-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Expand file tree
/
Copy pathprobability.qmd
More file actions
728 lines (483 loc) · 38.3 KB
/
probability.qmd
File metadata and controls
728 lines (483 loc) · 38.3 KB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
---
output: html_document
editor_options:
chunk_output_type: inline
---
# Probability: A Brief Review
*MATH/STAT 355* builds directly on topics covered in *MATH/STAT 354: Probability*. You're not expected to perfectly remember everything from *Probability*, but you will need to have sufficient facility with the following topics covered in this review Chapter in order to grasp the majority of concepts covered in *MATH/STAT 355*.
## Learning Objectives
By the end of this chapter, you should be able to...
- Distinguish between important probability models (e.g., Normal, Binomial)
- Derive the expectation and variance of a single random variable or a sum of random variables
- Define the moment generating function and use it to find moments or identify pdfs
- Derive pdfs of transformations of continuous random variables
## Concept Questions
1. Which probability distributions are appropriate for *quantitative* (continuous) random variables?
2. Which probability distributions are appropriate for *categorical* random variables?
3. *Independently and Identically Distributed (iid)* random variables are an incredibly important assumption involved in many statistical methods. Why do you think it might be important/useful for random variables to have this property?
4. Why might we want to be able to derive distribution functions for transformations of random variables? In what scenarios can you imagine this being useful?
## Definitions
You are expected to know the following definitions:
**Random Variable**
A random variable is a function that takes inputs from a sample space of all possible outcomes, and outputs real values or probabilities. As an example, consider a coin flip. The sample space of all possible outcomes consists of "heads" and "tails", and each outcome is associated with a probability (50% each, for a fair coin). For our purposes, you should know that random variables have probability density (or mass) functions, and are either discrete or continuous based on the number of possible outcomes a random variable may take. Random variables are often denoted with capital Roman letters, like $X$, $Y$, $Z$, etc.
**Probability density function** (discrete, continuous)
- Note: I don't care if you call a pmf a pdf... I will probably do this continuously throughout the semester. We don't need to be picky about this in *MATH/STAT 355*.
There are many different accepted ways to write the notation for a pdf of a random variables. Any of the following are perfectly appropriate for this class: $f(x)$, $\pi(x)$, $p(x)$, $f_X(x)$. I typically use either $\pi$ or $p$, but might mix it up occasionally.
Key things I want you to know about probability density functions:
- $\pi(x) \geq 0$, everywhere. This should make sense (hopefully) because probabilities cannot be negative!
- $\int_{-\infty}^\infty \pi(x) = 1$. This should also (hopefully) makes sense. Probabilities can't be *greater* than one, and the probability of event occurring *at all (ever)* should be equal to one, if the event $x$ is a random variable.
**Cumulative distribution function** (discrete, continuous)
Cumulative distribution functions we'll typically write as $F_X(x)$. or $F(x)$, for short. It is important to know that
$$
F_X(x) = \Pr(X \leq x),
$$
or in words, "the cumulative distribution function is the probability that a random variable lies before $x$." If you write $\Pr(X < x)$ instead of $\leq$, you're fine. The probability that a random variable is exactly one number (for an RV with a continuous pdf) is zero anyway, so these are the same thing. Key things I want you to know about cumulative distribution functions:
- $F(x)$ is non-decreasing. This is in part where the "cumulative" piece comes in to play. Recall that probabilities are basically integrals or sums. If we're integrating over something positive, and our upper bound for our integral *increases*, the area under the curve (cumulative probability) will increase as well.
- $0 \leq F(x) \leq 1$ (since probabilities have to be between zero and one!)
- $\Pr(a < X \leq b) = F(b) - F(a)$ (because algebra)
**Joint probability density function**
A joint probability density function is a probability distribution defined for more than one random variable at a time. For two random variables, $X$ and $Z$, we could write their joint density function as $f_{X,Z}(x, z)$ , or $f(x,z)$ for short. The joint density function encodes all sorts of fun information, including *marginal* distributions for $X$ and $Z$, and conditional distributions (see next **bold** definition). We can think of the joint pdf as listing all possible pairs of outputs from the density function $f(x,z)$, for varying values of $x$ and $z$. Key things I want you to know about joint pdfs:
- How to get a marginal pdf from a joint pdf:
Suppose I want to know $f_X(x)$, and I know $f_{X,Z}(x,z)$. Then I can integrate or "average over" $Z$ to get
$$
f_X(x) = \int f_{X,Z}(x,z)dz
$$
- The relationship between conditional pdfs, marginal pdfs, joint pdfs, and Bayes' theorem/rule
- How to obtain a joint pdf for *independent* random variables: just multiply their marginal pdfs together! This is how we will (typically) think about likelihoods!
