I Odd use of terms (“stationary stochastic process”., etc.)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the translation of a Russian author's use of specific terms related to stochastic processes. The term "probability density distribution" is debated as potentially confusing, suggesting it may be a mix of "probability distribution" and "probability density function." The phrase "stationary stochastic process" is considered not redundant, as it distinguishes from deterministic processes, though "stochastic" can be omitted later for brevity. Regarding "de Broglie matter waves," the consensus is that the term can be simplified to "de Broglie wave," unless the author's formal style necessitates retaining "matter" for emphasis. Overall, clarity and context are essential in the translation process.
nomadreid
Gold Member
Messages
1,748
Reaction score
243
I am trying to make sense of a Russian author’s use of terms (I have to translate his article). I have three questions, but please don't think you need to answer all three before answering. Thanks for any insights!

[1] He uses the term “probability density distribution” ρ(ξ) of a stationary (stochastic) process ξ.This sounds to me like a hybrid of “probability distribution” and “probability density function”, and that only one of them should be chosen. Am I wrong? If so, the first one?

[2] when talking about stationary processes, he writes in the original “stationary stochastic process”. Is this redundant –shall I eliminate “stochastic”, or leave it in?

[3] When he is referring to deBroglie waves, he writes “deBroglie matter waves”. Is the “matter” definitely to be left out, or can it be left in for emphasis?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
(1) A stochastic process ##\xi## is a function whose domain is ##D=\Omega\times U## and range is ##S##, which is usually ##\mathbb R## or ##\mathbb Z##. ##\Omega## is the sample space, which is the set of all possible outcomes. ##U## is the 'index set', which is usually the non-negative reals or the non-negative integers. The index set ##U## usually represents time, but doesn't have to.

A stochastic process can also be considered as a collection of random variables ##\left(\xi_t\right)_{t\in U}##, such that ##\xi_t(\omega)=\xi(\omega,t)## is the value of the process at 'time' ##t## in outcome ##\omega##. In fact sometimes 'stochastic process' is defined in this way as a collection of random variables, and its nature as a function is derived from that. The two definitions are equivalent.

The stochastic process ##\xi## is stationary if random variables ##\xi_t## and ##\xi_s## have the same distribution, for all ##t,s\in U##.

What the author means by “probability density distribution” ##\rho(\xi)## depends on how they use it. If the stoch process is stationary, I think they probably mean the probability density function (pdf) of ##\xi_t##, which is the same for all ##t\in U##. If it is not stationary, more examination of how it is used would be needed, eg it could be a function ##\eta:U\times S\to[0,1]## such that ##\eta(t,\alpha)=f_{\xi_t}(\alpha)## where ##f_{\xi_t}## is the pdf of ##\xi_t##.

(2) I don't think the stationary in 'stationary stochastic process' is redundant, since one can have a deterministic process that is a function from ##U## to ##S##. However it is usual when talking about stochastic processes to omit the stochastic after a while, provided it is clear from the context that it means a stochastic process. Since a stationary deterministic process is just a constant function, and it would be rare to characterise a constant function as a process, it is reasonable to use 'stationary process' to refer to stationary stochastic processes. If you want to do this, it can be made clear in the translation by, when the notion of 'stationary' is introduced, and it says something like 'a stochastic process is called stationary if <insert conditions, like those given above>', just adding the words, either in the text or - if you want the translation to be as literal as possible - as a footnote: 'and this may be referred to as a stationary process'.

(3) I'm not aware of any other sort of de Broglie wave. It's usual to call it either a 'matter wave' or a 'de Broglie wave'. If there isn't any other sort of de Broglie wave (I don't think there is, but I don't know for sure) 'de Broglie matter wave' seems unnecessarily long. But it sounds like this author likes to be very formal, so the decision depends on whether you want to go for concision or to preserve the author's style.
 
  • Like
Likes nomadreid and berkeman
Thank you very much for your detailed and helpful explanations, andrewkirk. Very much appreciated.
 
Thread 'Is there a white hole inside every black hole?'
This is what I am thinking. How much feasible is it? There is a white hole inside every black hole The white hole spits mass/energy out continuously The mass/energy that is spit out of a white hole drops back into it eventually. This is because of extreme space time curvature around the white hole Ironically this extreme space time curvature of the space around a white hole is caused by the huge mass/energy packed in the white hole Because of continuously spitting mass/energy which keeps...
Why do two separately floating objects in a liquid "attract" each other ?? What if gravity is an emergent property like surface tension ? What if they both are essentially trying to *minimize disorder at the interfaces — where non-aligned polarized particles are forced to mix with each other* What if gravity is an emergent property that is trying to optimize the entropy emerging out of spin aligned quantum bits

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
41
Views
5K
Back
Top