Applying Chernoff bound on normal distribution

phonic
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Dear all,

I am trying to find out a good bound on the deveation of a normal distributed variable from its mean.

The noramly distributed variables X_t \sim N(\mu, \sigma^2), t= 1,2,...,n are iid. Applying the Chebyshev inequality on the mean of these n iid variables:

m_n = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{t=1}^n X_t

P(m_n - \mu \geq \epsilon ) = \frac{1}{2} P(e^{s(m_n - \mu)^2} \geq e^{s\epsilon^2} ) \leq \frac{1}{2}e^{-s \epsilon^2} E[e^{s(m_n-\mu)^2}]

The question is how to calculate this expectaion
E[e^{s(m_n-\mu)^2}]

Can anybody give some hints? Thanks a lot!

Since m_n \sim N(\mu, \frac{\sigma^2}{n} ),
E[(m_n-\mu)^2}] = \frac{\sigma^2}{n}. But
E[e^{s(m_n-\mu)^2}] seems not easy.

Phonic
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you treating s as a constant? Can you? Isn't it a r.v., e.g. s = sn?
 
s can be considered as a constant number. Since the Markov inequality holds for any s.

Is there some bounds on the tail probability of a normal distribution?
 
But in P(m_n - \mu \geq \epsilon ) = \frac{1}{2} P(e^{s(m_n - \mu)^2} \geq e^{s\epsilon^2} ) \leq \frac{1}{2}e^{-s \epsilon^2} E[e^{s(m_n-\mu)^2}], you have moved s out of the E[] in e^{-s \epsilon^2} but then left it inside the E[] in E[e^{s(m_n-\mu)^2}], is that legit? More to the point, can you also take it out of the latter, and if you can, would that make the job easier?
 
Last edited:
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...

Similar threads

Back
Top