- How to obtain a marginal pdf from a joint pdf when random variables are independent *without integrating* (think, "separability")
**Conditional probability density function**
A conditional pdf denotes the probability distribution for a (set of) random variable(s), *given that* the value for another (set of) random variable(s) is known. For two random variables, $X$ and $Z$, we could write the conditional distribution of $X$ "given" $Z$ as $f_{X \mid Z}(x \mid z)$ , where the "conditioning" is denoted by a vertical bar (in LaTeX, this is typeset using "\\mid"). Key things I want you to know about conditional pdfs:
- The relationship between conditional pdfs, marginal pdfs, joint pdfs, and Bayes' theorem/rule
- How to obtain a conditional pdf from a joint pdf (again, think Bayes' rule)
- Relationship between conditional pdfs and independence (see next **bold** definition)
**Independence**
Two random variables $X$ and $Z$ are *independent* if and only if:
- $f_{X,Z}(x,z) = f_X(x) f_Z(z)$ (their joint pdf is "separable")
- $f_{X\mid Z}(x\mid z) = f_X(x)$ (the pdf for $X$ does not depend on $Z$ in any way)
Note that the "opposite" is also true: $f_{Z\mid X}(z\mid x) = f_Z(z)$
In notation, we denote that two variables are independent as $X \perp\!\!\!\perp Z$, or $X \perp Z$. In LaTeX, the *latter* is typeset as "\\perp", and the former is typeset as "\\perp\\!\\!\\!\\perp". As a matter of personal preference, I (Taylor) prefer $\perp\!\!\!\perp$, but I don't like typing it out every time. Consider using the "\\newcommand" functionality in LaTeX to create a shorthand for this for your documents!
**Jacobian Matrix**
Let $f$ be a 1-1 and onto function, where $f(x_i) = y_i$ for $i = 1, \dots, n$. Then the Jacobian matrix of $f$ is the matrix of partial derivatives,
$$
J_f(x) = \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{\partial y_1}{\partial x_1} & \dots & \frac{\partial y_n}{\partial x_1} \\
\vdots & & \vdots \\
\frac{\partial y_1}{\partial x_n} & \dots & \frac{\partial y_n}{\partial x_n}
\end{pmatrix}
$$
The Jacobian matrix is sometimes simply referred to as the "Jacobian", but be careful when simply calling it the Jacobian, since this can sometimes refer to the *determinant* of the Jacobian matrix as well. For this course, we'll always refer to the Jacobian matrix as a matrix, and the "Jacobian" as its determinant.
**Jacobian**
The Jacobian is the determinant of the Jacobian matrix, denoted by $| J_f(x) |$. Recall from linear algebra that $Det(A) = Det(A^\top)$. This is convenient, because it means we won't have worry too much about remembering which order our partial derivatives go in our matrix, for 2x2 matrices (which is all we'll be working with for this course).
**Expected Value / Expectation**
The expectation (or expected value) of a random variable is defined as:
$$
E[X] = \int_{-\infty}^\infty x f(x) dx
$$
Expected value is a weighted average, where the average is over all possible values a random variable can take, weighted by the probability that those values occur. Key things I want you to know about expectation:
- The relationship between expectation, variance, and moments (specifically, that $E[X]$ is the 1st moment!)
- The "law of the unconscious statistician" (see the Theorems section of this chapter)
- Expectation of linear transformations of random variables (see **Theorems** section of this chapter)
**Variance**
The variance of a random variable is defined as:
$$
Var[X] = E[(X - E[X])^2] = E[X^2] - E[X]^2
$$
In words, we can read this as "the expected value of the squared deviation from the mean" of a random variable $X$. Key things I want you to know about variance:
- The relationship between expectation, variance, and moments (hopefully clear, given the formula for variance)
- The relationship between variance and standard deviation: $Var(X) = sd(X)^2$
- The relationship between variance and covariance: $Var(X) = Cov(X, X)$
- $Var(X) \geq 0$. This should make sense, given that we're taking the expectation of something "squared" in order to calculate it!
- $Var(c) = 0$ for any constant, $c$.
- Variance of linear transformations of random variables (see **Theorems** section of this chapter)
$r^{th}$ **moment**
The $r^{th}$ moment of a probability distribution is given by $E[X^r]$. For example, when $r = 1$, the $r^{th}$ moment is just the expectation of the random variable $X$. Key things I want you to know about moments:
- The relationship between moments, expectation, and variance
- For example, if you know the first and second moments of a distribution, you should be able to calculate the variance of a random variable with that distribution!
