Randomly Stopped Sums vs the sum of I.I.D. Random Variables

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 3K views
CGandC
Messages
326
Reaction score
34
I've came across the two following theorems in my studies of Probability Generating Functions:

Theorem 1:
Suppose ##X_1, ... , X_n## are independent random variables, and let ##Y = X_1 + ... + X_n##. Then,
##G_Y(s) = \prod_{i=1}^n G_{X_i}(s)##

Theorem 2:
Let ##X_1, X_2, ...## be a sequence of independent and identically distributed random variables with common PGF ##G_X##. Let ##N## be a random variable, independent of the ##X_i##'s with PGF ##G_N##, and let ##T_N = X_1 + ... + X_N = \sum_{i=1}^N X_i##. Then the PGF of ##T_N## is:
##G_{T_N}(s) = G_N (G_X(s))##

Question:
I don't understand the difference between these two theorems.
From reading here: https://stats.stackexchange.com/que...topped-sums-vs-the-sum-of-i-i-d-random-variab
I understand that in first theorem ## n ## is a number that we know so we know how many ## X_i ## will appear in the sum in ## Y ##.
But in the second theorem ## N ## is a random variable so we don't know how many ## X_i ## will appear in the sum ## Y ##.

But I still don't fully understand.

the proof for the first theorem goes as follows:
##
G_Y(t) =G_{X_1+X_2+\ldots+X_n}(t)=\mathbb{E}\left[t^{X_1+X_2+\ldots+X_n}\right]=\mathbb{E}\left[\prod_{i=1}^n t^{X_i}\right]=\prod_{i=1}^n \mathbb{E}\left[t^{X_i}\right]=\prod_{i=1}^n G_{X_i}(t)
##

Then I tried to prove the second theorem using exactly the same proof as follows:
##
G_Y(t) =G_{X_1+X_2+\ldots+X_N}(t)=\mathbb{E}\left[t^{X_1+X_2+\ldots+X_N}\right]=\mathbb{E}\left[\prod_{i=1}^N t^{X_i}\right]=\prod_{i=1}^N \mathbb{E}\left[t^{X_i}\right]=\prod_{i=1}^N G_{X_i}(t)
##
this proof is specious, but I don't understand why. I mean, the number of ## X_i## 's that will be multiplied by each other is determined by ## N ## ,even if we don't know it, so I don't understand what's the problem.Thanks in advance for any help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
CGandC said:
I've came across the two following theorems in my studies of Probability Generating Functions:

Theorem 1:
Suppose ##X_1, ... , X_n## are independent random variables, and let ##Y = X_1 + ... + X_n##. Then,
##G_Y(s) = \prod_{i=1}^n G_{X_i}(s)##

Theorem 2:
Let ##X_1, X_2, ...## be a sequence of independent and identically distributed random variables with common PGF ##G_X##. Let ##N## be a random variable, independent of the ##X_i##'s with PGF ##G_N##, and let ##T_N = X_1 + ... + X_N = \sum_{i=1}^N X_i##. Then the PGF of ##T_N## is:
##G_{T_N}(s) = G_N (G_X(s))##

Question:
I don't understand the difference between these two theorems.
From reading here: https://stats.stackexchange.com/que...topped-sums-vs-the-sum-of-i-i-d-random-variab
I understand that in first theorem ## n ## is a number that we know so we know how many ## X_i ## will appear in the sum in ## Y ##.
But in the second theorem ## N ## is a random variable so we don't know how many ## X_i ## will appear in the sum ## Y ##.

But I still don't fully understand.

the proof for the first theorem goes as follows:
##
G_Y(t) =G_{X_1+X_2+\ldots+X_n}(t)=\mathbb{E}\left[t^{X_1+X_2+\ldots+X_n}\right]=\mathbb{E}\left[\prod_{i=1}^n t^{X_i}\right]=\prod_{i=1}^n \mathbb{E}\left[t^{X_i}\right]=\prod_{i=1}^n G_{X_i}(t)
##

Then I tried to prove the second theorem using exactly the same proof as follows:
##
G_Y(t) =G_{X_1+X_2+\ldots+X_N}(t)=\mathbb{E}\left[t^{X_1+X_2+\ldots+X_N}\right]=\mathbb{E}\left[\prod_{i=1}^N t^{X_i}\right]=\prod_{i=1}^N \mathbb{E}\left[t^{X_i}\right]=\prod_{i=1}^N G_{X_i}(t)
##
this proof is specious, but I don't understand why. I mean, the number of ## X_i## 's that will be multiplied by each other is determined by ## N ## ,even if we don't know it, so I don't understand what's the problem.Thanks in advance for any help!

[itex]\prod_{i=1}^N G_{X_i}(t) = (G_{X_1}(t))^N[/itex] is a random variable: it's a function of [itex]N[/itex]. To find [itex]\mathbb{E}(t^Y)[/itex] you need to remove this dependence on [itex]N[/itex] by using conditional expectation: [tex] \begin{split}<br /> \mathbb{E}(t^{Y}) &= \sum_{n=1}^\infty \mathbb{E}(t^{X_1 + \dots + X_N} | N = n)\mathbb{P}(N = n) \\<br /> &= \sum_{n=1}^\infty \mathbb{E}(t^{X_1 + \dots + X_n})\mathbb{P}(N = n) \end{split}[/tex]
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim mcnamara and CGandC
Ahh! that makes sense, thank you a lot!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim mcnamara