´ ÿ1 ¯ ı pℓq 1{p 1{p p ď Cpt q pδtDℓq E }∇Du} p , (34) L pΘT q where the conclusion follows by noticing“ that, in the‰ last sum of integrals term in the second line, each interval rtpnq,tpn`1qs appears at most ℓ times. To estimate the expectation of I2, we use the Young inequality and write N´ℓ T pn`ℓq pnq

E E ½ rI2s“ δtD rtpnq,tpn`ℓqsptqfpΠDuptqqdW ptq, ΠDu ´ ΠDu L2 n“1 0 ÿ ” ż ı N´ℓ @ D 1 pn`ℓq pnq 2 ď δtD E }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 4 L n“1 ÿ “ ‰ N´ℓ T 2

` δtD E ½ pnq pn`ℓq ptqfpΠDuptqqdW ptq (35) rt ,t s 2 0 L n“1 ”› ż › ı ÿ › › By using the Itˆoisometry,› (5) and Lemma 3.1, we bound the› last term in the right hand side: T 2

E ½ pnq pn`ℓq ptqfpΠDuptqqdW ptq rt ,t s 2 0 L ”› ż T › ı › › 2

E ½ › ď pTrQq rtpnq,tpn`ℓqsptq}fpΠ›Duptqq}LpK,L2q dt 0 ” ż T ı 2

E ½ ď pTrQq rtpnq,tpn`ℓqsptqpF1}ΠDuptq}L2 ` F2q dt ż0 p”ℓqE pnq 2 ı ď pTrQqt F1 max }ΠDu }L2 ` F2 1ďnďN pℓq ď C “ p0q t . ‰ f,T,Q,p,}ΠD u }L2 Together with (35), (34), (33) and (32), this implies

N´ℓ pn`ℓq pnq 2 pℓq E δtD }ΠDu ´ ΠDu } 2 ď C p0q t , L f,T,Q,p,}ΠD u }L2 n“1 ” ÿ ı which completes the proof of the lemma.

Remark 3.3 (Uniform time steps). Lemma 3.2 is restricted to uniform time steps, and is the only reason why we chose such time steps in the scheme (Algorithm NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 17

2.4). Extending this lemma, and thus our convergence analysis, to non-uniform time steps remains an open question. Remark 3.4. The result of Lemma 3.2 will be used to obtain compactness-in-time of the approximate functions. The approach used here based on this estimate fills an apparent gap in [3, 12] where the result of [3, Lemma 4.4] ([12, Lemma 3.2]) is not sufficient for proving [3, Theorem 4.6] ([12, Lemma 4.1], respectively).

We can now estimate the time-translate of ΠDu. It follows from Lemmas 7.2 and 3.2, and estimate (76) that, for any ρ P p0,T q, T ´ρ E 2 }ΠDupt ` ρq´ ΠDuptq}L2 dt ď Cρ, (36) 0 ” ż ı and E 2 }ΠDu}Hβ p0,T ;L2q ď C, for any β P p0, 1{2q. (37) In the following lemma,“ we estimate‰ the dual norm of the time variation of the pnq N 2 iterates tΠDu un“0. The dual norm | ¨ |˚,D on ΠDpXD,0qĂ L is defined by: for all v P ΠDpXD,0q,

|v|˚,D :“ sup vpxq ΠDφpxqdx : φ P XD,0, }ΠDφ}L2 `}∇Dφ}Lp ď 1 . " żΩ * Lemma 3.5. For any q P N let r “ 2q and α “ mint1{2, 1{pu. Then, for all ℓ “ 1,...,N ´ 1, pn`ℓq pnq r pℓq αr E |ΠDu ´ ΠDu | ď C p0q pt q . (38) ˚,D f,T,Q,p,q,}ΠD u }L2 As a consequence,“ for any t,s Pr0,T s ‰ r αr E |ΠDuptq´ ΠDupsq| ď C p0q |t ´ s|` δtD . (39) ˚,D f,T,Q,p,q,}ΠD u }L2 Proof. It“ follows from (31) that‰ ` ˘ E pn`ℓq pnq r |ΠDu ´ ΠDu |˚,D “ ℓ´1 ‰ r r´1 r E pn`i`1q ∇ pn`i`1q ∇ ď 2 δtD sup apΠDu , Du q, Dφ Lp1 ,Lp A φP i“0 ”´ ÿ @ D ¯ ı ℓ´1 r r´1E pn`iq pn`i`1q ` 2 sup fpΠDu q∆ W, ΠDφ L2 A φP i“0 ”´ ÿ @ D ¯ ı “: I1 ` I2, (40) where we have set A :“ tφ P XD,0, }ΠDφ}L2 `}∇Dφ}Lp ď 1u. We estimate the first term I1 by using (3) and Lemma 3.1.

ℓ´1 r r E ∇ pn`i`1q p´1 ∇ I1 ď CδtD sup 1 ` | Du | , | Dφ| L2 A φP i“0 ” ´ ÿ @ D ¯ ı ℓ´1 r pℓq rE r r E r pn`i`1q p´1 ď Cpt q sup }∇Dφ}L1 ` CδtD sup }∇Dφ}Lp }∇Du }Lp φPA φPA ” i“0 ¯ ı “ ‰ pn`ℓq `ÿ t r{p1 pℓq r pℓq r{pE p ď Cpt q ` Cpt q }∇Duptq}Lp dt pnq żt pℓq r pℓq r{p ”´ pp´1qr ¯ ı ď Cpt q ` Cpt q E }∇Du} p L pΘT q “ ‰ 18 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

1 pℓq r pℓq r{p pr 1{p pℓq r{p ď Cpt q ` Cpt q E }∇Du} p ď Cpt q . (41) L pΘT q

The last term I2 is estimated` by“ using the Burkholder–Davis–Gundy‰˘ inequality, (5) and Lemma 3.1. T r