- The relationship between moments and *moment generating functions* (see **Theorems** section of this chapter)
**Covariance**
The covariance of two random variables is a measure of their *joint* variability. We denote the covariance of two random variables $X$ and $Z$ as $Cov(X,Z)$, and
$$
Cov(X, Z) = E[(X - E[X])(Y - E[Y])] = E[XY] - E[X]E[Y]
$$
Some things I want you to know about covariance:
- $Cov(X, X) = Var(X)$
- $Cov(X, Y) = Cov(Y, X)$ (order doesn't matter)
**Moment Generating Function (MGF)**
The moment generating function of a random variable $X$ is defined as
$$
M_X(t) = E[e^{tX}]
$$
A few things to note:
- $M_X(0) = 1$, always.
- If two random variables have the same MGF, they have the same probability distribution!
- MGFs are sometimes useful for showing how different random variables are related to each other
### Distributions Table
You are also expected to know the probability distributions contained in Table 1, below. Note that you *do not* need to memorize the pdfs for these distributions, but you *should* be familiar with what types of random variables (continuous/quantitative, categorical, integer-valued, etc.) may take on different distributions. The more familiar you are with the forms of the pdfs, the easier/faster it will be to work through problem sets and quizzes.
| Distribution | PDF/PMF | Parameters | Support |
|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|
| Uniform | $\pi(x) = \frac{1}{\beta - \alpha}$ | $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}$, $\beta\in \mathbb{R}$ | $x \in [\alpha, \beta]$ |
| Normal | $\pi(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \sigma^2}} \exp(-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2} (x - \mu)^2)$ | $\mu \in \mathbb{R}$, $\sigma > 0$ | $x \in \mathbb{R}$ |
| Multivariate Normal | $\pi(\textbf{x}) = (2\pi)^{-k/2} |\Sigma|^{-1/2} \exp(-\frac{1}{2}(\textbf{x} - \mu)^\top \Sigma^{-1}(\textbf{x} - \mu)))$ | $\mu \in \mathbb{R}^k$, $\Sigma \in \mathbb{R}^{k\times k}$ , positive semi-definite (in practice, almost always positive definite) | $x \in \mathbb{R}^{k}$ |
| Gamma | $\pi(x) = \frac{\beta^{\alpha}}{\Gamma(\alpha)}x^{\alpha - 1} e^{-\beta x}$ | $\alpha \text{ (shape)}, \beta \text{ (rate)} > 0$ | $x \in (0,\infty)$ |
| Chi-squared | $\pi(x) = \frac{2^{-\nu/2}}{\Gamma(\nu/2)} x^{\nu/2 - 1}e^{-x/2}$ | $\nu > 0$ | $x \in [0, \infty)$ |
| $F$ | $\pi(x) = \frac{\Gamma(\frac{\nu_1 + \nu_2}{2})}{\Gamma(\frac{\nu_1}{2}) \Gamma(\frac{\nu_2}{2})} \left( \frac{\nu_1}{\nu_2}\right)^{\nu_1/2} \left( \frac{x^{(\nu_1 - 2)/2}}{\left( 1 + \left( \frac{\nu_1}{\nu_2}\right)x\right)^{(\nu_1 + \nu_2)/2}}\right)$ | $\nu_1, \nu_2 > 0$ | $x \in [0, \infty)$ |
| Exponential | $\pi(x) = \beta e^{-\beta x}$ | $\beta > 0$ | $x \in [0, \infty)$ |
| Laplace (Double Exponential) | $\pi(x) = \frac{1}{2b} \exp( - \frac{|x - \mu|}{b})$ | $\mu \in \mathbb{R}$, $b > 0$ | $x \in \mathbb{R}$ |
| Student-$t$ | $\pi(x) = \frac{\Gamma((\nu + 1)/2)}{\Gamma(\nu/2) \sqrt{\nu \pi}} (1 + \frac{x^2}{\nu})^{-(\nu + 1)/2}$ | $\nu > 0$ | $x \in \mathbb{R}$ |
| Beta | $\pi(x) = \frac{\Gamma(\alpha + \beta)}{\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(\beta)} x^{\alpha - 1}(1 - x)^{\beta - 1}$ | $\alpha, \beta > 0$ | $x \in [0,1]$ |
| Poisson | $\pi(x) = \frac{\lambda^x e^{-\lambda}}{x!}$ | $\lambda > 0$ | $x \in \mathbb{N}$ |
| Binomial | $\pi(x) = \binom{n}{x} p^{x} (1 - p)^{n - x}$ | $p \in [0,1], n = \{0, 1, 2, \dots\}$ | $x \in \{0, 1, \dots, n\}$ |
| Multinomial | $\pi(\textbf{x}) = \frac{n!}{x_1! \dots x_k!} p_1^{x_1} \dots p_k^{x_k}$ | $p_i > 0$, $p_1 + \dots + p_k = 1$, $n = \{0, 1, 2, \dots \}$ | $\{ x_1, \dots, x_k \mid \sum_{i = 1}^k x_i = n, x_i \geq 0 (i = 1, \dots, k)\}$ |
| Negative Binomial | $\pi(x) = \binom{x + r - 1}{x} (1-p)^x p^r$ | $r > 0$, $p \in [0,1]$ | $x \in \{0, 1, \dots\}$ |
: *Table 1.* Table of main probability distributions we will work with for *MATH/STAT 355*.
