MHB Solving Autocovariance Function $\gamma(t+h,t)$

  • Thread starter Thread starter nacho-man
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Function
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the autocovariance function $\gamma(t+h,t)$ for the process defined by $X_t = Z_t + \theta Z_t$, where ${Z_t}$ is a zero-mean process with variance $\sigma^2$. The derived autocovariance for $h=0$ is $\sigma^2 + \theta^2 \sigma^2$, while for $h=|1|$, it is $2\theta \sigma^2, which contradicts the textbook's answer. The participant expresses confusion regarding the discrepancy for $h=|1|$ and questions whether there is a typo in the textbook. The discussion also hints at a follow-up question based on the responses received. Clarification on the autocovariance calculations is sought to resolve the issue.
nacho-man
Messages
166
Reaction score
0
This one is bugging me!

Let ${Z_t}$ ~ $(0, \sigma^2)$

And $X_t = Z_t + \theta Z_t$

im trying to find the autocovariance function $\gamma(t+h,t)$ And nearly have it, but am struggling with some conceptual issues :S

$\gamma(t+h,t) = \text{COV}[Z_{t+h} + \theta Z_{t-1+h}, Z_t + \theta Z_t-1]$

= $\text{COV}(Z_{t+h}, Z_t) + \theta \text{COV}(Z_{t+h}, Z_{t-1}) + \theta \text{COV}(Z_{t-1+h}, Z_t) + \theta^2 \text{COV}(Z_{t-1+h}, Z_{t-1})$

$\text{COV}(Z_{t+h}, Z_t) = \sigma^2$ (at $h=0$)
$\theta \text{COV}(Z_{t+h}, Z_{t-1})$ = $\theta \sigma^2$ (at $h=-1$)
$ \theta \text{COV}(Z_{t-1+h}, Z_t)$ = $\theta \sigma^2$ (at $h=1$)
$ \theta^2 \text{COV}(Z_{t-1+h}, Z_{t-1})$ = $\theta^2 \sigma^2$ (at $h=0$)

So, to summarise,

for h = 0, autocovariance = $\sigma^2 + \theta^2 \sigma^2$
for h = |1|, autocovariance = $\theta \sigma^2 + \theta \sigma^2$ = $2 \theta \sigma^2$ <<< textbook disagrees here!
f0r h>|1|, autocovariance = 0

The answers are attached to this post, I have a discrepancy for h=|1| and cannot see why. Is there a typo in the book?I Have an additional follow up question, depending on the response i receive for this initial post!

Any help very much appreciated as always,
thank you in advance.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.jpg
    Untitled.jpg
    34.1 KB · Views: 104
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
nacho said:
This one is bugging me!

Let ${Z_t}$ ~ $(0, \sigma^2)$

And $X_t = Z_t + \theta Z_t$

im trying to find the autocovariance function $\gamma(t+h,t)$ And nearly have it, but am struggling with some conceptual issues :S

$\gamma(t+h,t) = \text{COV}[Z_{t+h} + \theta Z_{t-1+h}, Z_t + \theta Z_t-1]$

= $\text{COV}(Z_{t+h}, Z_t) + \theta \text{COV}(Z_{t+h}, Z_{t-1}) + \theta \text{COV}(Z_{t-1+h}, Z_t) + \theta^2 \text{COV}(Z_{t-1+h}, Z_{t-1})$

$\text{COV}(Z_{t+h}, Z_t) = \sigma^2$ (at $h=0$)
$\theta \text{COV}(Z_{t+h}, Z_{t-1})$ = $\theta \sigma^2$ (at $h=-1$)
$ \theta \text{COV}(Z_{t-1+h}, Z_t)$ = $\theta \sigma^2$ (at $h=1$)
$ \theta^2 \text{COV}(Z_{t-1+h}, Z_{t-1})$ = $\theta^2 \sigma^2$ (at $h=0$)

So, to summarise,

for h = 0, autocovariance = $\sigma^2 + \theta^2 \sigma^2$
for h = |1|, autocovariance = $\theta \sigma^2 + \theta \sigma^2$ = $2 \theta \sigma^2$ <<< textbook disagrees here!
f0r h>|1|, autocovariance = 0

The answers are attached to this post, I have a discrepancy for h=|1| and cannot see why. Is there a typo in the book?I Have an additional follow up question, depending on the response i receive for this initial post!

Any help very much appreciated as always,
thank you in advance.

Because we have zero means:

$$\begin{aligned}\gamma_Z(t+1,t)&=E(Z_{t+1}Z_t)\\
&=E( (X_{t+1}+\theta X_t)(X_{t}+\theta X_{t-1}))\\
&=E(X_{t+1}X_t)+E(X_{t+1}\theta X_{t-1})+E(\theta X_t X_t)+E(\theta X_t \theta X_{t-1})
\end{aligned}$$

Now as the $X_i$s are uncorrelated and independent all the expectations but the third are zero, so:

$$\gamma_Z(t+1,t)=\theta \sigma^2$$

and similarly:

$$\begin{aligned}\gamma_Z(t-1,t)&=E(Z_{t-1}Z_t)\\
&=E( (X_{t-1}+\theta X_{t-2})(X_{t}+\theta X_{t}))\\
&=E(X_{t-1}X_t)+E(X_{t-1}\theta X_{t-1})+E(\theta X_{t-2} X_t)+E(\theta X_{t-2} \theta X_{t-1})
\end{aligned}$$

Now for the same reasons as before all the expectations other than the third are zero and we have as before:

$$\gamma_Z(t-1,t)=\theta \sigma^2$$

.
 
Last edited:
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. But this one involves probability, known as the Monty Hall Problem. Please see any number of YouTube videos on this for an explanation, I'll leave it to them to explain it. I question the predicate of all those who answer this...
There is a nice little variation of the problem. The host says, after you have chosen the door, that you can change your guess, but to sweeten the deal, he says you can choose the two other doors, if you wish. This proposition is a no brainer, however before you are quick enough to accept it, the host opens one of the two doors and it is empty. In this version you really want to change your pick, but at the same time ask yourself is the host impartial and does that change anything. The host...
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.