Therefore we have $d\left(\omega \right)>0$  almost surely by the compactness of $X$  . By a standard argument, we obtain that there exists a $\delta >0$  such that

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathbb{P}\left\{\omega \right|d\left(\omega \right)>\delta \}\ge 1-\epsilon .\end{array}$$

(3.6)

Denote ${\Omega }_{\delta }:=\left\{\omega \right|d\left(\omega \right)>\delta \}$  . By ( 3.5 ) we have $$li{m}_{s\to \infty }\mathbb{P}\{\omega \in {\Omega }_{\delta }|d\left(\phi \right(s,{\theta }_{-s}\omega \left)x\right({\theta }_{-s}\omega ),A(\omega \left)\right)>\frac{\delta }{4}\}=0.$$  Therefore there exists $t_{\delta }\left(\omega \right)\ge 0$  such that $$d\left(\phi \right(s,{\theta }_{-s}\omega \left)x\right({\theta }_{-s}\omega ),A(\omega \left)\right)<\frac{\delta }{2},s\ge t_{\delta }\left(\omega \right)$$  holds almost surely on ${\Omega }_{\delta }$  . Hence by the definition of $B_2\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  and the measure preserving of ${\theta }_t$  , we get that Since $\epsilon >0$  is arbitrary, we have $x\left(\omega \right)\in B_2\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  almost surely by letting $\epsilon \to 0$  . It follows that $B_1\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)\subset B_2\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  almost surely, and the converse inclusion is similar. This terminates the proof of the lemma. $\square$  The above lemma indicates that the basin $B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  is uniquely determined by $A\left(\omega \right)$  , therefore is well defined. The following lemma says that the basin is random open. Proof. It is obvious that $x\in B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  is equivalent to $\phi (t,\omega )x\in U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)$  for some $t\ge 0$  , i.e. $x\in \phi (-t,{\theta }_t\omega )U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)$  by using the fact that $\phi (t,\omega {)}^{-1}=\phi (-t,{\theta }_t\omega )$  . So it follows that $x\in B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  if and only if $x\in {\cup }_{t\ge 0}\phi (-t,{\theta }_t\omega )U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)$  , therefore we obtain that $$B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)={\bigcup }_{t\ge 0}\phi (-t,{\theta }_t\omega )U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right).$$  Then by a similar method to that of [10, 6, 4] , we can easily obtain that $$\overline{{\bigcup }_{t\ge 0}\phi (-t,{\theta }_t\omega )\overline{U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)}}$$  is ${\mathfrak{F}}^u$  -measurable, hence it is a random closed set. It is easy to verify that we have the following holds $$\overline{{\bigcup }_{t\ge 0}\phi (-t,{\theta }_t\omega )U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)}=\overline{{\bigcup }_{t\ge 0}\phi (-t,{\theta }_t\omega )\overline{U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)}}.$$  To see this, note first that the left hand is obvious the subset of the right hand. And every element of the union of right hand is a subset of the left hand, so the closure of the union of right is included by the left for the closeness of the left hand. So we have got that the closure of $B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  is a random closed set. By (ii) of proposition 2.1 we obtain that $B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  is a random set, the openness of $B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  follows the fact that $\phi (-t,{\theta }_t\omega )$  is homeomorphism on $X$  , which terminates the proof of the lemma. $\square$  Afterwards, we will also use $D\left(\omega \right)$  to denote the set of all random variables almost surely contained in it, which may cause a bit confusion of notations for random sets. By the above preliminaries, we can prove our main theorem now. We decompose the proof of the main theorem into the following several lemmas: Proof. If $x\left(\omega \right)\in U\left(\omega \right)\cap \mathsf{ℭ}\mathsf{\Re }\left(\phi \right)$  , recalling that $U\left(\omega \right)$  is a random pre-attractor, fix $T\left(\omega \right)>0$  such that $U\left(T\right(\omega \left)\right)\subset U\left(\omega \right)$  . Denote

$$\begin{array}{c}\overline{d}\left(\omega \right):=dis{t}_X\left(U\right(T\left(\omega \right)),X-U(\omega \left)\right).\end{array}$$

