Is the formula for conditional expectation valid for multiple random variables?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the validity of the conditional expectation formula E[Xg(Y)|Y] = g(Y)E[X|Y] for multiple random variables. The proof provided shows that this formula holds for discrete random variables X and Y, using the definition of conditional expectation. However, the question arises whether the formula can be extended to a third variable, Z, leading to E[Xg(Z)|Y]. It is clarified that while one might think to substitute g(Y) with g(Z), the relationship does not hold because Xg(Z) forms a new random variable with its own distribution. Ultimately, the conclusion is that the formula's validity depends on the independence of the variables involved.
jimmy1
Messages
60
Reaction score
0
[SOLVED] Conditional Expectation

I'm trying to understand the following proof I saw in a book. It says that:
E[Xg(Y)|Y] = g(Y)E[X|Y] where X and Y are discrete random variables and g(Y) is a function of the random variable Y.

Now they give the following proof:

E[Xg(Y)|Y] = \sum_{x}x g(Y) f_{x|y}(x|y)
= g(Y)\sum_{x}x f_{x|y}(x|y)
= g(Y)E[X|Y]

Now, the proof is very simple as they are just using the definition of conditional expectation (ie. E[X|Y]= \sum_{x}x f_{x|y}(x|y)).

But, would this formula also work for say 3 variables? That is, E[Xg(Z)|Y] = g(Z)E[X|Y], where Z is another discrete random variable.

It probably isn't right, but from the above proof I can't immediatley see what's wrong with it, as I'll be just switching the g(Y) with a g(Z), and as the summation in the proof is over x, I can take g(Z) out of the summation and similarly get the result E[Xg(Z)|Y] = g(Z)E[X|Y] ??
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
No, the proof works because the event {Xg(Y)|Y=y} = {Xg(y)|y} = g(y){X|y}; but the event {Xg(Z)|y} cannot be written similarly, in general.

In general, V = Xg(Z) is a new random variable and has its own distribution and conditional distribution; so the sum is over v.

If X and Z are independent then E[Xg(Z)|y] = E[X|y]E[g(Z)|y].

If Z = h(Y) then E[Xg(h(y))|y] = g(h(y))E[X|y].
 
Ah yes, that clears things up. Cheers, you've been great help once again!
 
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