I Help understanding conditional expectation identity

psie
Messages
315
Reaction score
40
TL;DR Summary
I'm reading a proof on conditional probabilities and there is an identity involving conditional expectation which I'm stuck on.
Let ##(\Omega,\mathcal{F},P)## be a probability space, and let us define the conditional expectation ##{\rm E}[X\mid\mathcal{G}]## for integrable random variables ##X:\Omega\to\mathbb{R}##, i.e. ##X\in L^1(P)##, and sub-sigma-algebras ##\mathcal{G}\subseteq\mathcal{F}##.

Definition 1: The conditional expectation ##{\rm E}[X\mid\mathcal{G}]## of ##X## given ##\mathcal{G}## is the random variable ##Z## having the following properties:
(i) ##Z## is integrable, i.e. ##Z\in L^1(P)##.
(ii) ##Z## is (##\mathcal{G},\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}))##-measurable.
(iii) For any ##A\in\mathcal{G}## we have $$\int_A Z\,\mathrm dP=\int_A X\,\mathrm dP.$$

Definition 2: If ##X\in L^1(P)## and ##Y:\Omega\to\mathbb{R}## is any random variable, then the conditional expectation of ##X## given ##Y## is defined as $${\rm E}[X\mid Y]:={\rm E}[X\mid\sigma(Y)],$$ where ##\sigma(Y)=\{Y^{-1}(B)\mid B\in\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R})\}## is the sigma-algebra generated by ##Y##.

If ##\mathcal{G}=\sigma(Y)##, then (iii) in definition 1 says that $${\rm E}[\mathbf{1}_A{\rm E}[X\mid Y]]={\rm E}[\mathbf{1}_AX],\quad \forall A\in\sigma(Y).\tag1$$

Now, in a proof I'm reading currently, there are three random variables ##U,S,T## and the following computation appears in the proof: $$\int_{T^{-1}(B)} U\,\mathrm dP={\rm E}[\mathbf{1}_B(T)U]={\rm E}[\mathbf{1}_B(T){\rm E}[U\mid S,T]].$$I simply do not comprehend the last equality, that is ##{\rm E}[\mathbf{1}_B(T)U]={\rm E}[\mathbf{1}_B(T){\rm E}[U\mid S,T]]##. How does this follow from the definitions above and the identity ##(1)##? I'm grateful for any help on this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I understand the identity in question now. First, from Durret's book, we have

If ##X## is ##\mathcal G##-measurable and ##E|Y|,E|XY|<\infty##, then $$E[XY|\mathcal{G}]=XE[Y|\mathcal{G}].$$

Second, we need the Tower property or the law of the iterated expectation, that is ##E[Y|\mathcal{H}]= E\big[E[Y\mid \mathcal G]\mid \mathcal H\big]##, where ##\mathcal H\subset\mathcal G##.

By the latter property, we have $$E[\mathbf1_B(T)U]=E[E[\mathbf1_B(T)U\mid S,T]].$$ Now, by the theorem in Durret, ##\mathbf1_B(T)=\mathbf1_{T^{-1}(B)}## is ##\sigma(T)##-measurable, and this is a subset of ##\sigma(S,T)=\sigma(\sigma(S)\cup\sigma(T))##. So we can "pull it out", and we are left with $$E[\mathbf1_B(T)U]=E[\mathbf1_B(T)E[U\mid S,T]],$$which is the desired identity.
 
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