E ½ I2 ď C } rtpnq,tpn`ℓqsptqfpΠDuptqqdW ptq}L2 ż0 “ T ‰ r{2 2

E ½ ď C rtpnq,tpn`ℓqsptqpF1}ΠDuptq}L2 ` F2q dt 0 ”´ ż ¯ ı pℓq r{2E r{2 pnq r r{2 pℓq r{2 ď Cpt q F1 max }ΠDu }L2 ` F2 ď Cpt q . (42) 1ďnďN The estimate (38) follows from“ (40)–(42). The bound (39)‰ follows by noticing that, if t ă s Pr0,T s and n ď r are such that t P ptpnq,tpn`1qs and s P ptprq,tpr`1qs, then pr´nq t ď |s ´ t|` δtD. For any t Pr0,T s, there exists n Pt0, ¨ ¨ ¨ ,N ´ 1u such that t P ptpnq,tpn`1qs. Using this notation, we define n pnq piq pi`1q MDptq :“ MD :“ fpΠDu q∆ W. i“0 ÿ piq pi`1q The term fpΠDu q∆ W corresponds to the noise term added at each time step of the GS. The following lemma shows that MD is bounded in various norms. Lemma 3.6. For any β P p0, 1{2q, for any r “ 2q with q P N, there exists C ě 0 such that E 2 E r }MD}Hβ p0,T ;L2q ď C and }MD}L8p0,T ;L2q ď C. (43) Proof. It follows,“ in a similar‰ way as (42), that“ ‰ E pn`ℓq pnq r pℓq r{2 }MD ´ MD }L2 ď Cpt q . (44) Together with Lemma 7.2,“ this implies the‰ first estimate. The second estimate E r follows from the uniform bound of }ΠDu}L8p0,T ;L2q and the Burkholder–Davis– Gundy. “ ‰

4. Tightness and construction of new probability space and processes u , ∇ u ,M , W In this section, we show that the sequence ΠDm m Dm m Dm mPN is tight. To prove the tightness of MDm , we introduce the following space. For any r ě 2, let us consider ` ˘( r 2 2 L p0,T ; Lwq :“ the space of r-integrable functions v : r0,T s Ñ L , endowed with the weakest topology such that, for all φ P L2, the mapping r 2 r R 2 v P L p0,T ; Lwq ÞÑ L p0,T ; qQxvp¨q, φyL is continuous.

r 2 2 In particular, vn Ñ v in L p0,T ; Lwq if and only if for all φ P L : r xvnp¨q, φyL2 Ñxvp¨q, φyL2 in L p0,T ; Rq. NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 19

N 8 2 Let tφi : i P uĂ Cc pΘq be a dense countable subset in L and equip the ball B 2 of radius CB in L with the following metric

minp1, |xv ´ w, φiyL2 |q d 2 pv, wq“ for v, w P B. Lw 2i iPN ÿ It is easily checked that bounded sets in L8p0,T ; L2q are metrisable for the topology r 2 of L p0,T ; Lwq, with metric 1{r T r r 2 2 dL pLwqpv, wq :“ dLw pvpsq, wpsqq ds . ˜ż0 ¸ Nm`1 D u X To prove the tightness of Π m m, we define the following norm on Dm : for any v XNm`1 m P Dm

∇ p β 2 }vm}Dm :“} Dm vm}L pΘT q `}ΠDm vm}H p0,T,L q. By Lemma 3.1 and Estimate (37), we have E u q C, q ,p . } m}Dm ď with “ minp2 q

Since the norm }¨}Dm changes“ with‰ m, we need to use Lemma 7.4 to establish the tightness of tΠDm umumPN. We now define the space E E p p p p d r 2 2 :“ L p0,T ; L qˆ L p0,T ; L q w ˆ L p0,T ; Lwqˆ Cpr0,T s; L q, p p p p where L p0,T ; L q w is the` space L p0,T˘ ; L q endowed with the weak topology. The sequence ΠD u , ∇D u ,MD , W is proved to be tight in the fol- ` ˘m m m m m mPN lowing lemma. ` ˘( Lemma 4.1. u , ∇ u ,M , W E The measures of law of ΠDm m Dm m Dm nPN on are tight. ` ˘( Proof. Let us first establish a (deterministic) compactness result. Consider, for a fixed constant C, the sets

KmpCq :“ v P ΠDm XDm,0 : Dwm P XDm,0 satisfying ΠDm wm “ v, }wm}Dm ď C T ´ρ 2 and }vpt ` ρq´ vptq}L2 dt ď Cρ, @ρ P p0,T q ż0 and define (

8 2 KpCq“ KmpCq Xtv P L p0,T ; L q : }v}L8p0,T ;L2q ď Cu. ˜mPN ¸ ď 1 1 Each KmpCq is relatively compact in L p0,T ; L q since it is bounded in the finite- dimensional space ΠDm XDm,0. Moreover, by the compactness of pDmqmPN (Def- inition 2.8), [26, Proposition C.5] shows that any sequence tvmumPN satisfying 1 1 vm P KmpCq for any m P N is relatively compact in L p0,T ; L q. Hence, Lemma 7.4 K 1 1 shows that mPN KmpCq, and thus pCq is relatively compact in L p0,T ; L q. The bound on }wm}Dm stated in KmpCq and the discrete Sobolev embeddings (Defini- Ť ˚ tion 2.11) ensure that KpCq is bounded in Lpp0,T ; Lp q for p˚ ą p. Together with the bound in L8p0,T ; L2q and standard interpolation results, this proves that KpCq is bounded in Lp¯p0,T ; Lp¯q for somep ¯ ą p. Using again interpolation inequality, 20 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE this proves that the relative compactness of KpCq not only holds in L1p0,T ; L1q, but also in Lpp0,T ; Lpq. K This compactness of pCq, Lemma 7.3 and the bounds on tΠDm umumPN, t∇Dm umumPN and tMDm umPN stated in Lemma 3.1, (36), (37) and Lemma 3.6 imply the tightness u , ∇ u ,M , W E law of ΠDm m Dm m Dm mPN in . By using ` Jakubowski’s version of the˘( Skorohod theorem [41, Theorem 2], we show u , ∇ u ,M , W the almost sure convergence of ΠDm m Dm m Dm mPN, up to a change of probability space, in the following lemma. ` ˘( Lemma 4.2. There exists a new probability space pΩ, F, F, Pq, a sequence of ran- u , M , W u, M, W dom variables m m m mPN and random variables p q on this space such that ` ˘ N ‚ um P XDrm,0 for each m P ,

‚ ΠDm um, ∇Dm um, M m, W m takes its values in space E with the same laws, for each m P N, as ΠD u , ∇D u ,MD , W , `r m m˘ m m m ‚ pu, M, W q takes its values in Lpp0,T ; W 1,ppΘqqˆLrp0,T ; L2 qˆCpr0,T s; L2q, r r ` 0 ˘ w ‚ up to a subsequence as m Ñ8, p p ΠDm um Ñ u a.s. in L p0,T ; L q, (45) ∇ ∇ p p d Dm um Ñ u a.s. in L p0,T ; L q w, (46) r r 2 M m Ñ M a.s. in L` p0,T ; Lwq, ˘ (47) r 2 W m Ñ W a.s. in Cpr0,T s; L q, (48)

