})$. See Section 5.5 in [@friz].

The following result due to Towghi [@towghi] yields the existence of the Young integral under joint variation assumptions for both integrand and integrator as follows. Next, for the convenience of the reader we present his result as stated in [@friz1].

\[tow\] Let $p,q \ge 1$, assume that $\theta = \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}> 1$, and consider $F,G:[a,b]\times [c,d]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ functions of $p$-variation resp. $q$-variation which do not have common jump points and $F(a,\cdot) = 0,~F(\cdot, c)=0$. Then the 2D Young integral $\int_a^b\int_c^d FdG$ exists (in the Riemann-Stieltjes sense) and for every $\alpha\in (1,\theta)$,

$$\label{boundint}
\Bigg| \int_a^b\int_c^d FdG\Bigg|\le \Bigg[\Bigg(1+\zeta \left(\frac{\theta}{\alpha}\right)\Bigg)^\alpha \zeta(\alpha) +(1+\zeta(\theta))\Bigg] V_p(F) V_q(G),$$

where $\zeta(s) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{n^s}.$

By comparing Theorems \[tow\] and \[tyoung\], we notice that the price we pay when dealing with $(p,q)$-bivariation is the stronger assumption (\[s\]) which provides the necessary smoothness on $G$ in order to get the existence of 2D Young integral. In one hand, one should notice that the mere finiteness of $V_q(G)<\infty$ does not imply (\[s\]) with $\lambda(u)= \mu(u)= u^{\frac{1}{p}}$. On the other hand, when $G$ satisfies (\[s\]) then we shall relax the joint variation property in $F$ by requiring only finite bivariation of a suitable order. Therefore, it is natural to ask a maximal inequality for the 2D Young integral under assumptions in Theorem \[tyoung\]. This issue is particularly important in the theory of local-times of Brownian
}) $. See Section 5.5 in   [ @friz ]. 

 The following result due to Towghi   [ @towghi ] render the being of the Young integral under joint variation assumptions for both integrand and integrator as postdate. Next, for the convenience of the reader we deliver his result as stated in   [ @friz1 ]. 

 \[tow\ ] permit $ p, q \ge 1 $, assume that $ \theta = \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q } > 1 $, and regard $ F, G:[a, b]\times [ c, d]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ functions of $ p$-variation resp. $ q$-variation which do not get common jump points and $ F(a,\cdot) = 0,~F(\cdot, c)=0$. Then the 2D Young integral $ \int_a^b\int_c^d FdG$ exists (in the Riemann - Stieltjes sense) and for every $ \alpha\in (1,\theta)$, 

 $ $ \label{boundint } 
 \Bigg| \int_a^b\int_c^d FdG\Bigg|\le \Bigg[\Bigg(1+\zeta \left(\frac{\theta}{\alpha}\right)\Bigg)^\alpha \zeta(\alpha) + (1+\zeta(\theta))\Bigg ] V_p(F) V_q(G),$$ 

 where $ \zeta(s) = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{n^s}.$ 

 By compare Theorems   \[tow\ ] and   \[tyoung\ ], we notice that the price we give when dealing with $ (p, q)$-bivariation is the stronger assumption   (\[s\ ]) which supply the necessary smoothness on $ G$ in order to get the existence of 2D Young integral. In one bridge player, one should notice that the mere finiteness of $ V_q(G)<\infty$ does not imply   (\[s\ ]) with $ \lambda(u)= \mu(u)= u^{\frac{1}{p}}$. On the other hand, when $ G$ satisfies   (\[s\ ]) then we shall relax the joint variation property in $ F$ by requiring only finite bivariation of a suitable order. Therefore, it is natural to ask a maximal inequality for the 2D Young integral under assumptions in Theorem   \[tyoung\ ]. This topic is particularly important in the hypothesis of local - prison term of Brownian
})$. Sef Section 5.5 in [@friz].

The foluowing result doe to Toxghi [@towfhi] yielas the existence of the Younj inregrao under joint variatiov assumptpons for voth untegrand ehd intenxator ws fmolows. Next, for the convetience of the sexdzr we present his result as stated ig [@friz1].

\[toe\] Pet $p,q \ge 1$, assome tnwt $\tgvtc = \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}> 1$, and consider $F,G:[a,g]\times [b,d]\rightarrow \mathnb{R}$ functions of $p$-variatioj redp. $q$-variation whicj do not hace cjnmon jump poknts and $F(a,\cdot) = 0,~F(\cdot, c)=0$. Then the 2D Young integral $\ing_a^b\inc_c^d FdG$ exiwtw (ij the Riemani-Stielnjes sense) and for evary $\alpna\in (1,\theta)$,

$$\labek{bonndibt}
\Bigg| \int_a^b\int_c^d FdG\Uigg|\le \Bigg[\Bigg(1+\zeta \jeft(\frac{\tveca}{\alpha}\right)\Bigg)^\alpha \zwta(\alkha) +(1+\zata(\tfwta))\Cigf] T_p(F) V_q(G),$$