## Theorems
- Law of Total Probability
$$
P(A) = \sum_n P(A \cap B_n),
$$or
$$
P(A) = \sum_n P(A \mid B_n) P(B_n)
$$
- Bayes' Theorem
$$
\pi(A \mid B) = \frac{\pi(B \mid A) \pi(A)}{\pi(B)}
$$
- Relationship between pdf and cdf
$$
F_Y(y) = \int_{-\infty}^y f_Y(t)dt
$$
$$
\frac{\partial}{\partial y}F_Y(y) = f_Y(y)
$$
- Expectation of random variables
$$
E[X] = \int_{-\infty}^\infty x f(x) dx
$$
$$
E[X^2] = \int_{-\infty}^\infty x^2 f(x) dx
$$
- "Law of the Unconscious Statistician"
$$
E[g(X)] = \int_{-\infty}^\infty g(x)f(x)dx
$$
- Expectation and variance of linear transformations of random variables
$$
E[cX + b] = c E[X] + b
$$
$$
Var[cX + b] = c^2 Var[X]
$$
- Relationship between mean and variance
$$
Var[X] = E[(X - E[X])^2] = E[X^2] - E[X]^2
$$
Also, recall that $Cov[X, X] = Var[X]$.
- Iterated Things
$$
E[X] = E[E[X \mid Y]]
$$ and $$
Var(X) = E[Var(X \mid Y)] + Var(E[X \mid Y])
$$
- Finding a marginal pdf from a joint pdf
$$
f_X(x) = \int_{-\infty}^\infty f_{X,Y}(x, y) dy
$$
- Independence of random variables and joint pdfs
If two random variables are independent, their joint pdf will be *separable*. For example, if $X$ and $Y$ are independent, we could write
$$
f_{X,Y}(x, y) = f_{X}(x)f_Y(y)
$$
- Expected value of a product of independent random variables
Suppose random variables $X_1, \dots, X_n$ are independent. Then we can write,
$$
E\left[\prod_{i = 1}^n X_i\right] = \prod_{i = 1}^n E[X_i]
$$
- Covariance of independent random variables
If $X$ and $Y$ are independent, then $Cov(X, Y) = 0$. We can show this by noting that
\begin{align}
Cov(X, Y) & = E[(X - E[X])(Y - E[Y])] \\
& = E[XY - XE[Y] - YE[X] + E[X]E[Y]] \\
& = E[XY] - E[XE[Y]] - E[YE[X]] + E[X]E[Y] \\
& = 2E[X]E[Y] - 2E[X]E[Y] \\
& = 0
\end{align}
- Using MGFs to find moments
Recall that the moment generating function of a random variable $X$, denoted by $M_X(t)$ is
$$
M_X(t) = E[e^{tX}]
$$
Then the $n$th moment of the probability distribution for $X$ , $E[X^n]$, is given by
$$
\frac{\partial M_X}{\partial t^n} \Bigg|_{t = 0}
$$
where the above reads as "the $n$th derivative of the moment generating function, evaluated at $t = 0$."
- Using MGFs to identify pdfs
MGFs uniquely identify probability density functions. If $X$ and $Y$ are two random variables where for all values of $t$, $M_X(t) = M_Y(t)$, then $F_X(x) = F_Y(y)$.
- Central Limit Theorem
The classical CLT states that for independent and identically distributed (iid) random variables $X_1, \dots, X_n$, with expected value $E[X_i] = \mu$ and $Var[X_i] = \sigma^2 < \infty$, the sample average (centered and standardized) converges in distribution to a standard normal distribution at a root-$n$ rate. Notationally, this is written as
$$
\sqrt{n} (\bar{X} - \mu) \overset{d}{\to} N(0, \sigma^2)
$$
{width="20" height="16"} A fun aside: this is only *one* CLT, often referred to as the Levy CLT. There are other CLTs, such as the Lyapunov CLT and Lindeberg-Feller CLT!