(3.7)

By the compactness of $X$  , it is obvious that $\overline{d}\left(\omega \right)>0$  holds almost surely. By measurable selection theorem, similar to [2] , there exists two collections of random variables $\left\{x_n\right(\omega ){\}}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\subset U(T\left(\omega \right))$  with $U\left(T\right(\omega \left)\right)={\overline{\left\{x_n\right(\omega \left)\right\}}}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$  and $\left\{x_m\right(\omega ){\}}_{m\in \mathbb{N}}\subset X-U(\omega )$  with $X-U\left(\omega \right)={\overline{\left\{x_m\right(\omega \left)\right\}}}_{m\in \mathbb{N}}$  such that

$$\begin{array}{c}\overline{d}\left(\omega \right)=in{f}_{n\in \mathbb{N},m\in \mathbb{N}}d\left(x_n\right(\omega ),x_m(\omega \left)\right).\end{array}$$

(3.8)

So we obtain that $\overline{d}\left(\omega \right)$  is a random variable. Choose $0<\epsilon \left(\omega \right)<\overline{d}\left(\omega \right)$  , then we have $$\phi (t,{\theta }_{-t}\omega )x\left({\theta }_{-t}\omega \right)\in \phi (t,{\theta }_{-t}\omega )U\left({\theta }_{-t}\omega \right)\subset U\left(T\right(\omega \left)\right),wheret\ge T\left(\omega \right).$$  Then by the the fact $x\left(\omega \right)\in \mathsf{ℭ}\mathsf{\Re }\left(\phi \right)$  , for this $\epsilon \left(\omega \right)>0$  and the above $T\left(\omega \right)$  , there exists an $\epsilon \left(\omega \right)$  $T\left(\omega \right)$  -chain $\left(x_0\right(\omega ),t_0)$  , $\left(x_1\right(\omega ),t_1)$  , $\cdots$  , $\left(x_n\right(\omega ),t_n)$  with $x_0\left(\omega \right)=x_n\left(\omega \right)=x\left(\omega \right)$  . So by the choice of $\epsilon \left(\omega \right)$  and induction we obtain that

$$\begin{array}{c}x\left(\omega \right)\in B_{\epsilon \left(\omega \right)}\left(U\right(T\left(\omega \right)\left)\right)\subset U\left(\omega \right)\end{array}$$

(3.9)

almost surely, where $B_r\left(x\right)$  stands for the open ball centered at $x$  with radius $r$  .

Hence we derive $x\left(\omega \right)\in U\left(T\right(\omega \left)\right)$  from letting $\epsilon \left(\omega \right)\to 0$  in ( 3.9 ) and from the closeness of $U\left(T\right(\omega \left)\right)$  . And then let $T\left(\omega \right)\to \infty$  in ( 3.9 ), we obtain $x\left(\omega \right)\in A\left(\omega \right)$  almost surely by ( 3.4 ). $\square$ 

Lemma 3.5 Suppose $U\left(\omega \right)$  is a random open set, $x\left(\omega \right)$  is a random variable. Define

$$\begin{array}{c}t\left(\omega \right):=inf\{t\in {\mathbb{R}}^{+}|\phi (t,\omega )x\left(\omega \right)\in \overline{U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)}\},\end{array}$$

(3.10)

i.e. the first entrance time of $x\left(\omega \right)$  into $U\left(\omega \right)$  under the cocycle $\phi$  . Then $t\left(\omega \right)$  is a random variable, which is measurable with respect to the universal $\sigma$  -algebra ${\mathfrak{F}}^u$  .

