CDF: Prove a>0 for F(x) = 1 - e^(-ax) - axe^(-ax)

  • Thread starter Thread starter fateswarm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cdf Probabilities
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The function F(x) = 1 - e^(-ax) - axe^(-ax) constitutes a cumulative distribution function (CDF) if and only if the parameter 'a' is greater than 0. The conditions for F(x) to be a valid CDF include F(x) being non-negative and bounded above by 1, which leads to the requirement that a must be positive. Additionally, the derivative of F(x) must be non-negative for all x, confirming that F(x) is an increasing function when a > 0.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of cumulative distribution functions (CDF)
  • Knowledge of derivatives and their implications for monotonicity
  • Familiarity with exponential functions and their properties
  • Basic integration techniques, particularly for improper integrals
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of cumulative distribution functions in probability theory
  • Learn how to compute and analyze derivatives of functions
  • Explore the implications of exponential decay in probability distributions
  • Investigate improper integrals and their convergence criteria
USEFUL FOR

Students in statistics, mathematics, or related fields who are studying probability distributions, particularly those interested in understanding the conditions for functions to qualify as cumulative distribution functions.

fateswarm
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Given the function F(x) = 1 - e^(-ax) - axe^(-ax) for x>=0 and 0 elsewhere, for which values of 'a' does the function constitute a CDF?

Homework Equations




The Attempt at a Solution



I started with saying for that to occur, provided x1>x2 -> F(x1) > F(x2)

Though I've only managed to say for x1=0 and x2=1 -> a>0 but I'm not sure if it's an unequivocal answer.

How can I prove it decisively?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
fateswarm said:
I started with saying for that to occur, provided x1>x2 -> F(x1) > F(x2)
That should be ≥.

What about F(x)≥0? F(x)≤1?
Did you check the derivative?

If all of them are fine, you are done.
 
If you want to show that F is an increasing function, then show that its derivative is never negative.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
HallsofIvy said:
If you want to show that F is an increasing function, then show that its derivative is never negative.

Oh, good idea (+thanks). I'll look into it. I may return if I see an issue.
 
I've got a bit of trouble. The derivative>0 appears to conclude to (a^2)xe^(-ax)>0 which appears to be true for any 'a' belonging in IR. It appears to be more direct to do 0<=F(x)<=1 which appears to conclude to 0<=(e^-ax)(1-ax)<=1 but how do I learn how to solve that inequality?
 
fateswarm said:
I've got a bit of trouble. The derivative>0 appears to conclude to (a^2)xe^(-ax)>0 which appears to be true for any 'a' belonging in IR. It appears to be more direct to do 0<=F(x)<=1 which appears to conclude to 0<=(e^-ax)(1-ax)<=1 but how do I learn how to solve that inequality?

Aren't you forgetting something very important? If ##f(x) = a^2 x e^{-ax} 1_{\{x \geq 0 \}},## then you need two things:
(1) \; f(x) \geq 0 \text{ for all }x; \text{ and }\\<br /> (2)\; \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} f(x) \, dx = 1.
In the current case the integral goes from 0 to ∞ because f(x) = 0 for x < 0. So, if you have a = 0 do these conditions hold? What about if a < 0?
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Well I can I show that for a negative 'a' F will not be approaching 1 for x->+oo. The integral of f(x) between 0 and +oo appears to be 'a' times the expected value of any Exp(a) so it's 1 for any 'a', hrm.. provided a>0 (for any Exp(a)) so I guess that might be enough. It's a bit confusing since the exercise goes on to ask for the fx(x) in a later question so I'm unsure if it needs it exposed directly on this first question.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K