‚ um is a solution to the gradient scheme (Algorithm 2.4 with D “ Dm) in which W is replaced by W m. Furthermore,r up to a subsequence as m Ñ 8, for almost all t,s P p0,T q, for all r ě 1, p ΠDm umptq´ ΠDm umpsq Ñ uptq´ upsq in L pΩ ˆ Θq, (49) r 2 M mptq´ M mpsq Ñ Mptq´ Mpsq in L pΩ; Lwq. (50) r r Proof. By using Jakubowski’s version of the Skorohod theorem [41, Theorem 2], we find a new probability space pΩ, F, F, Pq, a sequence of random variables on this space um, zm, M m, W m taking its values in space E with the same laws, for each m P N, as ΠD u , ∇D u ,MD , W , and random variables pu, z, M, W q in E, ` m m m˘ m m so that up to a subsequence as m Ñ8, ` ˘ p p um Ñ u a.s. in L p0,T ; L q, (51) p p d zm Ñ z a.s. in L p0,T ; L q w, (52) and the convergences (47), (48) hold. ` ˘

Since pum, zmq has the same law as pΠDm um, ∇Dm umq, there exists um P XDm,0 such that ∇ um “ ΠDm um, zm “ Dm um r and um is a solution to the gradient scheme (Algorithm 2.4 with D “ Dm) in which

W is replaced by W m. More precisely,r for any n Pt0, ¨r ¨ ¨ ,Nm ´ 1u and φ P XDm,0, P um satisfies,r a.s., 1 pn` 2 q pn`1q pn`1q d um, ΠD φ 2 ` δtD apΠD u , ∇D u q, ∇D φ 1 r Dm m L m m m m m Lp ,Lp @ D @ D r r r NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 21

pnq pn`1q “ fpΠDm um q∆ W m, ΠDm φ L2 . (53) Furthermore, applying [26, Lemma 4.8]@ and the a.s. convergences (51)D and (52), the limit-conformity of pDmqmPN ensures that r ∇ ∇ ∇ p d p 1,p z “ u , Dm um Ñ u a.s. in L pΘT q w, and u P L p0,T ; W0 pΘqq. (54) From (51)–(54) we obtain the first part` of the˘ lemma including (45) and (46). We now prove (49)r and (50) as the second part of the lemma. We obtain, from (8)– (9), the coercivity of pDmqmPN and (43), for any q ě 1 E q 2 p sup }ΠD um} p `}ΠD um} 8 2 `}∇D um} p m L pΘT q m L p0,T ;L q m L pΘT q mPN “ E q ‰ ` sup }M m}L8p0,T ;L2q ď C. (55) r mPN r r From (45), (47) and (55), we obtain the following result by applying the Vitali theorem p ΠDm um Ñ u in L pΩ ˆ p0,T qˆ Θq as m Ñ8, (56) r 2 M m Ñ M in L pΩ ˆ p0,T q; Lwq as m Ñ8. (57) r Hence, up to a subsequence, one has (49) for almost all t,s P p0,T q. The conver- gence (50) can be obtained from (57) using the classical a.e. extraction in Lrp0,T q 2 r P on the function t ÞÑ Ω dLw pM mptq´ Mptq, 0q d . The continuity of theş stochastic processes u and M is showed in the following lemma. 2 Lemma 4.3. The stochastic processes u and M have continuous versions in Cpr0,T s,Lwq and Cpr0,T s,L2q, respectively. Proof. The continuity of u will be proved using Kolmogorov’s test [19, Theorem N 8 2 3.3]. Let tψi : i P u Ă Cc pΘqzt0u be a dense countable subset in L and define the metric |xv ´ w, φiyL2 | 2 d 2 pv, wq“ for v, w P L , Lw 2i iPN ÿ 1 with φi :“ ψi{p}ψi}pLp `}∇ψi}Lp q, where we recall that p “ maxt2,p u. This metric 2 defines the weak topologyp of L on its closed balls, which are compact and thus complete for this topology. To estimate the continuity ofp u, we start by estimating 2 1 1 dLw ΠDm umpsq, ΠDm umps q for 0 ď s ď s ď T . 1,p p We first define the interpolator PD : W pΘqX L Ñ XD by ` ˘ m 0 m,0 p PD φ :“ argmin }ΠD w ´ φ} p `}p ∇D w ´ ∇φ} p . (58) m wPXDm,0 m L m L We have, for r ě 1, ` p ˘ r E 1 ΠDm umps , xq´ ΠDm umps, xq φipxqdx „ˇ żΘ ˆ ˙ ˇ  ˇ ˇ r ˇ r´1E r 1 r ˇ ď ˇ2 ΠDm umps , xq´ ΠDm umps, xq Πˇ Dm PDm φipxqdx „ˇ żΘ ˆ ˙ ˇ  ˇ ˇ r r´1Eˇ r 1 r ˇ ` 2 ˇ ΠDm umps , xq´ ΠDm umps, xq ΠDm PDm φipxˇq´ φipxq dx „ˇ żΘ ˆ ˙ˆ ˙ ˇ  ˇ r ˇ r´1 1 r E ˇ r r 2 ∇ ˇ p ď 2 ΠˇDm umps , xq´ ΠDm umps, xq p}ΠDm PDm φi}L `} Dm PDm φi}ˇL q „ˇ ˇ˚,D ˇ ˇ ˇ ˇ ˇ r r ˇ 22 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

r´1 r r E 2 ` 2 }ΠDm um}L8p0,T ;L2q }ΠDm PDm φi ´ φi}L (59) „  It follows from (58)r and }φi}Lp `}∇φi}Lp ď C that p 2 }ΠDm PDm φi ´ φi}L ď CSDm pφiqď C, and

2 p }ΠDm PDm φi}L `}∇Dm PDm φi}L ď C.

