The Pareto and Exponential Distr. Where is the mistake?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between the Pareto Distribution and the Exponential Distribution, specifically addressing a perceived error in the transformation of their probability density functions (pdf). The user initially believes there is a mistake in the Wikipedia definitions but is informed that the discrepancy arises from not accounting for the change of variables in density functions. The key insight is that the extra factor of 1/x in the denominator is necessary due to the derivative of the transformation, which ensures the integrity of the probability density function.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of probability density functions (pdf)
  • Familiarity with the Pareto Distribution and its parameters (k, x_m)
  • Knowledge of the Exponential Distribution and its pdf (f(x; λ))
  • Basic calculus, particularly change of variables and derivatives
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Pareto Distribution from the Exponential Distribution
  • Learn about the implications of change of variables in probability distributions
  • Explore the concept of probability density functions in depth
  • Investigate other distributions that exhibit similar transformations
USEFUL FOR

Statisticians, data scientists, and anyone involved in probability theory or statistical modeling who seeks to understand the nuances of distribution transformations and density functions.

MrGandalf
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Hi.

I want to examine the connection between the Pareto Distribution and the Exponential distribution. According to Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution) the Pareto distribution's pdf is
f(x; k, x_m) = k x_m^k x^{-(k + 1)} = \frac{k x_m^k}{x^{(k + 1)}}
x is the variable, x_m is the minimum value and k is a positive parameter.

Wiki tells me that the Pareto distribution is linked to the Exponential distribution (which is f(x;\lambda) = \lambda e^{-\lambda x}) by the following:

f(x; k, x_m) = Exp(\ln(x/x_m); k)

I assume there are no mistakes on the Wiki, so I think I'm doing something wrong. Can anyone see any errors in my reasoning? I start with the Exponential distribution and work my way backwards with the specified parameters. (Sorry if you feel I'm repeating myself at the end, just wanted to get the same form as above).

Exp(\ln(x/x_m); k) \;=\; k e^{-k\ln[x/x_m]} \;=\; k \Big(e^{\ln[x/x_m]}\Big)^{-k}
k\Big(\frac{x}{x_m}\Big)^{-k} \;=\; k\Big(\frac{x_m}{x}\Big)^{k} \;=\; k\frac{x_m^k}{x^k} = k x_m^k x^{-k} \;=\; \frac{k x_m^k}{x^k} \;\not=\; \frac{k x_m^k}{x^{(k + 1)}}

Where does the extra x in the denominator come from? I am very confused right now. I can't see anything wrong! I hope someone can enlighten me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hm, seems right to me, maybe there is indeed an error on wiki. :smile:
 
I am digging up an old thread here, sorry.

What you are missing is the fact that f is a density and so you can't just substitute a new variable, you have to do a change of variables accounting for the fact that dx != dy. Otherwise your distribution is "stretched".

The factor 1/x that you are missing comes from d [ ln ( X / Xm) ] / dx.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K