Trying to generate a bivariate distribution from a univariate distribution

  • Thread starter Thread starter csprh
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Distribution
Click For Summary
To generate a bivariate distribution from the given univariate distribution, one approach is to consider the independence of the variables, where the joint probability density function (PDF) can be expressed as the product of the individual PDFs. It is crucial to ensure that the resulting PDF is normalized by calculating the volume under the function using a double integral over the defined domain. If the distribution is not symmetric, as in the case of the original function, it may not conform to standard forms like the Normal or Cauchy distributions. Additionally, transformation theorems can be applied to derive the PDF in relation to other variables if treating the random variables as particular distributions. Properly defining the domain and ensuring the PDF is positive across that domain are essential steps in this process.
csprh
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Hi all

I have a univariate distribution of the form

\frac{xγ}{((x^2+γ^2)^{1.5})}

where both parameters are real and non-negative.

How do I go about finding the bivariate form, where x and y (the new bivariate variables) are still both real and positive?

To explain further what I mean, the univariate cauchy distribution can be similarily is defined as

\frac{(γ/∏)}{(x^2+γ^2)}

where x and y (in this case) are real numbers which can be positive and negative.

it's bivariate distribution can be defined as

\frac{(γ/(2∏))}{(x^2+y^2+γ^2)^{1.5}}

How was this calculation done? One guess I had was to transform the first equation above into the Fourier domain and therefore obtain it's characteristic function. Transform this somehow in the CF domain and invert. Hmmmm. I seem to be a long way off this at the moment.

Any help would be gratefully received. I have spent at least three weeks mucking around with Matlab, Maple and Mathematica, but not to too much avail.

Thanks in advance

Paul
 
Physics news on Phys.org
OK, there goes my 2 cents on this... as far as I remember that's up on how you define your multivariate distribution, let's imaging (X_1...X_n) follows a multivariate Normal distribution or the Cauchy distribution, then every linear combination of its components is also a Normal or a Cauchy distribution.

But the Normal and the Cauchy are both symmetric distributions and yours is not, so there's no way you can get a bivariate distribution where the linear combination of its components will behave as your distribution.

Now, if you forget about that condition and X,Y are independent you only need to multiply their PDF. f(x,y)=f(x) f(y) and if they are not then f(x,y)=f(x|y) f(y|x)

I hope this helps.
 
Hey csprh and welcome to the forums.

If you have a form of a PDF which needs to be normalized to make it a 'true' PDF, then the best way to handle this is to first decide a domain for your PDF (i.e. x is between blah and blah and y is between blah and blah) and then calculate the volume under this function using a double integral, which will give you a number. Also before you do this, make sure your PDF is > 0 at all points in your domain.

When you have done this you will get integral = V which is the volume under the surface. To make this a PDF simply multiply your PDF by 1/V and this will create a proper PDF that you can use for doing distribution calculations.

If you are trying however to treat your random variables as 'particular' distributions and want to find the corresponding distribution of something in relation to this, then you will need to use a transformation theorem to find your PDF in terms of these other variables. So for example let's say you have X and Y which are distributions and want to find the distribution of f(X,Y): you need to use the properties of these (as well as independence properties and conditional properties if they exist) to get your final PDF.
 
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
9K