### Transforming Continuous Random Variables
We will *often* take at face value previously proven *relationships* between random variables. What I mean by this, as an example, is that it is a nice (convenient) fact that a sum of two independent normal random variables is *still* normally distributed, with a nice form for the mean and variance. In particular, if $X \sim N(\mu, \sigma^2)$ and $Y \sim N(\theta, \nu^2)$, then $X + Y \sim N(\mu + \theta, \sigma^2 + \nu^2)$. Most frequently used examples of these sorts of relationships can be found in the "Related Distributions" section of the Wikipedia page for a given probability distribution. Unless I explicitly ask you to derive/show how certain variables are related to each other, you can just state the known relationship, use it, and move on!
If I *do* ask you to derive/show these things, there a few different ways we can go about this. For this course, I expect you to know the "CDF method" for *one function* of *one random variable*, **and** the "Jacobian method" for a function of *more than one* random variable.
#### CDF Method: One random variable
**Theorem**. Let $X$ be a continuous random variable with pdf $f_X(x)$. Define a new random variable $Y = g(X)$, for nice\* functions $g$. Then $f_Y(y) = f_X(g^{-1}(y)) \times \frac{1}{g'(g^{-1}(y))}$.
{width="20" height="16"} \*By *nice* functions we mean functions that are strictly increasing and smooth *on the required range*. As an example, $exp(x)$ is a smooth, strictly increasing function; $|x|$ is not on the *whole real line*, but *is* from $(0, \infty)$ (where a lot of useful pdfs are defined). For the purposes of this class, every function that you will need to do this for will be "nice." Note that there are also considerations that need to be taken regarding the *range* of continuous random variables when considering transforming them. We will mostly ignore these considerations in this class, but a technically complete derivation (or proof) must consider them.
<details>
<summary>Proof.</summary>
We can write
\begin{align*}
f_Y(y) & = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} F_Y(y) \\
& = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \Pr(Y \leq y) \\
& = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \Pr(g(X) \leq y) \\
& = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \Pr(X \leq g^{-1}(y)) \\
& = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} F_X(g^{-1}(y)) \\
& = f_X(g^{-1}(y)) \times \frac{\partial}{\partial y} g^{-1}(y)
\end{align*}
where to obtain the last equality we use chain rule! Now we require some statistical trickery to continue... (note that this method is called the "CDF method" because we go *through* the CDF to derive the distribution for $Y$)
You will *especially* see this in the Bayes chapter of our course notes, but it is often true that our lives are made easier as statisticians if we multiply things by one, or add zero. What exactly do I mean? Rearranging gross looking formulas into things we are familiar with (like pdfs, for example) often makes our lives easier and allows us to avoid dealing with such grossness. Here, the grossness is less obvious, but nonetheless relevant. Note that we can write
\begin{align*}
y & = y \\
y & = g(g^{-1}(y)) \\
\frac{\partial}{\partial y} y & = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} g(g^{-1}(y)) \\
1 & = g'(g^{-1}(y)) \frac{\partial}{\partial y} g^{-1}(y) \hspace{1cm} \text{(chain rule again!)} \\
\frac{1}{g'(g^{-1}(y))} & = \frac{\partial}{\partial y} g^{-1}(y)
\end{align*}
The right-hand side should look familiar: it is exactly what we needed to "deal with" in our proof! Returning to that proof, we have
\begin{align*}
f_Y(y) & = f_X(g^{-1}(y)) \times \frac{\partial}{\partial y} g^{-1}(y) \\
& = f_X(g^{-1}(y)) \times \frac{1}{g'(g^{-1}(y))}
\end{align*}
as desired.
</details>
#### Jacobian Method: More than one random variable
Transformations of single random variables are great, but we'll need to work with transformations of *more than one* random variable if we want to be able to manipulate joint pdfs. Suppose, for example, we have $X \sim Gamma(\alpha, \lambda)$ and $Y \sim Gamma(\beta, \lambda)$, where $X \perp\!\!\!\perp Y$. Let $U = X + Y$ and $W = \frac{X}{X + Y}$. How do we show that $U$ and $W$ are independent? Through finding the joint pdf! Which means we need a method for transforming more than one, continuous random variable. Enter the Jacobian Method.
**Theorem**. Let $X = (x_1, \dots, x_n)$ be a vector of random variables (a random vector) with pdf $\pi_{X}(x)$. Suppose that $f(x) = y$ is a smooth, 1-1 and onto function, and that $|J_f(x)| > 0$ almost everywhere. Then $\pi_Y(y)$ is given by
$$
\pi_Y(y) = \pi_{X}(f^{-1}(y)) \times \bigg| \frac{\partial x}{\partial y} \bigg| \times I_Y\{y\}
$$ where $I_Y \{y \}$ denotes the support of $Y$.
