Estimating p with Bernoulli Sample

  • Thread starter Thread starter chicory
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bernoulli
chicory
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
A Bernoulli random sample :

X=1 , Pr(X=1)=p;
X=0 , Pr(X=0)=1-p;

taken X1, ..., Xn

and if it is known that 0=< p =<0.5

find a method of moments estimator of p

If I just take estimator of P =(sum Xi )/n than the estimate p may be bigger than 0.5 as in extreme case all Xi =1 .
What should I do , take estimator of p = Max (0.5*n , Sum Xi) /n ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
chicory said:
A Bernoulli random sample :

X=1 , Pr(X=1)=p;
X=0 , Pr(X=0)=1-p;

taken X1, ..., Xn

and if it is known that 0=< p =<0.5

find a method of moments estimator of p

If I just take estimator of P =(sum Xi )/n than the estimate p may be bigger than 0.5 as in extreme case all Xi =1 .
What should I do , take estimator of p = Max (0.5*n , Sum Xi) /n ?

Just simply state that fact, that is

P= sum Xi /n if sum Xi /n < 0.5
P= 0.5 otherwise.
 
But... is it too artificial?
Pr( estimator (p) = 0.5 ) is slightly bigger ...?
 
Artificial? You like better min( sum Xi/n, 0.5) ?

No, p will not be generally bigger and you will rarely get estimations of 0.7 or 0.8, remember that they already assure you that the real p is no higher than 0.5

Adjusting the estimation makes the value p=0.5 more common but that is irrelevant and only makes the estimation more accurate.
 
Last edited:
Thank you so much !
 
You're welcome :smile:
 
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