Note that the bound SDm pφiq ď 1 is obtained selecting w “ 0 in the definition of this quantity. We then estimate the right hand side of (59) using Lemmas 3.1 and 3.5 to obtain r E 1 ΠDm umps , xq´ ΠDm umps, xq φipxqdx „ˇ żΩ ˆ ˙ ˇ  ˇ 1 ˇ αr ˇ ď C |s ´ s|` δtDmˇ ` CSDm pφiq ˇ r r ˇ C s1 s αr Cδtαr CS φ . ď `| ´ | ` D˘ m ` Dm p iq

2 Recalling the definition of dLw and using Jensen’s inequality to write r r r p |xv ´ w, φiyL2 | |xv ´ w, φiyL2 | d 2 pu, vq “ ď , Lw 2i 2i ˜iPN ¸ iPN ÿ ÿ we infer p αr Cδt SD φ 1 r 1 αr Dm ` m p iq E d 2 ΠD u psq, ΠD u ps q ď C|s ´ s| ` C . Lw m m m m 2i „  iPN ` ˘ ÿ p N Since δtDm Ñ 0r and SDm pφriq Ñ 0 for all i P , while being uniformly bounded as seen above, we can apply the dominated convergence theorem on the last sum to see that it tends to 0 as m Ñ 8. Together with (49) and Fatou’s lemma, this implies, for almost any s,s1,

r αr E 2 1 1 dLw upsq, ups q ď C|s ´ s| . „  ` ˘ By choosing r such that αrpą 1, we obtain the desired continuity of u by applying the Kolmogorov test. We now prove the continuity of M. It follows from (44) and the fact that M m has the same law as Mm that 1 r 1 r{2 E 2 }M mps q´ M mpsq}L ď Cp|s ´ s|` δtDm q , (60) r r and Er}M } “ 2 s ď C, which implies‰ }M } ď C. Esti- m L8p0,T ;L q m L8p0,T ;LrpΩ;L2qq mate (60) and the discontinuous Ascoli-Arzel`atheorem [26, Theorem C.11] imply r 2 M m Ñ M uniformly on r0,T s in pL pΩ; L qqw, as m Ñ8, r 2 and M P C r0,T s; pL pΩ; L qqw . It follows from this convergence, (60), the weak lower semicontinuity of norms and Fatou’s lemma that ` ˘ E 1 r 1 r{2 }Mps q´ Mpsq}L2 ď C|s ´ s| . The continuity of M follows“ immediately‰ by choosing r ą 3 and applying the Kolmogorov test. NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 23

5. Identification of the limit In this section, we first find a representation of the martingale part M. Since M is continuous from r0,T s to L2, the representation theorem in [19, Theorem 8.2] can be used. We will check conditions of [19, Theorem 8.2] in the following lemma. Lemma 5.1. The process t Pr0,T s ÞÑ Mpt,ωqP L2 is a square integrable continu- ous martingale, with quadratic variation defined for all a,b P L2 by t 1{2 ˚ 1{2 ˚ xxMptqyypa,bq“ x fpuqQ paq, fpuqQ pbqyK ds, (61) ż0 for any t ě 0. ` ˘ ` ˘

Proof. It follows from the fact that MDm is piecewise constant and the same laws that M m is piecewise constant for any m P N. Furthermore, for all t Pr0,T s and P a.e., M m satisfies

piq pi`1q M mptq“ fpΠDm um q∆ W m. 0ďi δtD ăt ÿm Since um is a solution to the gradient scheme (Algorithmr 2.4 with D “ Dm), um is adapted to F r iδtDm :“ σtW mpk δtDm q, k “ 1, ¨ ¨ ¨ ,iu, r piq and the process M m :“ M mpi δtDm q defines a martingale with respect to this filtration. In particular, we have the following identity pjq piq E 2 2 xa, M m yL ´xa, M m yL ψ W mpδtDm q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W mpi δtDm q “ 0 (62) 2 i for all 0 ď“` i ď j ď Nm and any bounded˘ ` continuous function ψ˘‰: pL q Ñ R. Furthermore, we obtain

pjq pjq piq piq E 2 2 2 2 xa, M m yL xb, M m yL ´xa, M m yL xb, M m yL „ˆ pkq Q1{2 ˚ pkq Q1{2 ˚ ´ δtDm fpΠDm um q paq, fpΠDm um q pbq K i`1ďkďj ˙ ÿ @` ˘ ` ˘ D r r ψ W mpδtDm q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W mpi δtDm q “ 0. (63)  ` ˘ Proof that M is a martingale: We have to show that for almost all 0 ď s ď t ď T , all K P N, any bounded continuous function φ defined on pL2qK , and for any choice of times 0 ď s1 ă s2 㨨¨ă sK ď s, the following relation holds

E xa, MptqyL2 ´xa, MpsqyL2 φ W ps1q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W psK q “ 0. (64) Let txu denote“` the floor of x for any x ě 0.˘ ` For all 0 ď i ď K we˘‰ have

si δtDm Ñ si as m Ñ8. δtDm X \ It follows from (48) and the continuity of φ that

s1 sK φ W p δtD q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W p δtD q Ñ φ W ps q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W ps q (65) δt m δt m 1 K ˆ Dm Dm ˙ X \ X \ ` ˘ 24 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

P 2 K N as m Ñ 8, -a.s. in pL q . For any m P and δtDm ą 0 there exist l1,l2 P pl1q pl1`1q pl2q pl2`1q t0,...,Nm ´ 1u such that s P pt ,t s and t P pt ,t s. From (62) we obtain that

E 2 2 xa, M mptqyL ´xa, M mpsqyL ψ W mpδtDm q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W mpl1 δtDm q “ 0, (66)

2 l1 sK for any“` bounded continuous function˘ψ `defined on pL q . Since t ˘‰u ď l1, we can δtDm choose ψ in (66) such that

s1 sK ψ W pδtD q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W pl δtD q “ φ W p δtD q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W p δtD q . m m m 1 m m δt m m δt m ˆ Dm Dm ˙ We` obtain (64) by taking limit of˘ (66) as m Xtends\ to infinity and usingX the\ conver- gences (50) and (65). Proof of (61): From the definition of the quadratic variation [19, page 75], in order to prove (61), we have to show that

E xa, MptqyL2 xb, MptqyL2 ´xa, MpsqyL2 xb, MpsqyL2 „ˆ t Q1{2 ˚ Q1{2 ˚ ´ fpuq paq, fpuq pbq K φ W ps1q, ¨ ¨ ¨ , W psK q “ 0. (67) żs ˙  The above@` identity can˘ be obtained` by˘ usingD the` same arguments as˘ in the proof of (64) with the continuity of f, (56) and (63). The continuity and square integrability of M follows from Lemma 4.3 and (55).