Proof. It is easy to see that $$t\left(\omega \right)=inf\{t\in {\mathbb{R}}^{+}|dis{t}_X\left(\phi \right(t,\omega \left)x\right(\omega ),\overline{U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)})=0\}.$$  Since the function $$(t,\omega )\mapsto dis{t}_X\left(\phi \right(t,\omega \left)x\right(\omega ),\overline{U\left({\theta }_t\omega \right)})=:\tilde{d}(t,\omega )$$  is $\mathfrak{B}(\mathbb{T})\times \mathfrak{F}$  -measurable by a similar argument as the proof of lemma  3.1 . For arbitrary $a\in {\mathbb{R}}^{+}$  , it is easy to see that $$\left\{\omega \right|t\left(\omega \right)<a\}={\Pi }_{\Omega }\{(t,\omega )|0\le t<a,\tilde{d}(t,\omega )=0\}.$$  It is obvious that $\left\{\right(t,\omega \left)\right|0\le t<a,\tilde{d}(t,\omega )=0\}\in \mathfrak{B}(\mathbb{T})\times \mathfrak{F}$  , so $\left\{\omega \right|t\left(\omega \right)<a\}$  is ${\mathfrak{F}}^u$  -measurable by projection theorem. $\square$ 

Lemma 3.6 If the random variable $x\left(\omega \right)\in B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)\cap \mathsf{ℭ}\mathsf{\Re }\left(\phi \right)$  , we have $x\left(\omega \right)\in A\left(\omega \right)$  $\mathbb{P}$  -almost surely, where $B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  is the basin determined by the random local attractor $A\left(\omega \right)$  .

Proof. For $x\left(\omega \right)\in B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  , take $t\left(\omega \right)\ge 0$  defined by ( 3.10 ). Suppose $U\left(\omega \right)$  is a pre-attractor which determines the attractor $A\left(\omega \right)$  . So we have, for $s\ge T\left({\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right)$  , the following almost surely holds:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\phi (s+t(\omega ),\omega )x\left(\omega \right)& =\phi (s,{\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega )\phi \left(t\right(\omega ),\omega )x\left(\omega \right)\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \in \overline{\phi (s,{\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega )U\left({\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right)}{\subset }^{*}U\left({\theta }_{s+t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right).\end{array}$$

In fact, by the definition of pre-attractor, there exists a random variable $T\left({\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right)>0$  such that $$\overline{{\bigcup }_{s\ge T\left({\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right)}\phi (s,{\theta }_{-s}\circ {\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega )U({\theta }_{-s}\circ {\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega )}\subset U\left({\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right).$$  Then by the property of measure preserving of ${\theta }_t$  , we obtain that ${\subset }^{*}$  holds $\mathbb{P}$  -almost surely.

Hence we obtain

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \mathbb{P}\left\{\omega \right|\phi (s+t(\omega ),\omega )x\left(\omega \right)\in U\left({\theta }_{s+t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right),s\ge T\left({\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right)\}\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}=& \mathbb{P}\left\{\omega \right|\phi (s+t(\omega ),{\theta }_{-(s+t(\omega \left)\right)}\omega )x\left({\theta }_{-(s+t(\omega \left)\right)}\omega \right)\in U\left(\omega \right),s\ge T\left({\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \right)\}\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}=& 1\end{array}$$

by the fact that $\mathbb{P}$  is invariant under ${\theta }_t$  again. Further more, we are able to obtain the following finer result:

