High School Expectation of probability density function

Click For Summary
The expectation of a probability density function (pdf) is defined as E(X) = ∫ x f(x) dx, and this can be generalized to E(g(x)) = ∫ g(x) f(x) dx. The user attempted to calculate E(5 + 10X) using both a linear combination approach and direct integration, resulting in two different answers. It was clarified that both methods are valid, but a mistake likely occurred in the integration process. The discussion emphasizes that E(X) and E(X^2) are specific instances of the general expectation formula for functions of random variables.
songoku
Messages
2,508
Reaction score
402
E(X) of probability density function f(x) is \int x f(x) dx

E(X2) of probability density function f(x) is \int x^2 f(x) dx

Can I generalize it to E(g(x)) of probability density function f(x) = \int g(x). f(x) dx ?

I tried to find E(5 + 10X) from pdf. I did two ways:
1. I found E(X) then using linear combination of random variable, E (5 + 10X) = 5 + 10 E(X)

2. Using integration, \int (5 + 10x) f(x) dx

I got two different answers. Which one is correct and why?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
songoku said:
E(X) of probability density function f(x) is \int x f(x) dx

E(X2) of probability density function f(x) is \int x^2 f(x) dx

Can I generalize it to E(g(x)) of probability density function f(x) = \int g(x). f(x) dx ?

I tried to find E(5 + 10X) from pdf. I did two ways:
1. I found E(X) then using linear combination of random variable, E (5 + 10X) = 5 + 10 E(X)

2. Using integration, \int (5 + 10x) f(x) dx

I got two different answers. Which one is correct and why?

Thanks

They are both correct. You must have made a mistake integrating.
 
songoku said:
E(X) of probability density function f(x) is \int x f(x) dx

E(X2) of probability density function f(x) is \int x^2 f(x) dx

Can I generalize it to E(g(x)) of probability density function f(x) = \int g(x). f(x) dx ?

Yes. In fact, you could take that to be the definition of the expected value of some function ##g(x)##. Then, ##E(x)## and ##E(x^2)## are specific cases of ##g(x)##.
 
I re-checked so many times and apparently the mistake was I wrote the question wrongly o:)

Thank you so much perok
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K