Finding CDF of Gamma_m: Solve Using Functions

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter EngWiPy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cdf
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the random variable ##\Gamma_m##, defined in terms of other independent and identically distributed random variables ##\{a_n\}##. Participants explore both conditional and unconditional CDFs, discussing the implications of their approaches and the necessary calculations involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the random variable ##\Gamma_m## and its relationship with the random variables ##a_n##, providing the initial formulation for the CDF.
  • Another participant questions whether the focus is on the unconditional CDF or the conditional CDF, noting that the latter is simpler to compute.
  • A participant suggests rearranging the conditional CDF to isolate ##a_m##, leading to a formulation that incorporates the CDF of ##a_n##.
  • Some participants express that calculating the unconditional CDF requires averaging over all ##K-1## random variables, while the conditional CDF can be computed with respect to a single variable.
  • There is a mention of the complexity involved in finding the unconditional CDF, which may necessitate multiple integrations.
  • Participants clarify that the conditional CDF can be expressed in a simplified form, but emphasize that the unconditional CDF remains a more complex problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the distinction between conditional and unconditional CDFs, but there is no consensus on the best approach to compute the unconditional CDF, as it involves complex calculations that are still under discussion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the need for careful consideration of the dependencies between random variables and the implications for calculating their distributions. The complexity of the unconditional CDF is noted, with references to nested integrations that have not been resolved.

EngWiPy
Messages
1,361
Reaction score
61
Hello all,

I have the following random variable ##\Gamma_m=\frac{a_m}{\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n+1}## where the random variables ##\{a_n\}## are independent and identically distributed random variables. The CDF of random variable ##a_n## if given by

F_{a_n}(x)=1-\frac{1}{1+x}

Now I need to find the CDF of ##\Gamma_m##. I started like this:

F_m(\gamma)=Pr\left[\frac{a_m}{\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n+1}\leq \gamma\right]=1-Pr\left[\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n<\frac{a_m}{\gamma}-1\right]=1-\int_{a_m}Pr\left[\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n<\frac{a_m}{\gamma}-1\right]f_{a_m}(a_m)\,da_m

where ##f_{a_m}(a_m)=1/(1+a_m)^2## is the PDF of the random variable ##a_m##. Apparently, ##Pr\left[\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n<\frac{a_m}{\gamma}-1\right]## is the CDF of the random variable ##\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n## for a given ##a_m##. How can I continue from here without resorting to Laplace or Fourier Transform? The reason why is that I need to write the CDF in terms of functions, because later I need to find its PDF.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Do you want the unconditional CDF of ##\Gamma_m##, or the CDF conditional on the values of all the ##a_n## except ##a_m##? The latter is easy. The former requires a multiple integration.
 
andrewkirk said:
Do you want the unconditional CDF of ##\Gamma_m##, or the CDF conditional on the values of all the ##a_n## except ##a_m##? The latter is easy. The former requires a multiple integration.

I need the latter first. How can I find it? Any tips?
 
You worked out the following:
$$F_{\Gamma_m}(\gamma)=Pr\left[\frac{a_m}{1+\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n}\leq \gamma\right] $$
For the conditional case this is:
$$F_{\Gamma_m|a_1,...a_{n-1},a_{n+1},...,a_K}(\gamma)=Pr\left[\frac{a_m}{1+\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n}\leq \gamma\ \middle|\ a_1,...a_{n-1},a_{n+1},...,a_K\right] $$
Instead of the next step you take in your post, rearrange this to get ##a_m##, which is the only random variable in the conditional case, on its own on the left of the '##\leq##' sign. So you have
$$F_{\Gamma_m|a_1,...a_{n-1},a_{n+1},...,a_K}(\gamma)=Pr\left[a_m\leq \gamma{\left(1+\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n\right)}\ \middle|\ a_1,...a_{n-1},a_{n+1},...,a_K\right] $$
which is equal to
$$F_{a_n}\left( \gamma{\left(1+\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n\right)}\right)$$

So now you can just use the formula you wrote for ##F_{a_m}##.
 
That's why I arranged it in a different way, because in your approach to find the unconditional CDF, you need to average over all ##K-1## random variables. In my arrangement, I just need to average over one random variable if I can find the CDF of the summation conditioned on ##a_m##.
 
S_David said:
That's why I arranged it in a different way, because in your approach to find the unconditional CDF, you need to average over all ##K-1## random variables.
You asked in post 3 about the conditional CDF which, per the above, is just:

$$1-\frac1{ \gamma{\left(1+\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n\right)}}$$

As I stated above, the unconditional CDF requires a completely different calculation. That will involve a ##K##-deep nested integration.
 
andrewkirk said:
You asked in post 3 about the conditional CDF which, per the above, is just:

$$1-\frac1{ \gamma{\left(1+\sum\limits_{\substack{n=1\\n\neq m}}^Ka_n\right)}}$$

As I stated above, the unconditional CDF requires a completely different calculation. That will involve a ##K##-deep nested integration.

My ultimate aim as I stated in the first post is to evaluate the unconditional CDF, and in post 3 I said I need the conditional CDF first, and by the conditional CDF, I meant the conditional CDF I formulated in the last part of my first post, namely, the CDF of the summation of the random variables conditioned on ##a_m##. I formulated the problem this way with the ultimate goal of the unconditional CDF to be found as easy as possible.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K