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \phi (s+t(\omega ),{\theta }_{-(s+t(\omega \left)\right)}\omega )x\left({\theta }_{-(s+t(\omega \left)\right)}\omega \right)\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}=& \phi (s,{\theta }_{-s}\omega )\phi \left(t\right(\omega ),{\theta }_{-(s+t(\omega \left)\right)}\omega )x\left({\theta }_{-(s+t(\omega \left)\right)}\omega \right)\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}{\in }^{*}& \overline{\phi (s,{\theta }_{-s}\omega )U\left({\theta }_{-s}\omega \right)}{\subset }^{**}U\left(\omega \right),\end{array}$$

where ${\in }^{*}$  holds using the property of measure preserving of ${\theta }_t$  again. And ${\subset }^{**}$  holds if $s\ge T\left(\omega \right)$  by the property of pre-attractor. So denote $\tilde{T}\left(\omega \right)=max\left\{T\right(\omega ),T({\theta }_{t\left(\omega \right)}\omega \left)\right\}$  , and take $T_1\left(\omega \right)=t\left(\omega \right)+\tilde{T}\left(\omega \right)$  , then it follows that $$\overline{\phi (s,{\theta }_{-s}\omega )U\left({\theta }_{-s}\omega \right)}\subset U\left(T\right(\omega \left)\right)\subset U\left(\omega \right)$$  whenever $s\ge T_1\left(\omega \right)$  . Take $\overline{d}\left(\omega \right)$  as defined by ( 3.7 ), fix $T_1\left(\omega \right)$  , choose $0<\epsilon \left(\omega \right)<d\left(\omega \right)$  . Then it follows that any random $\epsilon \left(\omega \right)$  $T_1\left(\omega \right)$  -chain of length one begins at $x\left(\omega \right)\in B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  must ends in $B_{\epsilon \left(\omega \right)}\left(U\right(T\left(\omega \right)\left)\right)$  almost surely. By the fact that $x\left(\omega \right)$  is a random chain recurrent variable and repeat the proof process of lemma  3.4 we obtain that $x\left(\omega \right)\in A\left(\omega \right)$  almost surely. $\square$  By lemma  3.4 and lemma  3.6 , we obtain that the right hand of ( 1.3 ) is a subset of the left hand. To prove the equality ( 1.3 ), the rest work is to verify that the converse inclusion is true.

To this end, we first define a random open set $U_x\left(\omega \right)$  measurable with respect to ${\mathfrak{F}}^u$  for late use, which is defined as follows.

Suppose $x\left(\omega \right)$  is a random variable, ${\epsilon }_0\left(\omega \right),T_0\left(\omega \right)$  are two positive random variables. Define

$$\begin{array}{ccc}{U}_1\left(\omega \right):& ={\cup }_{t\ge T_0\left(\omega \right)}{B}_{{\epsilon }_0\left(\omega \right)}\left(\phi \right(t,{\theta }_{-t}\omega \left)x\right({\theta }_{-t}\omega \left)\right),& \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}{U}_2\left(\omega \right):& ={\cup }_{t\ge T_0\left(\omega \right)}{B}_{{\epsilon }_0\left(\omega \right)}\left(\phi \right(t,{\theta }_{-t}\omega \left)U_1\right({\theta }_{-t}\omega \left)\right),& \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots & \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}{U}_n\left(\omega \right):& ={\cup }_{t\ge T_0\left(\omega \right)}{B}_{{\epsilon }_0\left(\omega \right)}\left(\phi \right(t,{\theta }_{-t}\omega \left)U_{n-1}\right({\theta }_{-t}\omega \left)\right),& \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdots \cdots \cdots \cdots .& \end{array}$$

By the proof method of proposition 1.5.1 of [4] on page 32, which in turn stems from [10] , and a similar argument as in lemma  3.3 , adding some slight changes in the process of proof, we can conclude that $U_1\left(\omega \right),\cdots ,U_n\left(\omega \right),\cdots$  are all ${\mathfrak{F}}^u$  -measurable open sets. We omit the details here. So the set

$$\begin{array}{c}{U}_x\left(\omega \right):={\bigcup }_{n\in \mathbb{N}}{U}_n\left(\omega \right)\end{array}$$

(3.11)

is a random open set measurable with respect to ${\mathfrak{F}}^u$  by (vi) of proposition 2.1.

Now we can give the proof of the converse inclusion of ( 1.3 ), see the following lemma.

