MHB How to prove the normal distribution tail inequality for large x ?

WMDhamnekar
MHB
Messages
376
Reaction score
28
1635782991047.png

1635783023489.png

1635783043074.png


What is the meaning of this proof? What is the meaning of last statement of this proof? How to prove lemma (7.1)? or How to answer problem 1 given below?

1635783071928.png
1635783082068.png

1635784677943.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Dhamnekar Winod said:
View attachment 11392
View attachment 11393

What is the meaning of this proof? What is the meaning of last statement of this proof? How to prove lemma (7.1)? or How to answer problem 1 given below?

If $x>0$ then the inequality in (1.9) must be true, because the left side is then slightly less than n(x), and the right side is slightly more than n(x).

Let's consider the derivatives of the expressions in (1.8).
$$\frac d{dx}(1-\Re(x)) = -\Re'(x) = -n(x)$$

Let's first find $n'(x)$.
We have:
$$n'(x)=\frac d{dx} \frac 1{\sqrt{2\pi}} e^{-\frac 12x^2} = \frac 1{\sqrt{2\pi}} e^{-\frac 12x^2} \cdot -x =-xn(x)$$
Then we have for instance:
$$\frac d{dx}(x^{-1}n(x)) = -x^{-2}n(x) + x^{-1}n'(x) = -x^{-2}n(x)+x^{-1}\cdot -x n(x) = -(1+x^{-2})n(x)$$
So we see that the derivatives of the expressions in (1.8) are indeed the negatives of the expressions in (1.9).

We have that $1-\Re(x)$ is in between 2 expressions, so its integration must also be between the integrations of the those 2 expressions.
Qed.

To prove the more general formula, we need to repeat these steps for the additional terms.
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
If $x>0$ then the inequality in (1.9) must be true, because the left side is then slightly less than n(x), and the right side is slightly more than n(x).

Let's consider the derivatives of the expressions in (1.8).
$$\frac d{dx}(1-\Re(x)) = -\Re'(x) = -n(x)$$

Let's first find $n'(x)$.
We have:
$$n'(x)=\frac d{dx} \frac 1{\sqrt{2\pi}} e^{-\frac 12x^2} = \frac 1{\sqrt{2\pi}} e^{-\frac 12x^2} \cdot -x =-xn(x)$$
Then we have for instance:
$$\frac d{dx}(x^{-1}n(x)) = -x^{-2}n(x) + x^{-1}n'(x) = -x^{-2}n(x)+x^{-1}\cdot -x n(x) = -(1+x^{-2})n(x)$$
So we see that the derivatives of the expressions in (1.8) are indeed the negatives of the expressions in (1.9).

We have that $1-\Re(x)$ is in between 2 expressions, so its integration must also be between the integrations of the those 2 expressions.
Qed.

To prove the more general formula, we need to repeat these steps for the additional terms.
But, how to use this information to solve the given problem 1 or lemma 7.1?
 
Dhamnekar Winod said:
But, how to use this information to solve the given problem 1 or lemma 7.1?
Write (7.1) in the same form as (1.8) with the series on the left and also on the right.
Take the derivatives to find an expression that is in the same form as (1.9).
Then the proof follows in the same fashion.
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
Write (7.1) in the same form as (1.8) with the series on the left and also on the right.
Take the derivatives to find an expression that is in the same form as (1.9).
Then the proof follows in the same fashion.
Thanks for your answer. But sorry for not understanding it. I want to know your way of answering this problem.
But I got some math help from wikipedia.
1635875496626.png


How can we use the above two formulas of CDF of Normal distribution to prove lemma 7.1 in the original question?

I got the following proofs of expansion of CDF of standard normal distribution.

1635919963509.png


CDFNDINT.png

CDFNDINT2.png

CDFNDINT1.png

1635921860126.png


In the above expansions of CDF of standard normal distribution, I want to know how the highlighted or marked computations was performed. If any member of this MHB knows the method of these computations, may explain it in reply.

Following is the simple proof:
1635922488791.png

1635922506052.png

How the last omitted term was computed by the author?
 
Last edited:
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