Need help with a conditional variance proof.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that Y=g(X) if and only if var(Y|X) = 0, focusing on the properties of conditional variance in probability theory. Participants explore the implications of this statement, particularly in the context of discrete random variables and the definitions of functions.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks to prove that Y=g(X) if and only if var(Y|X) = 0, starting from the equation E(Y^2|X) = E(Y|X)^2.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the statement in advanced probability contexts, suggesting that technicalities regarding "sets of measure zero" may complicate the proof.
  • A participant discusses the case where Y can take multiple values for a single X, arguing that this would contribute positively to the variance, thus contradicting the condition for Y to be a function of X.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the computation of conditional variance versus conditional expectation, with a participant correcting their earlier statement about using E(Y|X) instead of Var(Y|X).
  • There is confusion about the implications of having multiple Y values for a single X, with participants discussing the definition of a function and the conditions under which Y can be considered a function of X.
  • One participant suggests that if Y is a multi-valued function, it cannot be a function in the traditional sense, leading to a discussion about the nature of functions and their relationship to variance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the initial statement regarding conditional variance and its implications. There is no consensus on the proof or the definitions involved, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of the proof and the potential for misunderstandings regarding definitions and properties of functions in the context of probability. The discussion also highlights the distinction between discrete and continuous cases, which may affect the interpretation of variance.

Kuma
Messages
129
Reaction score
0
need urgent help with a conditional variance proof.

I have been given this problem and I'm pretty stumped.

I want to prove that Y=g(X) if and only if var(YlX) = 0.

so if var(YlX)=0 then

E(Y^2lX) - E(YlX)^2 = 0

E(Y^2lX) =E(YlX)^2

so what should I do now? I tried showing that this equation is true when y =g(X), but in the end I end up with var(g(X)) = 0...unless I did something wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


I want to prove that Y=g(X) if and only if var(YlX) = 0.

In an advanced course on probability, I doubt that statement is true because there are techicalities about "sets of measure zero". If this problem is from an introductory course in probability, I assume it deals with discrete distributions.

Suppose there is a value [itex]X_0[/itex], such that Y can have two or more different values when [itex]X = X_0[/itex]. Show that at least one of these possible values for Y contribues a positive term to the sum for computing the variance [itex]E(Y|X_0)[/itex].
 


thanks for the reply. I kind of see where this is going. So for example if I had y^2 = x, then for each value of x there would be 2 values of y.

there is still a few things I'm a bit lost on though. Why would I want to compute the variance of the conditional expectation? I'm looking for the variance to be zero.

the question let's me assume that these are discrete rvs.

the conditional expectation of (YlX=x0) is calculated by sigma x * p(xly). So if I had two different values for x, am I trying to make the sum 0?
 


Kuma said:
tWhy would I want to compute the variance of the conditional expectation? I'm looking for the variance to be zero.
My mistake. I should have written [itex]Var(Y|X_0)[/itex] instead of [itex]E(Y|X_0)[/itex].

If the joint density is f(x,y)

[itex]Var(Y|X_0) = \sum (y - \bar{y} )^2 C f(y,x_0)[/itex]
where [itex]C = \frac {1}{ \sum f(y,x_0)}[/itex] and the sums are taken over all possible values of Y.

If Y is not a function of X then there are at least two values [itex]y_1[/itex] and [itex]y_2[/itex] with [itex]f(y1,x_0) > 0[/itex] and [itex]f(y2,x_0) > 0[/itex]. Only one of these values can be equal to [itex]\bar{y}[/itex].

I evaded the issue of whether [itex]\bar{y}[/itex] is [itex]E(Y)[/itex] or [itex]E(Y|x_0)[/itex] because I don't remember the precise definition of conditional variance!
 


I'm a bit confused about the part where you mentioned that if y was not a function of x, then there are 2 y values or more. Why is that? I'm not sure what it has to do with y nkt being a function of x.

also you sai that only one of f(yn, x) can be y bar. How js that possible since in the discrete case the joint distribution is a probability.
 


Kuma said:
I'm a bit confused about the part where you mentioned that if y was not a function of x, then there are 2 y values or more. Why is that? I'm not sure what it has to do with y nkt being a function of x.

If, for each value of x, there is one and only one possible y value possible then y is a function of x. Essentially that is the definition of a function. If y is not a function of x then either there is a y_i not associated with any of the x_i or there is an x_i with two or more possible y_i's.

also you sai that only one of f(yn, x) can be y bar. How js that possible since in the discrete case the joint distribution is a probability.

I didn't say that only one of the f(yn,x) can be y bar. I said only one of y1 and y2 can be y bar.
 


but what about for multi valued functions that are not 1-1, so in that case like you said, y is not a function of x? I kind of get it because if it was a 1-1 function, where there is only 1 y for every x, then the variance would be 0. Since µ would just be g(X) and the variance of that is 0.

so jf I understand this correctly, that is the proof in itself? Since the variance of a function of x is 0, I'm done? If there are 2 or more y for each x then y js not a function of x.
 


Kuma said:
but what about for multi valued functions that are not 1-1, so in that case like you said, y is not a function of x?

"Multi-valued functions" are not functions, just like "counterfeit money" isn't money.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K