Finding k in a probability density function

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on finding the constant k in the joint probability density function f(x,y,z) = kxy²z, defined for 0 < x, y < 1 and 0 < z < 2. The main issue raised is the challenge of integrating this function due to divergent integrals when attempting to evaluate it over the specified ranges. Participants clarify that the correct interpretation of the limits for x and y is crucial, as they should indeed be between 0 and 1. By setting these limits correctly, the integration leads to a non-divergent result, aligning with the book's answer of k = 3. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly understanding the bounds of integration in probability density functions.
mnphys
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Let X, Y, and Z have the joint probability density function f(x,y,z) = kxy2z for 0 < x, y < 1, and 0 < z < 2 (it is defined to be 0 elsewhere). Find k.

Homework Equations



Not sure how to type this in bbcode but: Integrate f(x,y,z) = kxy2z over the ranges of x (zero to infinity) , y (negative infinity to 1), and z (zero to two) and set k so that the result is equal to 1 (by the definition of a PDF).

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
The problem with this is that I keep running into divergent integrals, and I'm not sure how to avoid this. I have done all my work on paper and trying to type it all out into Word's equation editor is driving me insane but I can take photos of the work I've done if you want proof that I have DEFINITELY tried to work this out... like for pages and pages.

For example, if I start by integrating f(x,y,z) = xy2z respective to x, I end up with a non-divergent improper integral (the second term is equal to 0, but the first term takes the limit of x2y2z/2 as x approaches infinity). Let's move on and substitute "t" for x but remember that "t" is approaching infinity. If I then integrate respective to y, it gets worse - substituting "u" for y as y approaches negative infinity, that looks like t2z/6 - t2u3z/6 (remembering that t is approaching infinity and u is approaching negative infinity). Now integrating with respect to z leaves me with a really ugly equation that involves multiple terms all approaching infinity... yuck.

So... how do I resolve these divergent integrals? The book's answer is 3, and if I just set y and x's limits of integration to 1 (upper bound) and 0 (lower bound) then I get that answer, but... I can't do that, can I? Or I could change the order of integration, but no matter what order I try, I end up with at least one term involving taking the limit of a positive exponential as it approaches infinity.

Please, don't think I'm asking you to solve this for me - I really am not. Any hint as to how I can avoid these divergent integrals, or what I'm doing wrong, is all I'm asking for. If anyone would like me to upload photos of my work on this, I can do that.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mnphys said:

Homework Statement



Let X, Y, and Z have the joint probability density function f(x,y,z) = kxy2z for 0 < x, y < 1, and 0 < z < 2 (it is defined to be 0 elsewhere).

Are you sure that you've read and written the question correctly? One possible way to read the above is that Z has a range of (0, 2) and both X and Y have a range of (0,1)...

mnphys said:
So... how do I resolve these divergent integrals? The book's answer is 3, and if I just set y and x's limits of integration to 1 (upper bound) and 0 (lower bound) then I get that answer, but... I can't do that, can I?

If you have my above interpretation, then yes you can do this.
 
The book does say "0 < x" and "y < 1" but maybe you're right and that should be assumed?

It does work out perfectly if you use 0 to 1 as the ranges.
 
I agree. It is common to interpret ##0 < x,~y < 1## to mean both ##0 < x < 1## and ##0<y<1##.
 
Ok. I'll roll with that... Thanks, guys (or possibly gals)!
 
Question: A clock's minute hand has length 4 and its hour hand has length 3. What is the distance between the tips at the moment when it is increasing most rapidly?(Putnam Exam Question) Answer: Making assumption that both the hands moves at constant angular velocities, the answer is ## \sqrt{7} .## But don't you think this assumption is somewhat doubtful and wrong?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K