We now apply the continuous martingale representation [19, Theorem 8.2]. We have showed that the limit process M satisfies its hypotheses. Hence, there exists an enlarged probability space pΩ, F, Pq, with Ω Ă Ω and a Q-Wiener process W defined on pΩ, F, Pq such that M, u can be extended to random variables on this space and, for every t ě 0, r r r r Ă r r r t Mpt, ¨q “ fpuqps, ¨qdW psq. (68) ż0 We are ready to prove the main theorem. Ă Proof of Theorem 2.16. pkq pk`1q For any t Pr0,T s, there exists k Pt0, ¨ ¨ ¨ ,Nm ´ 1u such that t P pt ,t s. For 1,p p any ψ P W0 pΘqX L pΘq, we take the sum of (53) from n “ 0 to n “ k with test P function φ :“ PDm ψ (recallp the definition (58) of PDm ) to obtain, a.s., p0q ΠDm umptq, ΠDm PDm ψ L2 ´ ΠDm u , ΠDm PDm ψ L2 @ D @k D pn`1q ∇ pn`1q ∇ r ` δtD apΠDm um , Dm um q, Dm PDm ψ L2 n“0 ÿ @ D “ M mptq, ΠDm PrDm ψ L2 . r (69) p By consistency of pDmqmPN (Definition@ 2.6) we haveD ΠDm PDm ψ Ñ ψ in L . Hence, Equations (49) and (50) show that, for almost every t, p p ΠDm umptq, ΠDm PDm ψ L2 Ñ uptq, ψ L2 in L pΩq r @ M mptq, ΠDm PDm ψDL2 Ñ @Mptq, ψD L2 in L pΩq. (70) r @ D @ D NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 25

Moreover, we also have p0q ΠDm u , ΠDm PDm ψ L2 Ñ u0, ψ L2 . (71) It remains to prove the@ convergence of theD last term@ in theD left hand side of (69). We first note that k pn`1q ∇ pn`1q ∇ δtD apΠDm um , Dm um q, Dm PDm ψ L2 n“0 ÿ @ t D r r∇ ∇ “ apΠDm umpsq, Dm umpsqq, Dm PDm ψ Lp1 ,Lp ds ż0 @rt{δtDm sδtDm D r r ∇ ∇ ` apΠDm umpsq, Dm umpsqq, Dm PDm ψ Lp1 ,Lp ds. (72) żt ∇ ∇ @ p D Since Dm PDm ψ Ñ ψ in L , ther a.s. convergencesr (45) and (46) enable us to apply the standard Minty argument (as in, e.g., [26, Proof of Theorem 5.19 (Step 3)]) to get the a.s. convergence of the first term in the right hand side of (72): for any t Pr0,T s, P-a.s., t ∇ ∇ apΠDm umpsq, Dm umpsqq, Dm PDm ψ Lp1 ,Lp ds ż0 @ t D r r ∇ ∇ Ñ apupsq, upsqq, ψ Lp1 ,Lp ds. (73) ż0 The expectation of the last term in the right@ hand side of (72)D tends to zero as m Ñ8. Indeed, by using (3), H¨older inequality and (55) we obtain

rt{δtDm sδtDm E ∇ ∇ apΠDm umpsq, Dm umpsqq, Dm PDm ψ Lp1 ,Lp ds żt “ˇ @ rt{δtDm sδtDm D ˇ‰ ˇ E r r pk`1q p´1 ˇ ď C p1 ` |∇Dm um | q|∇Dm PDm ψ| dx ds żt żΘ ď CδtD“ }∇D PD ψ} 1 ‰ m m m L r rt{δtDm sδtDm pk`1q p´1 E ∇ ∇ p ` C } Dm um }Lp } Dm PDm ψ}L ds żt ď CδtD “ ‰ m r rt{δtDm sδtDm rt{δtDm sδtDm E ∇ pk`1q p pp´1q{p 1{p ` C } Dm um }Lp ds ds żt żt “` rt{δtDm sδtDm ˘ ` ˘ ‰ 1{pE r ∇ pk`1q p pp´1q{p ď CδtDm ` CpδtDm q } Dm um }Lp ds żt “ T ‰ 1{pE ∇ p r pp´1q{p ď CδtDm ` CpδtDm q } Dm umpsq}Lp ds ż0 1{p ď CpδtD ` pδtD q q, “ ‰ m m r which implies

rt{δtDm sδtDm ∇ ∇ 1 apΠDm umpsq, Dm umpsqq, Dm PDm ψ Lp1 ,Lp ds Ñ 0 in L pΩq żt @ D (74) r r 26 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

Using (70)–(74) and (68), we pass to the limit in (69) to see that u satisfies (4) in Definition 2.13, with W instead of W .

Ă 6. Conclusion We presented a numerical analysis framework for transient p-Laplace-like equations driven by a stochastic multiplicative noise. This framework, based on the Gradient Discretisation Method, covers many different numerical schemes, and in particu- lar schemes (such as finite volume methods, discontinuous Galerkin methods, or polytopal hybrid methods) that haven’t been widely studied yet in the context of stochastic PDEs. We proved the convergence of the discretisation towards a weak martingale solution by means of compactness arguments, which mix the Skohorod theorems with a Discrete Functional Analysis approach (compactness results, estab- lished in the deterministic setting, for fully discrete and non-conforming schemes). The GDM has been analysed, in the deterministic setting, for a range of non-linear models, including miscible flows in porous media [30], Stokes and Navier–Stokes equations [25, 31], and degenerate parabolic equations [24]. Since our approach is based on the generic tools developed in the GDM, it has the potential to be extended to stochastic versions of such models, and possibly to others such as the p-Laplace Navier–Stokes model.

7. Appendix

Lemma 7.1. Let α ą 0, q ą 0 and pE, dEq be a metric space. Assume that pnq g : r0,T s Ñ E is piecewise constant with respect to the partition pt qn“0,...,N and that, for all ℓ “ 1,...,N ´ 1, denoting by gpnq the constant value of g on ptpnq,tpn`1qs, N´ℓ pn`ℓq pnq q pℓq α δtD dEpg ,g q ď Cpt q . (75) n“1 ÿ 1 Then, there exists a constant C not depending on g or δtD such that T ´ρ q 1 dEpgpt ` ρq,gptqq dt ď C σpρ, δtDq, ż0 for any ρ Pr0,T s, where ρα if α P p0, 1s σ ρ, δt p Dq“ α α´1 #ρ ` pδtDq ρ if α ą 1.

