Absolutely continuous r.v. vs. continuous r.v.

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AxiomOfChoice
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuous
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the distinction between "absolutely continuous random variables" and "continuous random variables" within the context of measure theoretic probability. Participants explore definitions, examples, and implications of these concepts, highlighting various interpretations and nuances.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants define an absolutely continuous random variable as one for which there exists a measurable function f≥0 such that P{a
  • It is noted that the cumulative distribution function (CDF) F of an absolutely continuous random variable is continuous, and every absolutely continuous random variable is considered continuous by some definitions.
  • Others argue that there are continuous random variables that are not absolutely continuous, citing examples such as the Dirac delta distribution.
  • A participant mentions that a random variable is absolutely continuous if its CDF has a derivative except over a space of measure zero, and that this derivative does not need to be continuous.
  • Some participants suggest that a singular random variable is one that is continuous but not absolutely continuous, with examples including those with CDFs that are everywhere continuous but nowhere differentiable.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of distributions, with some participants asserting that distributions in probability differ from Schwartz distributions, highlighting their distinct properties.
  • One participant points out that the limit of the Gaussian distribution as the variance approaches zero results in the Dirac delta distribution, which raises further questions about classification.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and implications of absolutely continuous versus continuous random variables. There is no consensus on the relationship between these concepts, and multiple competing interpretations are presented.

Contextual Notes

Some definitions and interpretations depend on the author, leading to ambiguity in the classification of random variables. The discussion also touches on the mathematical properties of CDFs and their differentiability, which remain unresolved.

AxiomOfChoice
Messages
531
Reaction score
1
"Absolutely continuous r.v." vs. "continuous r.v."

I've recently come across the term "absolutely continuous random variable" in a book on measure theoretic probability. How am I supposed to distinguish between AC random variables and just continuous random variables?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Maybe if you consider X as a function (with random values) into some measure space,

then X is AC as a function?
 


A random variable X is called absolutely continuous if there exists a measurable function f≥0 such that

P\{a<X<b\}=\int_a^b f(x)dx.

If F is the cdf, that is, if F(t)=P\{X\leq t\}, then

F(t)=\int_{-\infty}^t f(x)dx

It can be checked that F is a continuous function.

Now, I think that the notion of continuous random variable depends on the author. Some define absolutely continuous and continuous as the same thing. Others say that X is continuous if the cdf F is continuous. In that case, we have seen that every absolutely continuous random variable is continuous. But there are (weird) continuous random variables that are not absolutely continuous. In practice, the interesting notion is clearly absolutely continuous, and not continuous.
 


I believe the Dirac delta distribution is an example of a distribution which is considered continuous but not absolutely continuous.
 


micromass said:
A random variable X is called absolutely continuous if there exists a measurable function f≥0 such that

P\{a<X<b\}=\int_a^b f(x)dx.

If F is the cdf, that is, if F(t)=P\{X\leq t\}, then

F(t)=\int_{-\infty}^t f(x)dx

It can be checked that F is a continuous function.

Now, I think that the notion of continuous random variable depends on the author. Some define absolutely continuous and continuous as the same thing. Others say that X is continuous if the cdf F is continuous. In that case, we have seen that every absolutely continuous random variable is continuous. But there are (weird) continuous random variables that are not absolutely continuous. In practice, the interesting notion is clearly absolutely continuous, and not continuous.

Right, but doesn't it come down to the same thing as f being AC as a function?
 


SW VandeCarr said:
I believe the Dirac delta distribution is an example of a distribution which is considered continuous but not absolutely continuous.
That's too loose.

Bacle2 said:
Right, but doesn't it come down to the same thing as f being AC as a function?
And that's too strict.
Another way to look at a continuous random variable is that such a random variable must have P(X=x) for all x. Yet another way to look at it is that the continuous random variable has a continuous CDF. A random variable with a Dirac delta distribution violates both.

A random variable is absolutely continuous if the CDF has a derivative, call it f(x), except over a space of measure zero. There's nothing saying this function f(x) has to be continuous.

A random variable that is continuous but not absolutely continuous is called a singular random variable. One example of such a random variable would be one whose CDF is everywhere continuous but nowhere differentiable. The CDF doesn't have to be nowhere differentiable to qualify as singular. It just has to be non-differentiable over a space with a non-zero measure.
 


D H said:
Another way to look at a continuous random variable is that such a random variable must have P(X=x) for all x. Yet another way to look at it is that the continuous random variable has a continuous CDF. A random variable with a Dirac delta distribution violates both.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...qRgbgO&usg=AFQjCNG905iuDw41bP91TCSD6O0AJU-VAg

See 1.24 re delta distribution. There might be some disagreement about this.

'Distributions which are induced by some locally integrable function are said to be regular. Other distributions (such as the delta distribution) are said to be singular. (As an exercise, prove that the delta distribution is not induced by any locally integrable function).'
 


SW VandeCarr said:
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...qRgbgO&usg=AFQjCNG905iuDw41bP91TCSD6O0AJU-VAg

See 1.24 re delta distribution. There might be some disagreement about this.

'Distributions which are induced by some locally integrable function are said to be regular. Other distributions (such as the delta distribution) are said to be singular. (As an exercise, prove that the delta distribution is not induced by any locally integrable function).'

Distributions in probability are not the same thing as Shwartz distributions, aka generalised functions. There is overlap, but they are different spaces and have different properties.
 


pwsnafu said:
Distributions in probability are not the same thing as Shwartz distributions, aka generalised functions. There is overlap, but they are different spaces and have different properties.

Well, I won't disagree with you, but the limit of the Gaussian distribution as the variance approaches zero is the Dirac delta distribution.

http://math.stackexchange.com/quest...delta-function-and-delta-as-limit-of-gaussian
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K