Probability Density Functions: Transformation of Variables

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation of probability density functions (PDFs) when the transformation function is many-to-one. The original poster presents a specific function and transformation, seeking guidance on how to correctly apply variable transformation techniques in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the implications of using a many-to-one transformation function, questioning how to apply the Jacobian determinant in this scenario. There is discussion on the relationship between cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) and PDFs, particularly in the context of variable transformations that are not monotonic.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the complexities of the problem, with some suggesting that the CDF approach may provide clarity. There are multiple interpretations being explored, particularly regarding the handling of disjoint intervals in the integration process. Follow-up questions indicate a desire for deeper understanding of the transformation steps involved.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the challenge of applying transformation methods in cases where the transformation function is not one-to-one, leading to potential complications in defining the integration boundaries. There is also mention of the need to differentiate between continuous and discrete cases, as well as the implications of piecewise functions.

Master1022
Messages
590
Reaction score
116
Homework Statement
If we have ## p(x) = c(x+1)^2 (1 - x) ## where ## -1 \leq x \leq 1 ## and we have a variable transformation ## Z = X^2 ##, then find ## p(z) ##
Relevant Equations
Probability transformation
Hi,

I have a question about probability transformations when the transformation function is a many-to-one function over the defined domain.

Question: How do we transform the variables when the transformation function is not a one-to-one function over the domain defined? If we have ## p(x) = m(x+1)^2 (1 - x) ## where ## -1 \leq x \leq 1 ##, where ## m ## is a constant, and we have a variable transformation ## Z = X^2 ##, then find ## p(z) ##

Context attempt:
I was reading some lecture notes where all it says is: "if the transformation function ## h(x) ## is not one-to-one, then we use a more complicated method".

So I know that usually when we go from ## x ## to ## z ##, then we need to consider the Jacobian determinant ## | \frac{\partial x}{\partial z} | ##. For the example above, then that becomes:
p(z) = m(\sqrt{z} + 1)^2 (1 - \sqrt{z}) \cdot \left|\frac{\partial x}{\partial z} \right| = m(\sqrt{z} + 1)^2 (1 - \sqrt{z}) \cdot \frac{1}{2\sqrt{z}}
but this exactly what was done for the situation where the transformation function was 1-to-1 over the domain defined.

For a discrete system when we have a transformation, then we might have something along the lines of:
p(Z = z) = \sum p(Z = X^2, X = x) = \sum p(Z = X^2|X = x) p(X = x)
but I am confused on how I can utilize this methodology for the continuous case.

Thank you in advance for any help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think this works better (conceptually) in the CDF for the system of which the PDF is the derivative (with some generalizations) of the CDF. Also CDF's can be agnostic about "continuous" vs "discrete" vs "mixed" distributions.

Where ##z = \zeta(x)## is a "reasonable" mapping (e.g. piecewise analytic).
P(Z\le z) = \int_{\forall x: \zeta(x)\le z} f(x) dx = \int_{\forall x:\zeta(x)\le z} \frac{d}{dx} P(X\le x) dx

where ##f## is the density function in ##x## and the derivative inside the integral is generalized to yield delta functions for steps. The problem with the general case is, of course, working with variable transformations which are not monotone increasing or monotone decreasing i.e. not continuously invertible.

When that is the case your domain of integration for certain z-values will be multiple disjoint intervals (including single points as zero-width closed intervals) where both boundaries will depend on z.

Then when you differentiate the CDF to get the PDF (w.r.t. z) you're going to have to differentiate several (potentially infinitely many) boundaries of the resulting integrals. But, in the end you can express the CDF w.r.t. z as a series of differences of CDF values w.r.t. x. E.g. let ##\{[x_1(z),x_2(z)], [x_3(z),x_4(z)], \ldots\}## be the set of intervals where ##x## satisfies ##\zeta(x)<z##. Then:
P(Z\le z) = \int_{x_1}^{x_2} f(x)dx + \int_{x_3}^{x_4} f(x) dx + \ldots = F(x_2)-F(x_1) + F(x_4)-F(x_3) \ldots
where ##F(x) = P(X\le x)## is the CDF in ##x##. To get the PDF you then differentiate w.r.t. ##z## recalling each of the ##x##'s depend on ##z##.

I don't think you can get simpler and more direct than this without making simplifying (or at least specifying) assumptions about the change of variable.

[edit: Here I implicitly assumed continuity and you'll have to be more careful with open vs closed intervals in the discrete or partially discrete cases.]
[edit2: But then you should just work with sums in the discrete case and break mixed cases into sums of a discrete and a continuous distribution.]
 
Thank you very much @jambaugh ! I have some follow-up questions as I don't think I understand everything in the post.

jambaugh said:
I think this works better (conceptually) in the CDF for the system of which the PDF is the derivative (with some generalizations) of the CDF. Also CDF's can be agnostic about "continuous" vs "discrete" vs "mixed" distributions.

Where ##z = \zeta(x)## is a "reasonable" mapping (e.g. piecewise analytic).
P(Z\le z) = \int_{\forall x: \zeta(x)\le z} f(x) dx = \int_{\forall x:\zeta(x)\le z} \frac{d}{dx} P(X\le x) dx

where ##f## is the density function in ##x## and the derivative inside the integral is generalized to yield delta functions for steps. The problem with the general case is, of course, working with variable transformations which are not monotone increasing or monotone decreasing i.e. not continuously invertible.
Okay, understood (I think)

jambaugh said:
When that is the case your domain of integration for certain z-values will be multiple disjoint intervals (including single points as zero-width closed intervals) where both boundaries will depend on z.

Then when you differentiate the CDF to get the PDF (w.r.t. z) you're going to have to differentiate several (potentially infinitely many) boundaries of the resulting integrals. But, in the end you can express the CDF w.r.t. z as a series of differences of CDF values w.r.t. x. E.g. let ##\{[x_1(z),x_2(z)], [x_3(z),x_4(z)], \ldots\}## be the set of intervals where ##x## satisfies ##\zeta(x)<z##.
Sorry, I don't quite get why this is the case. Could you perhaps explain why? So for the transformation function ## \zeta(x) ## which is many-to-one, then we need to split the function up into different regions? (e.g -1 to 0 and 0 to 1)?

jambaugh said:
Then:
P(Z\le z) = \int_{x_1}^{x_2} f(x)dx + \int_{x_3}^{x_4} f(x) dx + \ldots = F(x_2)-F(x_1) + F(x_4)-F(x_3) \ldots
where ##F(x) = P(X\le x)## is the CDF in ##x##. To get the PDF you then differentiate w.r.t. ##z## recalling each of the ##x##'s depend on ##z##.
I don't think you can get simpler and more direct than this without making simplifying (or at least specifying) assumptions about the change of variable.
okay thanks. I am still slightly confused about what steps I should do to tackle this problem. Should I:
1) Find the CDF of the original distribution
2) Change the variables to get CDF in terms of Z - I still am not sure how to do this in practice here
3) Then differentiate that to get pdf in terms of z

Thanks in advance
 
Here you can use the fact that 0 \leq a^2 \leq X^2 \leq b^2 if and only if either -|b| \leq X \leq -|a| or |a| \leq X \leq |b|. Then <br /> P(X^2 \leq z) = \int_{a^2}^z\,f_{X^2}(z)\,dz = \int_{-z^{1/2}}^{-|a|} f_X(x)\,dx + \int_{|a|}^{z^{1/2}} f_X(x)\,dx for a^2 \leq z \leq b^2.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K