CDP of a function of a continuous RV

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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the expectation of a function of a continuous random variable (RV), specifically focusing on the function E[e^X] where X is uniformly distributed between 0 and 1. Participants are examining different approaches to arrive at the same expectation value and seeking clarification on the methodology presented in a textbook.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents their method for calculating E[e^X] using the transformation Y = e^X and derives the cumulative distribution function (CDF) and probability density function (PDF) for Y.
  • Another participant expresses confusion regarding the textbook's approach and seeks clarification on why it differs from their own method.
  • Several participants reiterate a general rule for calculating expectations, stating that E[g(X)] can be computed as the integral of g(x) multiplied by the PDF of X.
  • One participant acknowledges their awareness of the general rule but emphasizes their desire to understand the reasoning behind the textbook's approach.
  • Another participant suggests that the textbook might have used a different dummy variable in the integral, implying a similarity to the participant's method.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the reasoning behind the textbook's method, and multiple approaches to calculating the expectation are discussed without resolution.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty regarding the necessity of the different approaches and the implications of using different variables in the calculations. The discussion highlights the complexity of understanding various methods for expectation calculations without resolving the underlying assumptions or steps involved.

IniquiTrance
Messages
185
Reaction score
0
REVISED: Expectation of a function of a continuous RV

Given:

[tex]f_{X}(x)=1[/tex]

[tex]0 \leq x \leq 1[/tex]

and 0 everywhere else.

We are asked to find E[eX]

The way my book does it is as follows:
page 191 in A First Course in Probability 8th ed by Sheldon Ross said:
[tex]Y = e^{X}[/tex]

[tex]F_{Y}(x) = P(X\leq Ln (x)) = \int_{0}^{ln x} f_{Y}(y) dy = ln (x)[/tex]

[tex]f_{Y}(x) = \frac{d}{dx} \left[ln (x)\right]=\frac{1}{x}[/tex]

[tex]1 \leq x \leq e[/tex]

[tex]E[e^{X}] = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} x f_{Y}(x) dx = \int_{1}^{e} dx = e - 1[/tex]

I understand how to do it as follows. I don't understand the author's way of doing it.

[tex]Y = e^{X}[/tex]

[tex]0 \leq x \leq 1[/tex]

[tex]1 \leq y \leq e[/tex]

[tex]F_{Y}(y) = P(X\leq Ln (y)) = \int_{0}^{ln y} f_{X}(x) dx = \int_{0}^{ln y} dx = ln (y)[/tex]

[tex]f_{Y}(y) = \frac{d}{dy} \left[ln (y)\right]=\frac{1}{y}[/tex]

[tex]E[e^{X}] = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} y f_{Y}(y) dy = \int_{1}^{e} dy = e - 1[/tex]

Can someone please explain to me why the author does it his way instead of mine?

I know I can make life easier by just taking:

[tex]\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}g(x)f(x) dx[/tex]

but I want to understand what's going on here.

Any help is much appreciated!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Any ideas? Sorry to bump, just redid the whole post, so it's essentially a new question :).
 
A general rule if you're given [tex]f_{X}(x)[/tex] to calculate [tex]E[g(X)][/tex] is:


[tex] E[g(X)] = \int{g(x) \, f_{X}(x) \, dx}[/tex]
 
Dickfore said:
A general rule if you're given [tex]f_{X}(x)[/tex] to calculate [tex]E[g(X)][/tex] is:


[tex] E[g(X)] = \int{g(x) \, f_{X}(x) \, dx}[/tex]

Yeah, I noted that I'm aware of that at the bottom of my post. :smile:

I just want to understand why the book does it this way.
 
IniquiTrance said:
Yeah, I noted that I'm aware of that at the bottom of my post. :smile:

I just want to understand why the book does it this way.

I think the book did it the same way as you, but used a different dummy variable in the last integral.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K