If X and Y are independent, are X^k and Y?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AxiomOfChoice
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Independent
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

If X and Y are independent random variables, then their transformations, such as X^k and Y, are also independent for any integer k. This is established through the property that E[f(X)g(Y)] = E[f(X)]E[g(Y)] for any measurable functions f and g. The proof utilizes the measure-theoretic definition of independence, which states that the joint density of independent variables is the product of their individual densities. For further insights, refer to Shreve's "Stochastic Calculus for Finance II", specifically Theorem 2.2.5.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of measure theory in probability
  • Familiarity with Borel sigma-algebras
  • Knowledge of expectations and probability density functions
  • Basic concepts of stochastic calculus
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the measure-theoretic definition of independence in probability theory
  • Explore Borel-measurable functions and their properties
  • Review Shreve's "Stochastic Calculus for Finance II" for advanced applications
  • Learn about the implications of uncorrelated random variables in probability
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, statisticians, and data scientists interested in advanced probability theory and its applications in finance and stochastic processes.

AxiomOfChoice
Messages
531
Reaction score
1
The definition of independence of random variables from a measure-theoretic standpoint is so confusing (independence of generated sigma-algebras, etc.) that I cannot answer this seemingly simple question...So if X,Y are independent random variables, does that mean X,X^2,X^3,X^4,\ldots and Y,Y^2,Y^3,\ldots are each pairwise independent?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Okay...just looked this up in a book. In fact, if X,Y are independent, then we have E[f(X)g(Y)] = E[f(X)]E[g(Y)] for "any" functions f and g. But the proof is from a non-measure-theoretic probability book. Is there anyone who can explain why this holds from a measure-theoretic standpoint?
 
Expectations can be expressed as integrals involving the probability density functions. Since X and Y are independent, their joint density is simply the product of their individual densities, so the expectations involving functions of the random variables end up as the product of the individual expectations.
 
AxiomOfChoice said:
Okay...just looked this up in a book. In fact, if X,Y are independent, then we have E[f(X)g(Y)] = E[f(X)]E[g(Y)] for "any" functions f and g.

I don't know what that result has to do with your original question. The conclusion deals with the expectations of f(x) and g(y) not with their independence. Random variables can be uncorrelated and still be dependent.

I'm not an expert on measure theory but I did take the course years ago. I think answering your original post ( which concerns functions of a random variable) in detail is complicated. For example, not all functions are "measureable". The one's you listed are. How do we prove they are? Are you wanting an explanation that begins at elementary points like that? Or do you simply want a theorem from measure theory that answers your question as a special case?
 
It's probably easier to use P[X<=x,Y<=y] = P[X<=x]P[Y<=y] (which can be obtained from the measure-theoretic definition of independence by considering generators of the Borel sigma algebras for R and R^2).
 
Let X and Y be independent random variable and f and g be borel-measurable functions on R, there is a measure-theoretic way of proof that f(X) and g(Y) are independent r.v. in Shreve's book "Stochastic Calculus for Finance II", see Theorem 2.2.5
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K