Bounded Probability Density Function

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The claim that a continuous probability density function (PDF) f(x) is bounded over its domain when the variance Var[X] is bounded away from zero (0 < c < Var[X]) is false. The Chi-Squared distribution with one degree of freedom, denoted as ChiSq_1, serves as a counterexample, demonstrating that while the variance is indeed bounded away from zero, the PDF is not bounded on its domain (0, ∞). This discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the relationship between variance and boundedness of PDFs in probability theory.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of probability density functions (PDFs)
  • Knowledge of variance and its implications in probability distributions
  • Familiarity with the Chi-Squared distribution and its properties
  • Basic concepts of continuity in mathematical functions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of the Chi-Squared distribution, specifically ChiSq_1
  • Explore the implications of variance in different probability distributions
  • Learn about bounded and unbounded functions in the context of probability theory
  • Investigate other examples of continuous PDFs and their variance characteristics
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, statisticians, and students of probability theory seeking to deepen their understanding of the relationship between variance and the boundedness of probability density functions.

robbins
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Let the random variable X have the probability density function f(x). Suppose f(x) is
continuous over its domain and Var[X] is bounded away from zero: 0 < c < Var[X].

Claim: f(x) is bounded over its domain.

Is this claim true?

I don't think a counterexample like X ~ ChiSq_1 applies because, while f(0) is not bounded, the domain is x > 0. The question of continuity at 0 doesn't arise since 0 is not part of the domain, and therefore the lack of boundedness at 0 isn't relevant. But for any given c > 0, I can find an M such that f(c) < M. This example does show, however, why one can't claim "uniformly bounded."

Similarly, a degenerate r.v. (all probability mass at the point X = c, say) is continuous (because it is discrete), but the variance is not bounded away from zero.

So the question remains: is the claim true? How might one prove it?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
robbins said:
Similarly, a degenerate r.v. (all probability mass at the point X = c, say) is continuous (because it is discrete), but the variance is not bounded away from zero.

That example isn't relevant, because a degenerate r.v. does not have a p.d.f.
 
Let the random variable X have the probability density function f(x). Suppose f(x) is
continuous over its domain and Var[X] is bounded away from zero: 0 < c < Var[X].

Claim: f(x) is bounded over its domain.

Is this claim true?
No, it is not, and the [tex]\chi^2_1[/tex] distribution you mention shows it. You do not need to worry about the pdf at [tex]x = 0[/tex], since the domain is only [tex](0, \infty)[/tex]. The variance of [tex]\chi^2_k[/tex] is [tex]\sigma^2 = 2k[/tex], so the variance of [tex]\chi^2_1[/tex] is bounded away from zero. However, the density is not bounded on its domain.
Statdad
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K