Cumulative distribution function (what is this 't'?)

Mattofix
Messages
137
Reaction score
0
my question is regarding 'continuous' cumulative distribution functions.

i kind of get it apart from that darn 't' in the definition (see http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/2/4/f24252ffb5e5e747b246189b7e1cfcce.png). My textbook, my lecture notes and even wikipedia don't refrer to the 't', apart from in the definition. I wouldn't mind apart from that i am working my way through some questions and have come across quite a few
asking me for the 'c.d.f of X for all t' (for example t<0 and t>2), not asking for the c.d.f of x values (like all of the worked examples i have come across) so what are the questions after?

Here is an example so you understand what my problem is.

Homework Statement


'X is a continuous random quantity with probability density function f(x) = x for 0<x<1, f(x)=2-x for 1 \leq x < 2 with f(x)=0
for all other x. Find the value of Fx(t), the cumulative distribution function of X, for all t (that is t<0 and t>2 as well as 0 \leq t \leq 2 )'


Homework Equations



http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/2/4/f24252ffb5e5e747b246189b7e1cfcce.png
http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/d/e/fdec25ee8674e78b0bad557daa923a41.png (maybe for when i find the new boundaries they are asking for?)

The Attempt at a Solution


If it was like all of the examples iv seen id say for x<0 F(x)=0, for x>2 F(x)=1, for 0<x<1 F(x)= x^{2}/2 and for 1<x<2 F(x)= 2x - x^{2}/2 , but its not...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If that definition makes any sense to you at all, you must know how to integrate. And if that is true, then you should understand that the t is a "dummy variable"- it does not exist and has no meaning "outside" the integral.

Perhaps it would be easier to understand by looking at the analogous situation in a sum:
\sum_{n=1}^5 3n- 1= (3(1)-1)+ (3(2)-1)+ (3(3)-1)+ (3(4)-1)+ (3(5)-1)
= 2+ 5+ 8+ 11+ 14= 40
the "n" is a "dummy index" which exists only in the sum.
 
ok, but what about the example? i have integrated.

if you can help me get the correct answer for this then hopefully i will be able to make the links and get to grips with it.
 
Mattofix said:

The Attempt at a Solution


for x<0 F(x)=0, for x>2 F(x)=1, for 0<x<1 F(x)= x^{2}/2 and for 1<x<2 F(x)= 2x - x^{2}/2 , but its not...


ok so for t<0 F(t)=0, for t>2 F(t)=1,

and for 0<t<1 F(t)= t^{2}/2 and for 1\leqt<2 F(x)= 2t - t^{2}/2 , but I am not being asked for that, I am being asked for 0\leqt\leq2, what is the answer to this?
 
You are close, but still miss one point:

Since the density is in two "pieces", you need to calculate the distribution function F(t) for two cases.

case 1: 0 < t < 1. Integrate the density from 0 to t to obtain F(t) for this case.

case 2: 1 \le t &lt; 2. Here is where you miss something. The correct value for F(t) is found by integrating the density from 0 to t. Since the density is in two pieces, and t is in the second interval, the integral here is broken into two pieces.
Write it out - it is MUCH easier to see in symbols than in my cryptic explanation.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top