How Can We Reduce Bias in LogNormal Mean Estimators?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zazubird
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Estimators Mean
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on reducing bias in log-normal mean estimators by adjusting the constant theta in the estimator formula. When theta equals 1, the estimator is consistent but biased, and the aim is to find a different theta value that minimizes this bias using a large n-approximation. The participant explores the relationship between the geometric mean and variance of X, leading to a complex expression involving the logarithm of these values. They express uncertainty about their calculations and consider applying the Central Limit Theorem or the Weak Law of Large Numbers for further insights. The conversation emphasizes the need for clarity in deriving the correct theta value to improve the estimator's accuracy.
Zazubird
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
If Y~N(mu,sigma) and y=logX, with X~LN(mu,sigma),
with a*=exp{ybar+1/2*theta*sample variance of y}, where ybar=sample mean of y and a=E[X]=exp{mu+1/2*sigma^2}, theta is constant.

If theta=1, a* is consistent but biased and we can reduce the bias by choosing a different value of theta. Use a large n-approximation in the expression E[a*] to find a value that reduces the bias, as compared to when theta=1.

During my attempt to do this, I ended up with E[a*]=E[geometric mean of x * geometric variance of x]. Knowing that y=logx and thus ybar=log(x1*x2*...*xn)/n, I ended with such an expression. I have a feeling that this is most likely incorrect and am thus completely lost. I was thinking along the lines of possibly using CLT or Weak Law of Large Numbers, with the n-approximation detail in the question, but still don't know where to go from there.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If Log[geometric mean] = Mean[y] and Log[geometric var] = Var[y], then Log[g.m.*g.v.] = Mean[y] + Var[y], and this is identical to E[Log[a*]] for theta = 2.
 
I think I made a mistake in my working and have taken a different approach involving mgfs of normal distributions. But I still get stuck halfway. I've put some of my working in the attached file. Any ideas as to how to get this different value of theta?

Edit to file: V= Ybar + 0.5*theta*S^2
 

Attachments

Last edited:
How did you end up getting E[exp (Vt)]?
 
I was reading documentation about the soundness and completeness of logic formal systems. Consider the following $$\vdash_S \phi$$ where ##S## is the proof-system making part the formal system and ##\phi## is a wff (well formed formula) of the formal language. Note the blank on left of the turnstile symbol ##\vdash_S##, as far as I can tell it actually represents the empty set. So what does it mean ? I guess it actually means ##\phi## is a theorem of the formal system, i.e. there is a...
Back
Top