MSE estimation with random variables

Click For Summary
The approach to MSE estimation presented is incorrect due to the assumption that the expected value of the estimate equals the expected value of the actual variable, which is not generally valid. Instead, the correct method involves substituting the linear combination of random variables into the MSE expression and expanding it to derive an equation involving the unknown coefficients. The discussion highlights that all necessary terms are known except for E[S^2], which can be ignored in the minimization process. The numerical minimization yields coefficients close to 1 for two variables and near 0 for one. This indicates a potential path for further analytical optimization.
ashah99
Messages
55
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Please see below: finding an MSE estimate for random variables
Relevant Equations
Expectation formula, MSE = E( (S_hat - S)^2 )
Hello all, I am wondering if my approach is correct for the following problem on MSE estimation/linear prediction on a zero-mean random variable. My final answer would be c1 = 1, c2 = 0, and c3 = 1. If my approach is incorrect, I certainly appreciate some guidance on the problem. Thank you.

Problem
1667568284000.png

Approach:
1667568360483.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, the approach is incorrect. When you take expected values, you assume that
$$E\left[ \hat S X_i\right] = E\left[ S X_i\right]$$
But we have no reason to suppose that is correct. ##\hat S## is only an estimate of ##S##, not identical to it, and cannot be substituted for it, except in very limited circumstances.

Instead, substitute ##\sum c_i X_i## for ##\hat S## in ##E[(\hat S - S)^2]##, then expand to get an expression in expected values of first and second order terms in ##X_1, X_2, X_3, S##, with unknowns ##c_1,c_2,c_3##. We have been given values for all those terms except ##E[S^2]##, which we can ignore, since it it is not multiplied by any of the unknown coefficients. Numerically minimising that expression, I get a solution where two of the coefficients are near 1 and one is near 0. Possibly the optimisation can be solved analytically, but I didn't try.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K