Proof. (i) ρ P p0, δtDs. For any t P r0,T ´ ρs, there exists n P t1, ¨ ¨ ¨ ,Nu such that t P ptpn´1q,tpnqs. If t P ptpn´1q,tpnq ´ ρs, then t ` ρ P ptpn´1q,tpnqs and gpt ` ρq “ gptq “ gpnq, so that pnq pnq pnq pn`1q pnq dEpgpt`ρq,gptqq “ 0. If t P pt ´ρ,t s, then t`ρ P pt ,t s and gptq“ g , pn`1q pn`1q pnq gpt`ρq“ g , so that dEpgpt`ρq,gptqq “ dE pg ,g q. Therefore, from (75) with ℓ “ 1 we have T ´ρ N´1 q pn`1q pnq q p1q α ´1 α´1 dEpgpt ` ρq,gptqq dt “ ρ dEpg ,g q ď ρCpt q δtD “ CρδtD 0 n“1 ż ÿ Cρα if α P p0, 1s ď α´1 #CδtD ρ if α ą 1. NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 27

α´1 1´α α Above, in the case α ď 1, we have concluded by writing ρδtD “ pρ{δtDq ρ ď α ρ , since ρ ď δtD. (ii) ρ ą δtD. In this case, we can find 1 ď ℓ ď N ´ 1 and ǫ P p0, 1q such that ρ “ δtDpℓ ` ǫq. For any t P r0,T ´ ρs, there exists n P t1, ¨ ¨ ¨ ,N ´ ℓu such that t P ptpn´1q,tpnqs. pn´1q pnq pn´1q pnq pn´1`ℓq pn`ℓq If t P pt ,t ´ δtDǫs, then t ` δtDǫ P pt ,t s and t ` ρ P pt ,t s. pnq pnq pnq pn`1q pn`ℓq pn`ℓ`1q If t P pt ´ δtDǫ,t s, then t ` δtDǫ P pt ,t s and t ` ρ P pt ,t s. Therefore, from (75) we have

pnq T ´ρ N´ℓ´1 t ´δtD ǫ q pn`ℓq pnq q dEpgpt ` ρq,gptqq dt “ dEpg ,g q dt pn´1q 0 n“1 t ż ÿ ż tpnq“ pn`ℓ`1q pnq q ` dEpg ,g q dt pnq żt ´δtDǫ pN´ℓq t ´δtDǫ ‰ pNq pN´ℓq q ` dEpg ,g q dt pN´ℓ´1q żt ´1 pℓq α ´1 pℓ`1q α ď δtDp1 ´ ǫqCδtD pt q ` δtDǫCδtD pt q ď Cp1 ` 2αqptpℓqqα ď Cp1 ` 2αqρα, which concludes the proof of this lemma. The following lemma is a consequence of Lemma 7.1. Lemma 7.2. Let 0 ă α ď 1, q ą 0 and 0 ă β ă α{q. Let g : r0,T s Ñ E be pnq pnq piecewise constant with respect to the partition pt qn“0,...,N , and let g be its constant value on ptpnq,tpn`1qs. Assume that, for all ℓ “ 1,...,N ´ 1, N´ℓ E pn`ℓq pnq q pℓq α δtD }g ´ g }L2 ď Cpt q . ” n“1 ı ÿ 1 Then, there exists a constant C not depending on g neither on δtD such that E q 1 }g}W β,qpr0,T s;L2q ď C . Proof. Using the same arguments“ as in Lemma‰ 7.1 and adding the expectation on estimates, we also obtain from the assumption on g that T ´ρ E q α }gpt ` ρq´ gptq}L2 dt ď Cρ . (76) 0 ” ż ı This implies that T T ´ρ q q dρ E }g} 2 “ E }gps ` ρq´ gpsq} 2 ds W β,qpr0,T s;L q L ρ1`βq ż0 ż0 “ ‰ ” T ` ˘ ı ď C ρα´βq´1dρ “ CT α´βq. ż0

Lemma 7.3. Let β P p0, 1q. For any r ě 1, the following embedding is compact: β 2 8 2 c r 2 H p0,T ; L qX L p0,T ; L q ãÑ L p0,T ; Lwq r 2 where the space L p0,T ; Lwq and its topology are defined in Section 4. 28 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

β 2 8 2 Proof. For any bounded sequence twmumPN in H p0,T ; L qX L p0,T ; L q, there exists w P Hβp0,T ; L2qX L8p0,T ; L2q such that β 2 2 2 wm Ñ w weakly in H p0,T ; L qX L p0,T ; L q up to a subsequence. Let vm “ wm ´ w. It is sufficient to prove that tvmumPN r 2 converges to zero in L p0,T ; Lwq. N η For any L P , let η :“ T {L. We define the piecewise constant function vm by 1 pℓ`1qη vη :“ v psq ds m rℓη,pℓ`1qηq η m żℓη ˇ β 2 We note that tvmumPN isˇ bounded in H p0,T ; L q. By using the Minkowski’s integral inequality, we deduce 2 L´1 pℓ`1qη pℓ`1qη η 2 1 }v ´ v } 2 2 “ v ps, xq´ v pt, xq ds dx dt m m L p0,T ;L q η m m ℓ“0 ℓη Θ ˜ ℓη ¸ ÿ ż ż ż L´1 pℓ`1qη pℓ`1qη 2 ď }vmpsq´ vmptq}L2 ds dt ℓ“0 ℓη ℓη ÿ ż ż L´1 pℓ`1qη pℓ`1qη 2 }vmpsq´ vmptq} 2 ď T η2β L ds dt |t ´ s|2β`1 ℓ“0 żℓη żℓη 2β ÿ 2 2β ď T η }vm}Hβ p0,T ;L2q ď Cη . η 8 2 Using the boundedness of vm ´ vm in L p0,T ; L q and an interpolation inequality of Lrp0,T q between L8p0,T q and L2p0,T q, we infer

2β η r }vm ´ vm}Lrp0,T ;L2q ď Cη . (77) On the other side, T L´1 η r η r η r d r 2 v , d 2 v s , ds η d 2 v , , L pLwqp m 0q “ Lw p mp q 0q “ Lw p m rℓη,pℓ`1qηq 0q (78) 0 ℓ“0 ż ÿ 2 ˇ 2 2 and, for any 0 ď ℓ ď L ´ 1 and φ P L , by weak convergenceˇ of vm in L p0,T ; L q, T η 1

v pxq φpxq dx “ v pt, xq½ ptqφpxq dt dx Ñ 0 m rℓη,pℓ`1qηq η m rℓη,pℓ`1qηq żΘ ż0 żΘ ˇ ˇ as m tendsˇ to infinity. Plugged into (78), this implies,ˇ for all η, η r 2 dL pLwqpvm, 0q Ñ 0 as m Ñ8. (79) Using (77), we obtain 2 η η β η r 2 r 2 r 2 r r 2 dL pLwqpvm, 0qď dL pLwqpvm, vmq` dL pLwqpvm, 0qď Cη ` dL pLwqpvm, 0q. We first take the superior limit as m tends to infinity of the above inequality,

r 2 use (79) and then let η tend to zero to obtain dL pLwqpvm, 0q Ñ 0 as m Ñ8, which completes the proof.

