Conditional expectation of Exp(theta)

ghostyc
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Given X follows an exponential distribution \theta

how could i show something like

\operatorname{E}(X|X \geq \tau)=\tau+\frac 1 \theta

?

i have get the idea of using Memorylessness property here,
but how can i combine the probabilty with the expectation?

thanks.

casper
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ghostyc said:
i have get the idea of using Memorylessness property here,
but how can i combine the probabilty with the expectation?

If you write down mathematically the Memorynessless property then it might become obvious. Otherwise it's fine to express the conditional expectation as a ratio of integrals and evaluate it directly.
 
bpet said:
If you write down mathematically the Memorynessless property then it might become obvious. Otherwise it's fine to express the conditional expectation as a ratio of integrals and evaluate it directly.

\Pr(T > s + t\; |\; T > s) = \Pr(T > t) \;\; \hbox{for all}\ s, t \ge 0.

i just can't convert from expectation to the probability...

damn
 
That's what I did so far.

But I just can't use the memoryless property to do it ...

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/5945/tempz.jpg
 

Attachments

  • temp.jpg
    temp.jpg
    26.2 KB · Views: 529
Last edited by a moderator:
ghostyc said:
That's what I did so far.

But I just can't use the memoryless property to do it ...

Hint: rewrite the memoryless property into a form suitable to use on line 1 of your proof. Conditional probabilities -> conditional cdf -> conditional pdf.
 
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