MHB Probability generating function

AI Thread Summary
A probability generating function (pgf) can indeed have a constant term, but adding a constant alters its fundamental properties. Specifically, including a constant term means the sum of the coefficients would no longer equal one, disqualifying it as a pgf. The discussion emphasizes the importance of adhering to the definition of pgfs when considering modifications. Additionally, the derivative of a pgf can yield the same result even if a constant is added, but this would not maintain the pgf's integrity. Thus, while technically possible, adding a constant to a pgf is not appropriate.
Poirot1
Messages
243
Reaction score
0
My question is : can a pgf have a constant term?

The reason I ask is that I was asked to show the (time) derivative of a pgf was equal to some multiple of the pgf and hence show the pgf was as given. So naturally , I differentiated the given answer and showed it satisfied the equation. But surely I could stick a constant on the end and it would differentiate to the same thing.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Poirot said:
My question is : can a pgf have a constant term?

The reason I ask is that I was asked to show the (time) derivative of a pgf was equal to some multiple of the pgf and hence show the pgf was as given. So naturally , I differentiated the given answer and showed it satisfied the equation. But surely I could stick a constant on the end and it would differentiate to the same thing.

The simple answer is yes.

The more complicated answer is: please post the actual question or more context.

Adding something onto a pgf will result in it no longer being a pgf, since the sum of the coefficients should be 1.

CB
 

Thread 'Value of intuitionistic logic'

I'm taking a look at intuitionistic propositional logic (IPL). Basically it exclude Double Negation Elimination (DNE) from the set of axiom schemas replacing it with Ex falso quodlibet: ⊥ → p for any proposition p (including both atomic and composite propositions). In IPL, for instance, the Law of Excluded Middle (LEM) p ∨ ¬p is no longer a theorem. My question: aside from the logic formal perspective, is IPL supposed to model/address some specific "kind of world" ? Thanks.
View full post »

Similar threads

A Deriving a Probability Generating Function for Independent Poisson Variables
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Understanding extinction probability in simple GWP
Replies
1
Views
2K
Probability Generating Functions
Replies
2
Views
2K
I On the expected value of a sum of a random number of r.v.s.
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Does the generalized gamma distribution have a mgf?
Replies
1
Views
2K
MHB Probability of misprints on each page
Replies
7
Views
2K
I Proving a multivariate normal distribution by the moment generating function
Replies
5
Views
3K
MHB Moment-Generating Function question
Replies
1
Views
1K
A game of roulette and generating functions
Replies
3
Views
1K
B Distribution of particles, given a function
Replies
2
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top