NOTE: $| J_f(y) | = | \frac{\partial x}{\partial y} |$, above, where $f(x) = y$. This means that the numerators and denominators in the Jacobian Matrix in the definition in the Course Notes are *flipped* here. The reason for this becomes clear in the proof sketched below, noting that $| \frac{\partial x}{\partial y} |^{-1} = | \frac{\partial y}{\partial x} |$, for the supposed functions $f$.
<details>
<summary>Proof.</summary>
Note that if $f$ is both 1-1 and onto, then $f$ is *either* monotone increasing or monotone decreasing. We'll prove the case where $f$ is increasing, and we'll note (but not show) how the decreasing case follows directly.
Let $f$ be a smooth, monotone increasing function. For some subset $C \subseteq \mathbb{R}^n$,
\begin{align*}
\int_C \pi_Y(y) dy & = \Pr(Y \in C) \\
& = \Pr(f(X) \in C) \\
& = \Pr(X \in f^{-1}(C)) \\
& = \int_{f^{-1}(C)} \pi_X(x) dx
\end{align*}
Now we'll use a (convoluted) $u$-substitution to make this look like what we want it to look like. Let $u = f^{-1}(y)$. Note that this also means $u = x$. Then $du = (f^{-1}(y))' dy = dx$. Proceeding with $u$-substitution, we have
\begin{align*}
\int_C \pi_Y(y) dy & = \int_{f^{-1}(C)} \pi_X(x) dx \\
& = \int_C \pi_X(u) du \\
& = \int_C \pi_X(f^{-1}(y)) (f^{-1}(y))' dy \\
& = \int_C \pi_X(f^{-1}(y))
\bigg| \frac{dx}{dy} \bigg| dy
\end{align*} which implies $\pi_Y(y) = \pi_X(f^{-1}(y))
\bigg| \frac{dx}{dy} \bigg|$, as desired. The absolute value signs (the Jacobian piece) come into play to help us deal with the decreasing case.
</details>
## Worked Examples
**Problem 1:** Suppose $X \sim Exponential(\lambda)$. Calculate $E[X]$ and $Var[X]$.
<details>
<summary>Solution:</summary>
We know that $f(x) = \lambda e^{-\lambda x}$. If we can calculate $E[X]$ and $E[X^2]$, then we're basically done! We can write
\begin{align*}
E[X] & = \int_0^\infty x \lambda e^{-\lambda x} dx \\
& = \lambda \int_0^\infty x e^{-\lambda x} dx
\end{align*}
And now we need integration by parts! Set $u = x$, $dv = e^{-\lambda x} dx$. Then $du = 1dx$ and $v = \frac{-1}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x}$. Since $\int u dv = uv - \int vdu$, we can continue
\begin{align*}
E[X] & = \lambda \int_0^\infty x e^{-\lambda x} dx \\
& = \lambda \left( -\frac{x}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x} \bigg|_0^\infty - \int_0^\infty \frac{-1}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x} dx \right) \\
& = \lambda \left( - \int_0^\infty \frac{-1}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x} dx \right) \\
& = \lambda \left( \frac{-1}{\lambda^2} e^{-\lambda x} \bigg|_0^\infty \right) \\
& = \frac{-1}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x} \bigg|_0^\infty \\
& = \frac{1}{\lambda} e^{-0} \\
& = \frac{1}{\lambda}
\end{align*}
We can follow a similar process to get $E[X^2]$ (using the law of the unconscious statistician!). We can write
\begin{align*}
E[X^2] & = \int_0^\infty x^2 \lambda e^{-\lambda x} dx \\
& = \lambda \int_0^\infty x^2 e^{-\lambda x} dx
\end{align*}
And now we need integration by parts again! Set $u = x^2$, $dv = e^{-\lambda x} dx$. Then $du = 2xdx$ and $v = \frac{-1}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x}$. Since $\int u dv = uv - \int vdu$, we can continue
\begin{align*}
E[X] & = \lambda \int_0^\infty x^2 e^{-\lambda x} dx \\
& = \lambda \left( -\frac{x^2}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x} \bigg|_0^\infty - \int_0^\infty \frac{-2}{\lambda} xe^{-\lambda x} dx \right) \\
& = \lambda \left( -\frac{x^2}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x} \bigg|_0^\infty + \frac{2}{\lambda} \int_0^\infty xe^{-\lambda x} dx \right) \\
& = \lambda \left( -\frac{x^2}{\lambda} e^{-\lambda x} \bigg|_0^\infty + \frac{2}{\lambda^3} \right)\\
& = \lambda \left( 0 + \frac{2}{\lambda^3} \right) \\
& = \frac{2}{\lambda^2}
\end{align*}
Now we can calculate $Var[X] = E[X^2] - E[X]^2$ as $$
Var[X] = E[X^2] - E[X]^2 = \frac{2}{\lambda^2} - \frac{1}{\lambda^2} = \frac{1}{\lambda^2}
$$ And so we have $E[X] = \frac{1}{\lambda}$ and $Var[X] = \frac{1}{\lambda^2}$.
