Density of product of two uniform RVs

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the density of the product of two independent random variables, X and Y, both uniformly distributed over the interval [-1, 1]. The original poster attempts to derive the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of W = XY and subsequently differentiate it to find the density function. However, they express confusion regarding the bounds of their integrals and the overall approach.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the strategy of finding the CDF and differentiating it to obtain the density function. Some question the utility of considering P(W > w) and explore the implications of symmetry in the problem. There are attempts to break down the integral into cases based on the signs of X and Y, with concerns about the limits of integration and the behavior of logarithmic functions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing various approaches and insights. Some have suggested that breaking the problem into different regions may simplify the integration process. There is a recognition of the challenges posed by the integration limits and the nature of the functions involved, but no consensus has been reached on a definitive method.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the need to consider different cases based on the signs of the variables involved, as well as the implications of symmetry in the problem setup. There is acknowledgment of potential errors in previous calculations and the complexity introduced by the logarithmic terms.

obesogen
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


If X,Y are independent RVs ~ U[-1,1], and W=X*Y, find the density of W.

Homework Equations


The Attempt at a Solution


I feel my approach is right, but the bounds of my final integral don't make sense.
[tex] F_{XY}(w)=P(XY \leq w)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} P(XY \leq w | Y=y)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}P(X*y \leq w)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_{-1}^{1}P(X*y \leq w)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_{-1}^{1}P(X \leq w/y)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_{-1}^{1}F_X(w/y)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> [/tex]
For some RV Z, Z~U[-1,1], [itex]F_Z(z)=(z+1)/2[/itex]
And the density of Y is constant (1/2).
So the integral becomes
[tex] \int_{-1}^{1} \frac{\frac{w}{y}+1}{2}*\frac{1}{2}dy \\<br /> =\int_{-1}^{1} \frac{w}{4y}+\frac{1}{4} dy \\<br /> =\frac{w}{4}log(y)+\frac{y}{4} \rvert_{-1}^1 \\[/tex]

which obviously has a problem.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
obesogen said:

Homework Statement


If X,Y are independent RVs ~ U[-1,1], and W=X*Y, find the density of W.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


I feel my approach is right, but the bounds of my final integral don't make sense.
[tex] F_{XY}(w)=P(XY \leq w)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} P(XY \leq w | Y=y)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}P(X*y \leq w)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_{-1}^{1}P(X*y \leq w)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_{-1}^{1}P(X \leq w/y)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_{-1}^{1}F_X(w/y)*f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> [/tex]
For some RV Z, Z~U[-1,1], [itex]F_Z(z)=(z+1)/2[/itex]
And the density of Y is constant (1/2).
So the integral becomes
[tex] \int_{-1}^{1} \frac{\frac{w}{y}+1}{2}*\frac{1}{2}dy \\<br /> =\int_{-1}^{1} \frac{w}{4y}+\frac{1}{4} dy \\<br /> =\frac{w}{4}log(y)+\frac{y}{4} \rvert_{-1}^1 \\[/tex]

which obviously has a problem.

W can range from -1 to +1. To disentangle signs I think it is easiest to look at P{W > w} for 0 < w < 1 and P{W < w} for -1 < w < 0. For example, for 0 < w < 1, what is the event {W > w} in (X,Y) space?

RGV
 
Thank you for the reply, although I am not sure I understand your suggestions. I thought the general strategy to these types of problems was to find the cdf and differentiate. In this way, I don't know how P(W>w) can be of particular use. Are you suggesting a different approach? I tried taking the double integral of W<=w for each case (quadrant), but it seems like since the function is symmetric, it would either evaluate to 0 or (taking the integral of |W| when y<0), just 2...

*Small note: my original calculation was also a bit incorrect, since I need to break up the integral into two components, since the inequality flips when y is negative--although I run into similar limit problems there.
 
obesogen said:
Thank you for the reply, although I am not sure I understand your suggestions. I thought the general strategy to these types of problems was to find the cdf and differentiate. In this way, I don't know how P(W>w) can be of particular use. Are you suggesting a different approach? I tried taking the double integral of W<=w for each case (quadrant), but it seems like since the function is symmetric, it would either evaluate to 0 or (taking the integral of |W| when y<0), just 2...