Lemma 7.4. Let A be a complete metric space and tKmumPN be a sequence of compact sets in A. Then mPN Km is relatively compact in A if and only if, for any sequence txmumPN such that xm P Km for all m, the set txm : m P Nu is relatively compact in A. Ť NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 29

N Proof. Let Z :“ mPN Km. If Z is relatively compact in A, then txm : m P u is also relatively compact in A since it is included in Z. We now prove the converse statement, by way ofŤ contradiction. Let ε ą 0 and assume that Z is not covered by a finite number of balls of radius ε. K K B Since each m is compact it has a finite covering m Ă iPIm i by balls of radius

ε. Let m1 “ 1 and take xm1 P Km1 . By assumption, Z is not covered by iPI1 Bi Y N Ť Bpx1,εq so there is m2 P and xm2 P Km2 such that xm2 R Bi Y Bpxm1 ,εq; iPI1 Ť in particular, xm2 R Km1 so m2 ą m1 “ 1 and dpxm1 , xm2 q ě ε. Still using the Z m2 B B x ,ε B x ,ε Ť m N assumption Ć ℓ“1 iPIℓ i Y p m1 qY p m2 q so we can find 3 P and m2 x 3 P K 3 such that x 3 R B Y Bpx 1 ,εqY Bpx 2 ,εq; since each K , m m m ℓ“1 iPIℓ i m m ℓ Ť Ť m2 for ℓ “ 1,...,m2, is contained in Bi, we infer that xm3 R Kℓ, and thus Ť ŤiPIℓ ℓ“1 that m3 ą m2; additionally, dpxm1 , xm3 qě ε and dpxm2 , xm3 qě ε. Ť Ť Continuing the construction, we design a strictly increasing sequence pmkqkPN of N natural numbers and a sequence pxmk qkPN such that xmk P Kmk for all k P , and

dpxmk , xmj qě ε @k ­“ j. (80)

The sequence pxmk qkPN is incomplete, but can easily be completed into a sequence N pxmqmPN with xm P Km for all m P . The assumption then tell us that txmk : k P NuĂtxm : m P Nu is relatively compact. We should then be able to extract from pxmk qkPN a converging subsequence, which contradicts the property (80) and completes the proof. Acknowledgement: this research was supported by the Australian Government through the Australian Research Council’s Discovery Projects funding schemes (project number DP170100605 and DP160101755).

References

[1] C. Atkinson and C. W. Jones. Similarity solutions in some non-linear diffusion problems and in boundary-layer flow of a pseudo-plastic fluid. The Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, 27(2):193–211, 05 1974. [2] B. Ayuso de Dios, K. Lipnikov, and G. Manzini. The nonconforming virtual element method. ESAIM: Math. Model Numer. Anal., 50(3):879–904, 2016. [3] L. Banas, Z. Brze´zniak, M. Neklyudov, and A. Prohl. A convergent finite-element-based discretization of the stochastic Landau–Lifshitz–Gilbert equation. IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis, 34(2):502–549, April 2014. [4] L. Banas, Z. Brze´zniak, and A. Prohl. Computational studies for the stochastic Landau– Lifshitz–Gilbert equation. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 35(1):B62–B81, 2013. [5] L. Banas, Z. Brze´zniak, A. Prohl, and M. Neklyudov. A convergent finite-element-based discretization of the stochastic Landau–Lifshitz–Gilbert equation. IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis, 2013. [6] J. W. Barrett and W. B. Liu. Finite element approximation of the p-Laplacian. Math. Comp., 61(204):523–537, 1993. [7] J. W. Barrett and W. B. Liu. Finite element approximation of the parabolic p-Laplacian. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 31(2):413–428, 1994. [8] L. Beir˜ao da Veiga, F. Brezzi, A. Cangiani, G. Manzini, L. D. Marini, and A. Russo. Basic principles of virtual element methods. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. (M3AS), 199(23):199–214, 2013. [9] F. Bouchut, D. Doyen, and R. Eymard. Convection and total variation flow. IMA J. Numer. Anal., 34(3):1037–1071, 2014. [10] D. Breit. Regularity theory for nonlinear systems of SPDEs. Manuscripta Math., 146:329–349, 2015. [11] Z. Brze´zniak. On stochastic convolution in banach spaces and applications. Stochastics and Stochastic Reports, 61(3-4):245–295, 1997. 30 JER´ OMEˆ DRONIOU, BENIAMIN GOLDYS, AND KIM-NGAN LE