Lemma 3.7 $X\left(\omega \right)-\mathsf{ℭ}\mathsf{\Re }\left(\phi \right)\subset \cup \left[B\right(A\left)\right(\omega )-A(\omega \left)\right].$ 

Proof. If $x\left(\omega \right)\in X\left(\omega \right)-\mathsf{ℭ}\mathsf{\Re }\left(\phi \right)$  , there exists ${\epsilon }_0\left(\omega \right)>0,T_0\left(\omega \right)>0$  such that there is no ${\epsilon }_0\left(\omega \right)$  $T_0\left(\omega \right)$  -chain begins and ends at $x\left(\omega \right)$  by the definition of random chain recurrence. Take $U_x\left(\omega \right)$  defined by ( 3.11 ), then it is easy to see that $x\left(\omega \right)/\in U_x\left(\omega \right)$  and

$$\begin{array}{c}\phi (t,{\theta }_{-t}\omega )x\left({\theta }_{-t}\omega \right)\in U_x\left(\omega \right)\end{array}$$

(3.12)

when $t\ge T_0\left(\omega \right)$  . Given $y\left(\omega \right)\in U_x\left(\omega \right)$  , it is obvious that the ${\epsilon }_0\left(\omega \right)$  -neighbourhood of $\phi (t,{\theta }_{-t}\omega )y\left({\theta }_{-t}\omega \right)$  lies in $U_x\left(\omega \right)$  whenever $t\ge T_0\left(\omega \right)$  , therefore $U_x\left(T_0\right(\omega \left)\right)\subset U_x\left(\omega \right)$  , where $U_x\left(T_0\right(\omega \left)\right)$  is defined similarly to $U\left(T\right(\omega \left)\right)$  . So $U_x\left(\omega \right)$  is a random pre-attractor and it determines a random local attractor $A_x\left(\omega \right)$  by lemma  3.1 (The only difference is that $U_x\left(\omega \right)$  is ${\mathfrak{F}}^u$  -measurable while the $U\left(\omega \right)$  in lemma  3.1 is $\mathfrak{F}$  -measurable. But by remark  2.1 we know that this does not affect the result). And we have $x\left(\omega \right)\in B\left(A_x\right)\left(\omega \right)-U_x\left(\omega \right)\subset B\left(A_x\right)\left(\omega \right)-A_x\left(\omega \right)$  by ( 3.12 ). This completes the proof of the lemma. $\square$  By the above several lemmas, we complete the proof of our main theorem.

4 Some discussions

We know very well that there are several nonequivalent definitions of random attractors for random dynamical systems, see [16] for instance. Pull-back attractors were introduced and studied by Crauel and Flandoli [10] , Crauel, Debussche, and Flandoli [8] , Schmalfuss [17, 18] and others. Ochs in [15] firstly introduced random weak attractors, where `weak' means that the convergence to attractor is in probability instead of usual almost sureness. Another kind of attractor is forward attractor, which is in contrast to pull-back attractor and whose convergence is almost sure convergence in contrast to weak attractor's convergence in probability. As stated in [2] , the choice of convergence in probability makes the forward and pull-back attractors equivalent. So the authors adopted the weak attraction, in fact they adopt the weak point attractor, in order to prove Lyapunov's second method for RDS, for details see [2] . In [9] , the authors encounter the same problem— what kind of attraction to select. They appeal for the help of weak attractor again in order to get the Morse theory for RDS. Different from [2] , the authors in [9] used the weak set attractor, for details see [9] . But we find that all above mentioned random attractors are inappropriate to our problem. Hence to serve our purpose we define attractors as in definition  2.4 .

