I Finding a Factor's Contribution to An Average of a Product

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Spanky1996
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Average Product
Spanky1996
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Say that there is an object

X = <ABC> = (A_1B_1C_1+A_2B_2C_2+...+A_NB_NC_N)/N

Is there any way to say what X_A is? Or what exactly the A term in all of these terms contributed to X? Or is that info pretty much washed out in this type of ensemble average?

Oh, and A, B and C are random values. I will say, in my problem they do differ by about an order of magnitude from each other.

Thanks for any insights.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Spanky1996 said:
Is there any way to say what ##X_A## is
First you have to define it ...

Next you are interested in the probability distributions of your stochastic variables. Are the variables independent ?

Spanky1996 said:
they do differ by about an order of magnitude from each other
I think that's less interesting: you can divide each variable by a scale factor without doing much damage.

It's fun playing with Monte Carlo's in Excel: make three columns of a thousand ' =rand() ' cells each and make a histogram of the products
Look at average and stdev for each column
Compare with ' =rand() - 0.5 '
 
  • Like
Likes Spanky1996
BvU said:
First you have to define it ...

Next you are interested in the probability distributions of your stochastic variables. Are the variables independent ?I think that's less interesting: you can divide each variable by a scale factor without doing much damage.

It's fun playing with Monte Carlo's in Excel: make three columns of a thousand ' =rand() ' cells each and make a histogram of the products
Look at average and stdev for each column
Compare with ' =rand() - 0.5 '
I am actually doing monte Carlo simulations, bravo.

I guess defining it is my issue. I'm not sure how one can define/examine what role the set of A's had in whatever the final answer is for X.

The variables are independent.

I was thinking of doing something similar to what you suggest in your last paragraph. I don't understand the last bit though '=rand()-0.5' what is that?

Thank you for your interest!
 
Spanky1996 said:
'=rand()-0.5' what is that
Gives a different average (of course) and sigma (!) and a different histogram :smile:
 
what else can you tell us about these random variables-- Is there a second moment?

also I typically wonder: are they positive valued? are they bounded?
 
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...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top