Understanding extinction probability in simple GWP

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter psie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability theory
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on the extinction probability in a Galton-Watson process (GWP) as outlined in "An Intermediate Course in Probability" by Gut. The extinction probability, denoted as ##\eta##, satisfies the equation ##t=g(t)##, where ##g(t)## is the probability generating function (pgf) of the offspring distribution. The proof involves the law of total probability and the independence of offspring, leading to the conclusion that the extinction probability can be derived from the recursive relationship ##q_n=g(q_{n-1})##. The continuity of measure and properties of pgfs ensure that ##\eta## can be expressed as the limit of extinction probabilities over generations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Galton-Watson processes (GWP)
  • Familiarity with probability generating functions (pgf)
  • Knowledge of the law of total probability
  • Basic concepts of random variables and independence
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of probability generating functions in Galton-Watson processes
  • Explore the implications of extinction probabilities in population dynamics
  • Learn about the continuity properties of probability measures
  • Investigate applications of GWP in real-world scenarios, such as biology and ecology
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, statisticians, and researchers in probability theory, particularly those interested in population dynamics and extinction models.

psie
Messages
315
Reaction score
40
TL;DR
I'm studying a Galton-Watson process (GWP), with the usual assumptions. I am stuck on a theorem regarding the extinction probability.
I am paraphrasing from An Intermediate Course in Probability by Gut.

Background:

Let $$X(n)=\text{ number of individuals in generation } n.$$ We assume ##X(0)=1## and that all individuals give birth according to same probability law, independent of each other. Also, the number of offspring produced by an individual is independent of the number of individuals in their generation. Let ##Y## and ##\{Y_k: k\geq1\}## be generic r.v.s. denoting the number of children obtained by individuals, and set ##p_k=P(Y=k), \ k=0,1,2,\ldots##. The case ##P(Y=1)=1## is excluded. ##X(1)## equals the number of children of the ancestor and ##X(1)\stackrel{d}{=} Y##, i.e. ##X(1)## and ##Y## are equidistributed. Let ##Y_1,Y_2,\ldots## be the number of children obtained by the first, second, ... child. From the assumptions, ##Y_1,Y_2,\ldots## are i.i.d. and independent of ##X(1)##. Since $$X(2)=Y_1+\ldots+Y_{X(1)},$$we've got a random sum of random variables. It is known that the probability generating function (pgf) ##g_{X(2)}## of ##X(2)## is simply ##g_{X(1)}(g_Y(t))##. And since ##X(1)\stackrel{d}{=} Y##, ##g(t)=g_{X(1)}(t)=g_Y(t)##. One can easily derive a formula for the pgf of ##X(n)##.

The extinction probability is \begin{align*} \eta&=P(X(n)=0\text{ for some } n) \\ &=P\left(\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty \{X(n)=0\}\right)\end{align*}

Problem:

Theorem: ##\eta## satisfies the equation ##t=g(t)##.

Proof. Let ##A_k=\{\text{the founding member produces } k\text{ children}\}, k\geq 0##. By the law of total probability we have $$\eta=\sum_{k=0}^\infty P(\text{extinction}\mid A_k)\cdot P(A_k).$$ Now, ##P(A_k)=p_k##, and by the independence assumptions we have $$P(\text{extinction}\mid A_k)=\eta^k.$$ This yields $$\eta=\sum_{k=0}^\infty \eta^kp_k=g(\eta).$$

Question:

Why does ##P(\text{extinction}\mid A_k)=\eta^k## hold? I don't see how to justify this formally, given everything above.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I've found an answer from various sources. This is a slightly different proof of the theorem. The idea is that each offspring gives rise to a new GWP

Let ##q_n=P(X(n)=0)## and ##p_k=P(Y=k)=P(A_k)##. We've got $$q_n=\sum_{k=0}^\infty p_kq_{n-1}^k.\tag1$$ To prove ##(1)##, I quote Durrett:
If ##X(1)=k##, an event with probability ##p_k##, then ##X(n)=0## if and only if all ##k## families die out in the remaining ##n-1## units of time, an independent event with probability ##q_{n-1}^k##. Summing over the disjoint possibilities for each ##k## gives the desired result.
So ##q_n=g(q_{n-1})##. Now, since ##\{X(n)=0\}\subset \{X(n+1)=0\}## for all ##n\geq 1##, by continuity of measure from below, ##\eta=\lim_{n\to\infty}q_n##. Also, a pgf is a continuous function on ##[0,1]## and we have that $$0=q_0\leq q_1\leq\ldots\leq q_n\leq 1,$$so ##q=g(q)=\lim_{n\to\infty} g(q_n)## holds.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K