Expected Value and First Order Stochastic Dominance

AI Thread Summary
Establishing that E[X] >= E[Y] does not guarantee that random variable X has first-order stochastic dominance over Y. An example provided illustrates that X can have a higher expected value while still not dominating Y in terms of stochastic dominance. The discussion confirms that first-order stochastic dominance requires the mean of the dominating variable to be greater, but the reverse is not necessarily true. This clarification helps in understanding the relationship between expected value and stochastic dominance. Overall, the inquiry highlights the nuances in comparing random variables through these statistical concepts.
odck11
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Dear All:

Given two random variables X and Y, if I have established the relationship E[X]>=E[Y], does this necessarily imply that X must have a first-order-stochastic dominance over Y?

I know that first order stochastic dominance implies that the mean value of the dominating random variable be greater than the other variable but I am trying to find out whether the reverse must hold.

Thanks in advance.
Regards.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
odck11 said:
Dear All:

Given two random variables X and Y, if I have established the relationship E[X]>=E[Y], does this necessarily imply that X must have a first-order-stochastic dominance over Y?

I know that first order stochastic dominance implies that the mean value of the dominating random variable be greater than the other variable but I am trying to find out whether the reverse must hold.

Thanks in advance.
Regards.
Not necessarily. Let X have two states 10 and 0, while Y has two states 2 and 1, both with equal probability. E(X) = 5, E(Y) = 1.5, but X does not dominate Y.
 
Great! Thanks a lot. That's what I guessed too but just wanted to make sure. I appreciate your fast reply.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top