[12] Z. Brze´zniak, E. Carelli, and A. Prohl. Finite-element-based discretizations of the incompress- ible navier–stokes equations with multiplicative random forcing. IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis, 33(3):771–824, 01 2013. [13] Z. a. Brze´zniak, B. Goldys, and M. Ondrej´at. Stochastic geometric partial differential equa- tions. In New trends in stochastic analysis and related topics, volume 12 of Interdiscip. Math. Sci., pages 1–32. World Sci. Publ., Hackensack, NJ, 2012. [14] E. Carelli and A. Prohl. Rates of convergence for discretizations of the stochastic incom- pressible navier–stokes equations. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 50(5):2467–2496, 2012. [15] R. Carmona, F. Delarue, and D. Lacker. Mean field games with common noise. Ann. Probab., 44(6):3740–3803, 2016. [16] C. Carstensen, W. Liu, and N. Yan. A posteriori error estimates for finite element approx- imation of parabolic p-Laplacian. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 43(6):2294–2319, 2006. [17] F. Catt´e, P. L. Lions, J. M. Morel, and T. Coll. Image selective smoothing and edge detection by nonlinear diffusion. SIAM J. Num. Anal., 29:182–193, 1992. [18] B. Cockburn, B. Dong, J. Guzm´an, M. Restelli, and R. Sacco. A hybridizable discontinu- ous Galerkin method for steady-state convection-diffusion-reaction problems. SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 31(5):3827–3846, 2009. [19] G. Da Prato and J. Zabczyk. Stochastic equations in infinite dimensions, volume Second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. [20] A. Debussche, M. Hofmanova, and J. Vovelle. Degenerate parabolic stochastic partial differ- ential equations: quasilinear case. Ann. Probab., 44(3):1916–1955, 2016. [21] D. A. Di Pietro and J. Droniou. The Hybrid High-Order Method for Polytopal Meshes: Design, Analysis, and Applications, volume 19 of Modeling, Simulation and Applications. Springer International Publishing, 2020. [22] D. A. Di Pietro, J. Droniou, and G. Manzini. Discontinuous skeletal gradient discretisation methods on polytopal meshes. J. Comput. Phys., 355:397–425, 2018. [23] J. Droniou. Finite volume schemes for diffusion equations: introduction to and review of modern methods. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci., 24(8):1575–1619, 2014. [24] J. Droniou and R. Eymard. Uniform-in-time convergence of numerical methods for non-linear degenerate parabolic equations. Numerische Mathematik, 132(4):721–766, Apr 2016. [25] J. Droniou, R. Eymard, and P. Feron. Gradient schemes for Stokes problem. IMA J. Numer. Anal., 36(4):1636–1669, 2016. [26] J. Droniou, R. Eymard, T. Gallou¨et, C. Guichard, and R. Herbin. The gradient discretisation method, volume 82 of Mathematics & Applications. Springer, 2018. [27] J. Droniou, R. Eymard, T. Gallou¨et, and R. Herbin. Gradient schemes: a generic frame- work for the discretisation of linear, nonlinear and nonlocal elliptic and parabolic equations. Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, 23(13):2395–2432, 2013. [28] J. Droniou, R. Eymard, T. Gallou¨et, and R. Herbin. Non-conforming finite elements on polytopal meshes, pages 1–27. SEMA-SIMAI, 2020. [29] J. Droniou, R. Eymard, and R. Herbin. Gradient schemes: generic tools for the numerical analysis of diffusion equations. M2AN Math. Model. Numer. Anal., 50(3):749–781, 2016. Special issue – Polyhedral discretization for PDE. [30] J. Droniou, R. Eymard, A. Prignet, and K. S. Talbot. Unified convergence analysis of nu- merical schemes for a miscible displacement problem. Found. Comput. Math., 19(2):333–374, 2019. [31] R. Eymard, P. Feron, and C. Guichard. Family of convergent numerical schemes for the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. Math. Comput. Simulation, 144:196–218, 2018. [32] R. Eymard and C. Guichard. Discontinuous Galerkin gradient discretisations for the ap- proximation of second-order differential operators in divergence form. Comput. Appl. Math., 37(4):4023–4054, 2018. [33] R. Eymard, C. Guichard, and R. Herbin. Small-stencil 3D schemes for diffusive flows in porous media. ESAIM Math. Model. Numer. Anal., 46(2):265–290, 2012. [34] X. Feng and A. Prohl. Analysis of total variation flow and its finite element approximations. M2AN Math. Model. Numer. Anal., 37(3):533–556, 2003. NUMERICAL METHODS FOR STOCHASTIC PDES WITH LERAY–LIONS OPERATOR 31

[35] B. Goldys, J. F. Grotowski, and K.-N. Le. Weak martingale solutions to the stochas- tic Landau–Lifshitz–Gilbert equation with multi-dimensional noise via a convergent finite- element scheme. Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 130(1):232 – 261, 2020. [36] B. Goldys, K.-N. Le, and T. Tran. A finite element approximation for the stochastic Landau– Lifshitz–Gilbert equation. Journal of Differential Equations, 260(2):937 – 970, 2016. [37] M. Hairer. A theory of regularity structures. Invent. Math., 198(2):269–504, 2014. [38] M. Hofmanova and T. Zhang. Quasilinear parabolic stochastic partial differential equations: existence, uniqueness. Stochastic Process. Appl, 127(10):3354–3371, 2017. [39] L. Hornung. Quasilinear parabolic stochastic evolution equations via maximal Lp-regularity. Potential Anal., 50(2):279–326, 2019. [40] A. Ichikawa. Stability of semilinear stochastic evolution equations. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 90(1):12 – 44, 1982. [41] A. Jakubowski. The almost sure Skorokhod representation for subsequences in nonmetric spaces. Theory of Probability & Its Applications, 42(1):167–174, 1998. [42] N. Ju. Numerical analysis of parabolic p-laplacian: Approximation of trajectories. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 37(6):1861–1884, 2000. [43] P. E. Kloeden and E. Platen. Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 1992. [44] R. Kruse. Strong and Weak Approximation of Semilinear Stochastic Evolution Equations. Springer International Publishing, 2014. [45] J. Leray and J. L. Lions. Quelques r´esultats de Visik sur les probl`emes elliptiques non lin´eaires par les m´ethodes de Minty-Browder. Bull. Soc. Math. France, 93:97–107, 1965. [46] R. Mikulevicius and B. L. Rozovskii. Stochastic Navier-Stokes equations for turbulent flows. SIAM J. Math. Anal., 35(5):1250–1310, 2004. [47] M. Ondrejat, A. Prohl, and N. Walkington. Numerical approximation of nonlinear spde’s, 2020. [48] S. Peszat and J. Zabczyk. Stochastic partial differential equations with L´evy noise, volume 113 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 2007. An evolution equation approach. [49] J. R. Philip. N-diffusion. Australian Journal of Physics, 14:1–13, 1961. [50] C. Pr´evot and M. R¨ockner. A concise course on stochastic partial differential equations. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1905. Springer, 2007. [51] D. C. Wilcox. Turbulence modeling for CFD. DWC Industries, La Canada, 1998. [52] I. Yaroslavtsev. Burkholder-Davis-Gundy Inequalities in UMD Banach Spaces. Comm. Math. Phys., 379(2):417–459, 2020. [53] Z. Zhang and G. E. Karniadakis. Numerical Methods for Stochastic Partial Differential Equa- tions with White Noise. Springer International Publishing, 2017.

School of Mathematics, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia. [email protected]

School of Mathematics and Statistics, and The University of Sydney Nano Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney 2006, Australia [email protected]

School of Mathematics, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia. [email protected]