</details>
**Problem 2:** Show that an exponentially distributed random variable is "memoryless", i.e. show that $\Pr(X > s + x \mid X > s) = \Pr(X > x)$, $\forall s$.
<details>
<summary>Solution:</summary>
Recall that the CDF of an exponential distribution is given by $F(x) = 1-e^{-\lambda x}$. Thanks to Bayes rule, we can write
\begin{align*}
\Pr(X > s + x \mid X > s) & = \frac{\Pr(X > s + x , X > s)}{\Pr(X > s)} \\
& = \frac{\Pr(X > s + x)}{\Pr(X > s)} \\
& = \frac{1 - \Pr(X < s + x)}{1 - \Pr(X < s)} \\
& = \frac{1 - F(s + x)}{1 - F(s)}
\end{align*}
where the second equality is true because $x > 0$. Then we can write
\begin{align*}
\Pr(X > s + x \mid X > s) & = \frac{1 - F(s + x)}{1 - F(s)} \\
& = \frac{1 - \left(1 - e^{-\lambda(s + x)}\right)}{1 - \left(1 - e^{-\lambda s}\right)} \\
& = \frac{e^{-\lambda(s + x)}}{e^{-\lambda s}} \\
& = \frac{e^{-\lambda s - \lambda x}}{e^{-\lambda s}} \\
& = e^{-\lambda x} \\
& = 1 - F(x) \\
& = \Pr(X > x)
\end{align*}
and we're done!
</details>
**Problem 3:** Suppose $X \sim Exponential(1/\lambda)$, and $Y \mid X \sim Poisson(X)$. Show that $Y \sim Geometric(1/(1 + \lambda))$.
<details>
<summary>Solution:</summary>
Note that we can write $f(x, y) = f(y \mid x) f(x)$, and $f(y) = \int f(x, y) dx$. Then
$$
f(x, y) = \left( \frac{1}{\lambda} e^{-x/\lambda} \right) \left( \frac{x^y e^{-x}}{y!} \right)
$$ And so,
\begin{align*}
f(y) & = \int f(x, y) dx \\
& = \int \left( \frac{1}{\lambda} e^{-x/\lambda} \right) \left( \frac{x^y e^{-x}}{y!} \right) dx \\
& = \frac{1}{\lambda y!} \int x^y e^{-x(1 + \lambda)/\lambda} dx
\end{align*}
And we can again use integration by parts! Let $u = x^y$ and $dv = e^{-x(1 + \lambda)/\lambda} dx$. Then we have $du = yx^{y-1} dx$ and $v = -\frac{\lambda}{1 + \lambda}e^{-x(1 + \lambda)/\lambda}$, and we can write
\begin{align*}
f(y) & = \frac{1}{\lambda y!} \int x^y e^{-x(1 + \lambda)/\lambda} dx \\
& = \frac{1}{\lambda y!} \left( -x^y \frac{\lambda}{1 + \lambda}e^{-x(1 + \lambda)/\lambda} \bigg|_{x = 0}^{x = \infty} + \int \frac{\lambda}{1 + \lambda}e^{-x(1 + \lambda)/\lambda} yx^{y-1} dx\right) \\
& = \frac{1}{\lambda y!} \left( \int \frac{\lambda}{1 + \lambda}e^{-x(1 + \lambda)/\lambda} yx^{y-1} dx \right) \\
& = \frac{1}{\lambda y!} \left( \frac{\lambda }{1 + \lambda} \right) y \left( \int e^{-x(1 + \lambda)/\lambda} x^{y-1} dx \right)
\end{align*}
This *looks* gross, but it's actually not so bad. Note that, since $Y$ is Poisson, it can only take integer values beginning at 1! Then we can *repeat* the process of integration by parts $y$ *times* in order to get rid of $x^{y\dots}$ term on the inside of the integral. Specifically, each time we do this process we will pull out a $\left( \frac{\lambda }{1 + \lambda} \right)$, and a $y - i$ for the $i$th integration by parts step (try this one or two steps for yourself to see how it will simplify if you find this unintuitive!). We end up with,
\begin{align*}
f(y) & = \frac{1}{\lambda y!} \left( \frac{\lambda }{1 + \lambda} \right)^y y! \\
& = \frac{1}{\lambda} \left(\frac{\lambda}{1 + \lambda}\right)^y
\end{align*}
Now let $p = \frac{1}{1 + \lambda}$. If we can show that $f(y) \sim Geometric(p)$ then we're done. Note that $1 - p = \lambda/(1 + \lambda)$. We have
\begin{align*}
f(y) & = \frac{1}{\lambda} (1 - p)^y \\
& = \frac{1}{\lambda} (1 - p)^{y-1} (1-p) \\
& = (1 - p)^{y-1} \frac{1}{\lambda} \left( \frac{\lambda}{1 + \lambda} \right) \\
& = (1 - p)^{y-1} \left( \frac{1}{1 + \lambda} \right) \\
& = (1 - p)^{y-1} p
\end{align*}
which is exactly the pdf of a geometric random variable with parameter $p$ and trials that begin at 1.