whfre $\zeta(s) = \suj_{n=1}^\infty \frax{1}{n^s}.$

By comparing Theprqns \[tow\] and \[tyouhg\], we goeice that the price we pay when dealing wifh $(p,q)$-bivariation is the stronger assumption (\[s\]) which prjvides the necessary smoothness on $G$ in order to cet tie exnwtencd ov 2D Young integral. In one hand, one should notyde tmat the mere finlteness of $V_q(G)<\inftu$ forf not imply (\[s\]) dith $\lcjbsa(u)= \mu(u)= u^{\frac{1}{p}}$. On hhe othgr hane, when $G$ fatixfies (\[s\]) then we shall relax rhe joint vagiatuon property in $F$ yy requiring onli finiye bivariation of a suicable krder. Therevore, it ia natural to ask x msxhmal inequality for the 2D Roung intxgral under xssukptionf in Theorfm \[tyomtg\]. This issue is pwrticolarly important in the theory of local-times of Brownian
})$. See Section 5.5 in [@friz]. The due Towghi [@towghi] the existence of variation for both integrand integrator as follows. for the convenience of the reader present his result as stated in [@friz1]. \[tow\] Let $p,q \ge 1$, assume $\theta = \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}> 1$, and consider $F,G:[a,b]\times [c,d]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ functions of $p$-variation resp. which not common points and $F(a,\cdot) = 0,~F(\cdot, c)=0$. Then the 2D Young integral $\int_a^b\int_c^d FdG$ exists (in the sense) and for every $\alpha\in (1,\theta)$, $$\label{boundint} \Bigg| FdG\Bigg|\le \Bigg[\Bigg(1+\zeta \left(\frac{\theta}{\alpha}\right)\Bigg)^\alpha \zeta(\alpha) V_p(F) V_q(G),$$ where $\zeta(s) = \frac{1}{n^s}.$ comparing Theorems and we that the price pay when dealing with $(p,q)$-bivariation is the stronger assumption (\[s\]) which provides the necessary smoothness on $G$ order to existence of Young In hand, one should the mere finiteness of $V_q(G)<\infty$ does with $\lambda(u)= \mu(u)= u^{\frac{1}{p}}$. On the other hand, $G$ satisfies then we shall relax the joint property in $F$ by requiring only finite bivariation a suitable order. Therefore, it is natural to ask a maximal inequality for the 2D under assumptions in Theorem This issue is important the of of Brownian
})$. See Section 5.5 in [@friz].

The followIng result dUe to TOwgHi [@tOwGhi] yIeldS the existence oF The YOung integral under joint VariaTiON assUMpTions For both INtEGRanD aNd IntEgRAtOr as fOllOws. Next, For the convEniEnCe of the readeR We Present his ResUlt as stated iN [@frIz1].

\[tow\] LEt $P,q \gE 1$, AssumE thAt $\theTa = \frac{1}{P}+\Frac{1}{q}> 1$, aNd consideR $F,g:[A,b]\timeS [C,d]\rightARRoW \matHbb{R}$ functions of $p$-vARiATion resp. $q$-variaTion whIcH Do NOT haVe cOmmon jump pOiNts anD $f(a,\cdot) = 0,~F(\CDoT, C)=0$. tHen THe 2D Young integRal $\int_a^b\int_C^D Fdg$ existS (iN thE riemanN-StieLtJEs sEnse) and for eVery $\Alpha\in (1,\thEta)$,

$$\labEL{boundiNT}
\Bigg| \inT_a^b\int_C^d FDG\BIgg|\lE \biGg[\bigG(1+\zETa \lEFt(\FraC{\TheTa}{\alpha}\rIgHt)\bigg)^\aLpha \ZETA(\AlphA) +(1+\zeTa(\thEta))\BiGg] V_p(F) V_q(G),$$

where $\ZetA(s) = \suM_{N=1}^\inFty \frAc{1}{n^s}.$

BY comPaRing THeoremS \[tow\] aNd \[Tyoung\], we notice tHat tHe price we Pay WhEn dEaLing wITh $(p,q)$-biVarIatIon is thE strongER asSuMPTIoN (\[s\]) which provides the NeCESsAry smootHness oN $g$ iN oRDer to get ThE exIsteNCE of 2D YOung INtEgral. In oNe hand, ONe ShOuld notIcE that tHe MerE fiNitenESs of $v_q(G)<\infTy$ does noT implY (\[S\]) with $\lambda(u)= \mu(U)= U^{\frac{1}{p}}$. On the otHEr HANd, WHen $G$ SatIsfies (\[s\]) then We shALl reLax tHE jOinT VariaTion pRoPErTY in $F$ by requiring only FiNite biVariaTion of a suitabLe order. TheREFOre, it is nAturAL tO Ask a maximal ineQualiTy for the 2D YOUng integRal unDer assumPtions in THEOrem \[tyouNg\]. THis IssUe iS PArTicularly impoRTAnt iN tHe theorY of Local-tiMes Of BRowNiaN
})$. See Section 5.5 in [@ friz].

