Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Deriving Expectations (i.e. mean)

  1. Mar 24, 2008 #1
    Deriving Expectations (i.e. means)

    I'm looking at my Introduction to Econometrics book and trying to figure out the derivations in the 2nd Chapter.

    First, [tex]E(Y^{2}) = \sigma^{2}_{Y}+\mu^{2}_{Y}[/tex]

    The derivation goes like this:

    [tex]E(Y^{2}) = E{[(Y - \mu_{Y})+ \mu_{Y}]^{2}} = E[(Y- \mu_{Y})^2] + 2\mu_{Y}E(Y-\mu_{Y})+ \mu^{2}_{Y} = \sigma^{2}_{Y} + \mu^{2}_{Y}[/tex] because [tex]E(Y - \mu_{Y}) = 0[/tex]

    If this last thing equals zero, then why doesn't everything but [tex]\mu^{2}_{Y}[/tex] drop out?
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2008
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 24, 2008 #2
    Already the first "equality" is certainly not true.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 6, 2008
  4. Mar 24, 2008 #3
    Err, yeah. Sorry -- fixed.
  5. Mar 24, 2008 #4
    Because [itex]E(Y-\mu_Y)=0[/itex] does not imply that [itex]E\left[(Y-\mu_Y)^2\right]=0[/itex]. Otherwise, every random variable would be degenerate. Note that the square is *inside* the expectation.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 6, 2008
  6. Mar 29, 2008 #5
    Ah, yeah. [tex]E\left[(Y-\mu_Y)^2\right]=\sigma^{2}[/tex], right?

    So now I'm wondering how [tex]E(Y^{2}) = E{[(Y - \mu_{Y})+ \mu_{Y}]^{2}} [/tex]
  7. Mar 30, 2008 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Are you sure it is not E[((Y-\mu_Y)+ \mu_Y)^2][/itex]? That would then be [itex]E[(Y-\mu_Y)^2- 2\mu_Y(Y- \mu_Y)+ \mu_y^2][/itex] which gives the rest.
  8. Mar 30, 2008 #7
    Err, sorry. That's what it is. But I still don't see how you go from [tex]E(Y^2)[/tex] to [tex]E[((Y-\mu_Y)+\mu_Y)^2][/tex]. How'd they come up with the latter definition? Did they just add and subtract [tex]\mu_{Y}[/tex] and then add it, then group them using the associativity property?

    If I didn't add and subtract [tex]\mu_{Y}\[/tex], it seems to me that I would get [tex]E(Y^2) = \mu_Y^2[/tex]...

    How do you do the proof of [tex]E(Y) = \mu_Y[/tex]?

    Nevermind, I see. You have to add and subtract [tex]\mu_Y[/tex] (why is this formatting strangely?) to even get it. The proof of [tex]E(Y) = \mu_Y[/tex] is, I guess

    [tex]E(Y) = E[(Y -\mu_Y) + \mu_Y] = E(Y - \mu_Y) + E(\mu_Y)[/tex]

    Was what I did above legal? Can I distribute the E, and would [tex]E(\mu_Y) = \mu_Y[/tex]
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2008
  9. Mar 30, 2008 #8
    No, because

    E(Y^2)\neq \left[E(Y)\right]^2 = \mu_Y^2

    That's a definition.

    It was "legal", but to see that the first term vanishes you use [itex]E(Y-\mu_Y)=0[/itex] which is equivalent to [itex]E(Y)=\mu_Y[/itex] which is what you want to show. [itex]\mu_Y[/itex] is just a short notation for [itex]E(Y)[/itex]
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 6, 2008
  10. Mar 31, 2008 #9
    The notation could be a source of confusion. Some people interpret the square in the second term to act on Y rather than on the expectation as a whole. (To the Original poster): perhaps its better if you write

    [tex]E^{2}(Y) = (E(Y))^2 = (\mu_Y)^{2} = \mu_{Y}^2[/tex]

    (PS--I wrote this because some books define variance(X) as [itex]E(X-\mu_{X})^2[/itex]. They actually mean [itex]E[(X-\mu_{X})^2][/itex], that is, expectation of the square of the difference between X and its mean.)
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook