Discussion Overview
The discussion centers on predicting the z-score for a random variable Y given that another random variable X is at the 30th percentile, with a specified correlation of ρ = 0.7. The context involves assumptions of a bivariate normal distribution and the implications of these assumptions on the relationship between X and Y.
Discussion Character
- Technical explanation
- Debate/contested
- Mathematical reasoning
Main Points Raised
- Some participants propose that using the relationship derived from the bivariate normal distribution, the z-score for Y can be calculated as a function of the z-score for X, specifically suggesting that $z_Y = \text{sgn}(\rho) z_X$.
- Others argue that with X at the 30th percentile, the corresponding z-score $z_X$ is calculated as -0.524, leading to a derived z-score for Y of -0.524, which does not match the expected solution of -0.364.
- A later reply questions the validity of the derived z-score for Y, suggesting that the correlation and the model setup may not align correctly with the problem's requirements.
- Some participants mention that simplifying assumptions, such as setting means to zero, could lead to different interpretations of the correlation and its implications on the z-scores.
- There is a discussion about the nature of the joint PMF being "football shaped," indicating a specific correlation structure that may influence the predictions.
- One participant notes that the relationship between the expected values of z-scores can be expressed as $E(z_Y|z_X) = \rho z_X$, which is supported by simulation results.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express disagreement regarding the correct z-score for Y, with some asserting that the derived value of -0.524 is accurate, while others challenge this conclusion and suggest alternative interpretations and calculations. No consensus is reached on the correct approach or final value.
Contextual Notes
There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the means and variances of the random variables, as well as the implications of the correlation on the derived z-scores. The discussion reflects varying interpretations of the model and its parameters.