*Small note: my original calculation was also a bit incorrect, since I need to break up the integral into two components, since the inequality flips when y is negative--although I run into similar limit problems there.

G(w) = Pr(W > w) = 1 - F(w) = 1 - P(W <= w), so the density f(w) = dF/dw = -dG/dw. That is used in lots of places, and you should get familiar with it.

RGV
 
Last edited:
Ok, that makes sense, but I don't see how it helps my integral problem, since I still have to compute essentially the same integral. Also, I realized that the reason I was having a lot of trouble was that log|x| actually cannot be integrated using those bounds.
 
obesogen said:
Ok, that makes sense, but I don't see how it helps my integral problem, since I still have to compute essentially the same integral. Also, I realized that the reason I was having a lot of trouble was that log|x| actually cannot be integrated using those bounds.

Well, the suggestion I made helped ME a lot; the integration regions are easier, etc. However, if you don't care to do that, use whatever method you want---just be really careful about the integration limits.

As you say, log |x| cannot be integrated directly, but it is a piecewise-smooth function what can be integrated with no problem within the two separate regions x < 0 and x > 0. That's all you need.

RGV
 
I must still be missing something here. Here's what I'm getting for 0<w<1, for example. Thanks for your patience.

[tex] G(w)=P(XY>w)=\int P(Xy>w|Y=y)f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_0^1 P(X>w/y)f(y)dy+\int_{-1}^0 P(X<w/y)f(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_0^1 \left(1-\frac{w/y+1}{2}\right)*\frac{1}{2}+\int_{-1}^{0}\frac{w/y+1}{2}f(y)dy \\<br /> =1/4\int_0^1 dy-1/4 \int_0^1 w/y dy +1/2\int_{-1}^{0}w/y dy + 1/4 \int_{-1}^{0}dy \\<br /> = \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{4}\int_0^1\frac{w}{y}dy+\frac{1}{4}\int_{-1}^{0}\frac{w}{y}dy \\[/tex]

Also, I misspoke in my last comment about integrating ln|x|. I actually meant integrating 1/x, as you can see above.
 
obesogen said:
I must still be missing something here. Here's what I'm getting for 0<w<1, for example. Thanks for your patience.

[tex] G(w)=P(XY>w)=\int P(Xy>w|Y=y)f_Y(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_0^1 P(X>w/y)f(y)dy+\int_{-1}^0 P(X<w/y)f(y)dy \\<br /> =\int_0^1 \left(1-\frac{w/y+1}{2}\right)*\frac{1}{2}+\int_{-1}^{0}\frac{w/y+1}{2}f(y)dy \\<br /> =1/4\int_0^1 dy-1/4 \int_0^1 w/y dy +1/2\int_{-1}^{0}w/y dy + 1/4 \int_{-1}^{0}dy \\<br /> = \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{4}\int_0^1\frac{w}{y}dy+\frac{1}{4}\int_{-1}^{0}\frac{w}{y}dy \\[/tex]

Also, I misspoke in my last comment about integrating ln|x|. I actually meant integrating 1/x, as you can see above.

That seems complicated to me. For 0 < w < 1 the region {X*Y>w} consists of two right-triangular shapes (with a curved hypotenuse), one with its right angle at the top right and one with its right angle at the bottom left of the square [-1,1]^2. The two areas are equal, and the probability is the sum of the areas divided by the normalization factor 4, So, the probability is
[tex]P(W > w) = 2 \frac{1}{4} \int_{x=w}^1 \int_{y=w/x}^1 dy \, dx<br /> = \frac{1}{2} \int_{w}^1 \left(1-\frac{w}{x}\right) \,dx = \frac{1}{2} \left[ 1-w +w \ln(w) \right].[/tex]
For -1 < w < 0, P(W < w) is the same as P(W > |w|); just look at the geometric figures involved.

RGV
 
Ah, now I understand the use of 1-F(w), etc. A very useful trick, indeed. Thanks a lot, this was very helpful.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K