Finding Expectation from the inverse CDF.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the application of the inverse cumulative distribution function (CDF) in calculating the expected value E(X) using the identity that if U follows a uniform distribution on (0,1), then F-1(U) has CDF F. The participant expresses confusion regarding the interpretation of E(X) as the area above the CDF of X and seeks clarification on integrating the inverse function F-1(U). The key takeaway is the necessity to change variables in the integral for E[X] to utilize F-1(U) effectively.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of cumulative distribution functions (CDFs)
  • Familiarity with probability density functions (PDFs)
  • Knowledge of the concept of expected value E(X)
  • Basic calculus, specifically integration techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of inverse cumulative distribution functions (CDFs)
  • Learn about the change of variables technique in integration
  • Explore the relationship between uniform distributions and their inverses
  • Investigate graphical interpretations of expected value in probability distributions
USEFUL FOR

Students in statistics or probability courses, educators teaching concepts of expected value and CDFs, and anyone looking to deepen their understanding of integration techniques in probability theory.

Dr. Rostov
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


http://209.85.48.12/3560/8/upload/p2791776.jpg


Homework Equations


The most relevant identity to the part that I'm confused about is the following identity: for any cumulative distribution function F, with the inverse function F-1, if U has uniform (0,1) distribution, then F-1(U) has cdf F. Also useful: E(X) is the integral from -[tex]\infty[/tex] to [tex]\infty[/tex] of x * f(x), where f(x) = the probability distribution function of the distribution.


The Attempt at a Solution


The identity given for E(X) of a CDF makes perfect sense to me, and deducing the discrete corollary to the theorem makes sense too. Part C isn't anything I need help on, either; I've already used the formula to get it. But though I understand that these all make sense, I'm really just kind of confused about what they're asking in part A. What do they mean by using X=F-1(U) to show that E(X) can be interpreted as the shaded area above the CDF of X? Basically, what's the convention for integrating an inverse function representing a function that you don't know? I'm not looking for any coddling -- I'm just really rather confused by this problem and would like a push in the right direction to figure out what's up here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Dr. Rostov said:
what's the convention for integrating an inverse function representing a function that you don't know?

Not so much that point of view, but more like the reverse. The phrase "using X=F-1(U)" means use this change of variables to change the integral for E[X] into an integral in terms of F-1(u) and du.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K