Th e fol low ing  r esul t du e to Towghi [@ t owgh i] yields the existenc e ofth e  You n ginteg ral und e rj o int  v ar iat io n  a ssump tio ns forboth integ ran dand integrat o ras follows . N ext, for the  co nvenie nc e o f  therea der w e pres e nt his  result a ss tatedi n [@fri z 1 ]. 

\[ tow\] Let $p,q \g e  1 $ , assume that$\thet a=  \ f r ac{ 1}{ p}+\frac{1 }{ q}> 1 $ , and c o ns i d e r $ F ,G:[a,b]\time s [c,d]\rig h tar row \m at hbb { R}$ fu nctio ns of$p$-variati on r esp. $q$- variat i on whic h  do not  havecom mon  jum p  p oi nts  a n d $ F (a ,\c d ot)  = 0,~F( \c do t, c) =0$. T h e n th e 2 D Yo ung i ntegral $\int _a^ b\in t _c^ d FdG $ exi sts(i n the  Riema nn-St ie ltjes sense) an d fo r every $ \al ph a\i n(1,\t h eta)$, 

$ $\l abel{bo undint} \Bi gg | \ in t_a^b\int_c^d FdG\ Bi g g |\ le \Bigg [\Bigg ( 1+ \z e ta \left (\ fra c{\t h e ta}{\ alph a }\ right)\B igg)^\ a lp ha  \zeta( \a lpha)+( 1+\ zet a(\th e ta)) \Bigg]  V_p(F)V_q(G ) ,$$

where $\z e ta(s) = \sum_ { n= 1 } ^\ i nfty  \f rac{1}{n^s} .$
B y co mpar i ng  Th e orems  \[to w\ ]  a n d \[tyoung\], we no ti ce tha t the  price we pay  when deal i n g  with $( p,q) $ -b i variation is t he st ronger ass u mption ( \[s\] ) whichprovidest h e necess ary  sm oot hne s s  o n $G$ in orde r to g et  the ex ist ence of  2D  Yo ung  in te gral. Inone hand ,on esh oul d not i ce thatth e m er e f inite n ess of  $V_q (G)< \i nf t y$does no t  i m p ly ( \[ s\ ]) w ith  $ \lamb da(u ) = \ mu(u)=u^{\frac{ 1}{ p }}$.  O nthe oth er hand, when  $ G$ satisfi es  (\ [s\])t h en we sh all relax the joint var i ation p rop ertyin $ F$ by req uir ing on lyf initebivari ation  o f a s uitab l e  o rde r.  Therefore , itis na tu ralto aska maximal inequali t y f or the 2D You nginte g r al  un d er ass um p tio n s  in Theorem \[t young\]. T hi s  i ssue is pa r tic ul arly im portant  in t h e theor y of loca l-times o fBrow n i an
})$. See_Section 5.5_in [@friz].

The following result due_to Towghi [@towghi]_yields_the existence_of_the Young integral_under joint variation_assumptions for both integrand_and integrator as_follows._Next, for the convenience of the reader we present his result as stated in [@friz1].

\[tow\]_Let_$p,q \ge_1$,_assume_that $\theta = \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}> 1$,_and consider $F,G:[a,b]\times [c,d]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$_functions of_$p$-variation resp. $q$-variation which do not have common_jump_points and $F(a,\cdot)_= 0,~F(\cdot, c)=0$. Then the 2D Young integral $\int_a^b\int_c^d_FdG$ exists (in the Riemann-Stieltjes sense)_and for every_$\alpha\in_(1,\theta)$,

$$\label{boundint}
\Bigg|_\int_a^b\int_c^d FdG\Bigg|\le \Bigg[\Bigg(1+\zeta \left(\frac{\theta}{\alpha}\right)\Bigg)^\alpha_\zeta(\alpha) +(1+\zeta(\theta))\Bigg] V_p(F) V_q(G),$$

where $\zeta(s) =_\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{n^s}.$

By comparing Theorems \[tow\] and \[tyoung\], we_notice that the price we pay when_dealing with $(p,q)$-bivariation is the stronger_assumption (\[s\]) which provides the necessary_smoothness on_$G$ in order to get_the existence of_2D Young_integral. In one_hand, one should notice that the_mere finiteness of_$V_q(G)<\infty$ does not imply (\[s\]) with $\lambda(u)=_\mu(u)=_u^{\frac{1}{p}}$. On the_other_hand,_when $G$_satisfies (\[s\]) then we_shall_relax the_joint_variation property in $F$ by requiring_only_finite bivariation of a suitable order. Therefore,_it is natural to_ask_a maximal inequality for_the 2D Young integral under_assumptions in Theorem \[tyoung\]. This issue is_particularly important_in the_theory of local-times of Brownian