Does Convergence in Distribution Guarantee Probability Equality for Events?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between convergence in distribution and probability equality for events, specifically in the context of sequences of random variables converging to a normal distribution. Participants explore whether convergence in distribution implies convergence of probabilities for specific events, as well as the distinctions between convergence in distribution and weak convergence.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether the limit of probabilities, given convergence in distribution, can be concluded directly or if it requires proof.
  • Another participant suggests that the easiest proof involves the continuous mapping theorem, indicating that convergence in distribution of random variables implies convergence in distribution of their absolute values.
  • There is a discussion about the definitions of weak convergence, with one participant noting that "weak convergence" may not be consistently defined across different texts.
  • A participant provides a definition of weak convergence in terms of probability measures and continuity sets, suggesting it generalizes convergence in distribution.
  • Participants discuss the differences between weak convergence and convergence in distribution, emphasizing that weak convergence applies to measures while convergence in distribution applies to random variables.
  • One participant proposes that convergence in distribution is the weakest form of convergence among various types.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the implications of convergence in distribution regarding probabilities are trivial or require proof. There is also no consensus on the definitions and implications of weak convergence versus convergence in distribution, indicating multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that definitions of weak convergence may vary across texts, leading to potential confusion. The discussion highlights the need for clarity in the definitions used in probability theory.

rukawakaede
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Here is my question: Given that [itex]X_n\xrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}Z[/itex] as [itex]n\rightarrow\infty[/itex] where [itex]Z\sim N(0,1)[/itex].
Can we conclude directly that [itex]\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}P(|X_n|\leq u)=P(|Z|\leq u)[/itex] where [itex]u\in (0,1)[/itex]?
Is this completely trivial or requires some proof?

Also what is the differences between convergence in distribution and weak convergence?
I found both of them quite confusing as I was given a distinct definition for both concepts while some other books (including wikipedia) say they are the same.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi rukawakaede! :smile:

rukawakaede said:
Hi,

Here is my question: Given that [itex]X_n\xrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}Z[/itex] as [itex]n\rightarrow\infty[/itex] where [itex]Z\sim N(0,1)[/itex].
Can we conclude directly that [itex]\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}P(|X_n|\leq u)=P(|Z|\leq u)[/itex] where [itex]u\in (0,1)[/itex]?
Is this completely trivial or requires some proof?

I don't find this to be completely trivial, as a direct proof is annoying. The easiest proof uses the continuous mapping theorem ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_mapping_theorem ). Applying this gets us

[tex]X_n\xrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}Z~~\Leftrightarrow~~|X_n|\xrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}|Z|[/tex]

and by definition this gives us

[tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}P(|X_n|\leq u)=P(|Z|\leq u)[/tex]

Also what is the differences between convergence in distribution and weak convergence?
I found both of them quite confusing as I was given a distinct definition for both concepts while some other books (including wikipedia) say they are the same.

May I ask you what your books mean with weak convergence (or which books you are using). I guess that the term "weak convergence" is not in standard use in probability and that therefore many conflicting definitions exist, but that's my guess...
 
micromass said:
Hi rukawakaede! :smile:
I don't find this to be completely trivial, as a direct proof is annoying. The easiest proof uses the continuous mapping theorem ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_mapping_theorem ). Applying this gets us

[tex]X_n\xrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}Z~~\Leftrightarrow~~|X_n|\xrightarrow{\mathcal{D}}|Z|[/tex]

and by definition this gives us

[tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}P(|X_n|\leq u)=P(|Z|\leq u)[/tex]
May I ask you what your books mean with weak convergence (or which books you are using). I guess that the term "weak convergence" is not in standard use in probability and that therefore many conflicting definitions exist, but that's my guess...

I was given:

Let [itex]Q,Q_1,Q_2,\cdots:\mathcal{B}(\mathbf{R}) \rightarrow [0,1][/itex] be probability measures. [itex]Q_n[/itex] converges weakly to [itex]Q[/itex] whenever
[tex]\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}I_{Q_n}(f)=I_Q(f),\quad n\rightarrow\infty[/tex]
for all [itex]f\in\mathcal{C}_b(\mathbf{R})[/itex].

is weak convergence a measure theoretic equivalent to the idea of convergence in distribution in probability theory since convergence in distribution is the weakest among all four other types?
 
Ah, I see. I'm not quite sure what you mean with [itex]I_Q(f)[/itex] actually.

But, anyways, weak convergence is a generalization of convergence in distribution to arbitrary measure spaces. Of course, measures don't have cdf's, so we can't apply the same definition. The definition I'm used to is that

[tex]\mu_n\Rightarrow \mu~\text{if and only if}~\mu_n(A)\rightarrow \mu(A)~\text{for all continuity sets}[/tex]

The definition you gave seems to be equivalent to the above one.

The difference between convegence in distribution and weak convergence is
1) weak convergence generalizes to arbitrary measure spaces
2) weak convergence is a convergence between measures, while convergence in distribution is a convergence between random variables.

But there is a link between the two convergences: that is, a sequence Xn converges in distribution if and only if

[tex]P_{X_n}\rightarrow P_X[/tex]

converges weakly. With

[tex]P_Y(A)=P\{Y\in A\}[/tex]
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
6K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
7K