Thx for the efforts! I tried to clean up the question and remove the ambiguous notations. For the dirac measure, I use the one found in the Wikipedia article.
I try to formally understand a statement found across literature (as @Did pointed out, assuming independence):
$E[\mathbb{I}_{[0,T]}(\tau)D(\tau)] = \int_{0}^{T}E[D(t)]dP_{\tau}(t)$.
To derive it, the authors do the following:
$E[\mathbb{I}_{[0,T]}(\tau)D(\tau)] = E[\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathbb{I}_{[0,T]}(t) D( t) d\delta_{\tau}(t)] = E[\int_{0}^{T} D( t) d\delta_{\tau}(t)] = E[\int_{0}^{T} D( t) \delta_{\tau}(t)dt]$.
And then, what I don't get, they do the following (which might be a notational mess):
$\int_{0}^{T} E[D(t)] E[d\delta_{\tau}(t)] = \int_{0}^{T} E[D(t)] P(\tau \in [t,dt]) $
There are two questions
- How does the distribution of $\tau$ enter the picture, i.e. what is the relation of $\delta_{\tau}$ to $P_{\tau}$, to get the proposition (1st equation) from the second equation? (MickG's explanations).
- What is going on with the third equation? Which is hopefully resolved after answering the first question:-) Maybe, the authors mean something like $E[\delta_{\tau}(t)] = E[\mathbb{I}_{[t,dt]}(\tau)]=P(\tau \in [t,dt])$...
Thx!
On the RHS I get $\int_0^\infty E[D(t)]\mathbb1_{0<t<T}d\mu(t)=\int_0^TE[D(t)]d\mu(t)$. On the LHS, I get $E[E[D(t)]\mathbb1_{0<t<T}]$. So:
$$\int_0^TE[D(t)]d\mu(t)=E[E[D(t)]\mathbb1_{0<t<T}].$$
Seems we have one $E$ too many on the right… If I consider $D(t)\mathbb1_{[0,T]}(t)$ instead, I get:
$$E[D(t)\mathbb1_{[0,T]}(t)]=\int_0^\infty D(t)\mathbb1_{[0,T]}(t)d\mu(t)=\int_0^TD(t)d\mu(t).$$
Now there is a missing $E$. So the question I ask is: is the identity stated in your reference actually correct? Also, that integral of $E[D(t)]$ leaves me wondering whether $E[D(t)]$ actually depends on $t$. After all, it is an expected value, so why should it depend on anything? With that, I would have that the first equality has LHS equal to $P([0,T])E[D(t)]$.
Let us now look at how your authors derive their identity:
\begin{align*} E[\mathbb{I}_{[0,T]}(\tau)D(\tau)] ={}& E\left[\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathbb{I}_{[0,T]}(t) D( t) \delta(t-\tau)dt\right] = E\left[\int_{0}^{T} D( t) \delta(t-\tau)dt\right] ={} \\ {}={}& \int_{0}^{T} E[D(t)] E[\delta(t-\tau)]dt = \int_{0}^{T} E[D(t)] P(\tau \in [t,dt]). \end{align*}
I restored the "$\delta$ function" since this is just a formal trick to convince readers of the equality. Let us try to see this formal derivation step by step:
To better (but always formally) treat the third step, we may assume Fubini-Tonelli works fine and try this:
$$E\left[\int_0^TD(t)\delta(t-\tau)dt\right]=\int_0^\infty\int_0^TD(t)\delta(t-\tau)dtd\mu(\tau)=\int_0^T\int_0^\infty\delta(t-\tau)d\mu(\tau)D(t)dt,$$
then we have that inner integral, and, if $d\mu(\tau)=f(\tau)d\tau$, we know that is $f(t)\mathbb1_{[0,\infty)}(t)$, and we are there.
I hope this answers your question. Though that identity in your reference seems incorrect, as I pointed out at the start considering two different functions.