With respect to the measurability, we find it not appropriate to confine us to considering $\mathfrak{F}$  -measurability only. Since it is easy to see that $U\left(T\right(\omega \left)\right)$  , $B\left(A\right)\left(\omega \right)$  , $A\left(\omega \right)$  , $d\left(\omega \right)$  etc in this paper are not measurable with respect to $\mathfrak{F}$  . Therefore to serve our purpose, we have to allow measurability with respect to other $\sigma$  -algebra, in fact we allow ${\mathfrak{F}}^u$  -measurability. This treatment is also adopted by others, see [6, 7, 8, 10, 4] for instance. Certainly we can choose ${\overline{\mathfrak{F}}}^{\mathbb{P}}$  , the $\mathbb{P}$  -completion $\sigma$  -algebra of $\mathfrak{F}$  , in order that the above variables are measurable. Of course, when $\mathbb{T}=\mathbb{Z}$  , i.e. the RDS in consideration is discrete, or $\mathfrak{F}$  is complete with respect to the probability measure $\mathbb{P}$  on base space $(\Omega ,\mathfrak{F})$  , i.e. $\mathfrak{F}={\overline{\mathfrak{F}}}^{\mathbb{P}}$  , all the random variables are measurable with respect to $\mathfrak{F}$  as usual. Whence in this case, only considering $\mathfrak{F}$  -measurability as usual is enough to obtain our results.

Acknowledgements The author expresses his sincere thanks to Professor Yong, Li for his instructions and many invaluable suggestions. The author is very grateful to Professor Youqing, Ji and Qingdao, Huang for helpful discussions.

References

1. Arnold L 1998 Random Dynamical Systems (Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer-Verlag)
2. Arnold L and Schmalfuss B 2001 Lyapunovs Second Method for Random Dynamical Systems J. Diff. Equ. 177 235-65
3. Castaing C and Valadier M 1977 Convex Analysis and Measurable Multifunctions (Lec. Notes in Math. vol 580) (Berlin: Springer-Verlag)
4. Chueshov I 2002 Monotone Random systems Theory and Applications (Lec. Notes in Math. vol 1779) (Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag)
5. Conley C 1978 Isolated Invariant Sets and the Morse Index (Conf. Board Math. Sci. vol 38) (Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.)
6. Crauel H 1999 Global random attractors are uniquely determined by attracting deterministic compact sets Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (IV) 176 57-72
7. Crauel H 2001 Random Point Attractors versus Random Set Attractors J. London Math. Society 63 (2) 413-27
8. Crauel H, Debussche A and Flandoli F 1997 Random Attractors J. Dyn. Diff. Equ. 9 307-41
9. Crauel H, Duc L H and Siegmund S 2004 Towards a Morse heory for random dyanamical systems Stochastics and Dynamics 4 (3) 277-96
10. Crauel H and Flandoli F 1994 Attractors for random dynamical systems Probab. Theory Related Fields 100 365-93
11. Franks J 1988 A variation of Poincaré-Birkhoff theorem Hamiltonian Dynamical Systems (Contemporary Mathematics vol 81) (Providence: Amer. Math. Soc.) pp. 111-17
12. Hurley M 1991 Chain recurrence and attraction in non-compact spaces Ergod. Th. Dynam. Sys. 11 709-29
13. Hurley M 1992 Noncompact chain recurrence and attraction Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 115 1139-48
14. Hurley M 1995 Chain recurrence, semiflows, and gradients J. Dyn. Diff. Equ. 7 437-56
15. Ochs G 1999 Weak Random Attractors Institut für Dynamische Systeme, Universität Bremen Report 449
16. Scheutzow M 2002 Comparison of various concepts of a random attractor: A case study Arch. Math. 78 233-40
17. Schmalfuss B 1992 Backward cocycles and attractors for stochastic differential equations In: Reitmann V, Riedrich T and Koksch N (Eds.) International Seminar on Applied Mathematics – Nonlinear Dynamics: Attractor Approximation and Global Behaviour (Teubner, Leipzig) pp. 185-92
18. Schmalfuss B 1997 The random attractor of the stochastic Lorenz system ZAMP 48 951-75