An *alternative* solution (which perhaps embodies the phrase "work smarter, not harder") actually doesn't involve integration by parts at all! As statisticians, we typically like to avoid actually integrating anything whenever possible, and this is often achieved by manipulating algebra enough to essentially "create" a pdf out of what we see (since pdfs integrate to $1$!). Massive props to a student for solving this problem in a much "easier" way, answer below:
\begin{align*}
f(y) &= \int_{0}^{\infty} f(y \mid x) f(x) dx \\
&= \int_{0}^{\infty} (\frac{1}{\lambda}e^{-\frac{x}{\lambda}}) (\frac{x^y}{y!} e^{-x}) dx \\
&= \frac{1}{\lambda y!} \int_{0}^{\infty} x^y e^{-\frac{x}{\lambda}(1 + \lambda)} dx \\
&= \frac{1}{\lambda y!} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{(\frac{1+\lambda}{\lambda})^{y+1}}{(\frac{1+\lambda}{\lambda})^{y+1}} \frac{\Gamma(y+1)}{\Gamma(y+1)} x^{(y+1)-1} e^{-\frac{x}{\lambda}(1 + \lambda)} dx\\
&= \frac{\Gamma(y+1)}{\lambda y! (\frac{1+\lambda}{\lambda})^{y+1}} \int_{0}^{\infty} \frac{(\frac{1+\lambda}{\lambda})^{y+1}}{\Gamma(y+1)} x^{(y+1)-1} e^{-\frac{x}{\lambda}(1 + \lambda)} dx\\
&= \frac{\Gamma(y+1)}{\lambda y! (\frac{1+\lambda}{\lambda})^{y+1}} (1)\\
&= \frac{y!}{\lambda y! (\frac{1+\lambda}{\lambda})^{y+1}} \\
&= \frac{\lambda^{-1}}{(\frac{1+\lambda}{\lambda})^{y+1}}\\
&= \frac{\lambda^y}{(1+\lambda)^{y+1}}\\
&= \frac{1}{(1+\lambda)} \frac{\lambda^y}{(1+\lambda)^y}\\
&= \frac{1}{(1+\lambda)} (1 - \frac{1}{(1+\lambda)})^y \\
&=p(1-p)^y\qquad (\text{where }p=\frac{1}{1+\lambda})
\end{align*}
Note that we arrive at a slightly different answer with this approach. Specifically, we arrive at the pdf of a geometric random variable with parameter $p$ and trials that begin at 0, as opposed to 1. There's some subtlety here that we're going to choose to ignore.
</details>
**Problem 4:** Suppose that $X \sim N(\mu, \sigma^2)$, and let $Y = \frac{X - \mu}{\sigma}$. Find the distribution of $Y$ (simplifying all of your math will be useful for this problem).
<details>
<summary>Solution:</summary>
To solve this problem, we can use the theorem on transforming continuous random variables. We must first define our function $g$ that relates $X$ and $Y$. In this case, we have $g(a) = \frac{a - \mu}{\sigma}$. Now all we need to do is collect the mathematical "pieces" we need to use theorem: $g^{-1}(a)$, and $g'(a)$, and finally, the pdf of a normal random variable. We have
\begin{align*}
f_X(x) & = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi \sigma^2}} \exp(-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2} (x - \mu)^2) \\
g^{-1}(a) & = \sigma a + \mu \\
g'(a) & = \frac{\partial}{\partial a} \left(\frac{a - \mu}{\sigma}\right) = \frac{1}{\sigma}
\end{align*}
Putting it all together, we have
\begin{align*}
f_Y(y) & = f_X(g^{-1}(y)) \times \frac{1}{g'(g^{-1}(y))} \\
& = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi \sigma^2}} \exp(-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2} (\sigma y + \mu - \mu)^2) \times \sigma \\
& = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi} \sigma} \exp(-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2} (\sigma y)^2) \times \sigma \\
& = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \exp(-\frac{1}{2\sigma^2} \sigma^2 y^2) \\
& = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} \exp(-\frac{1}{2} y^2)
\end{align*}
and note that this is the pdf of a normally distributed random variable with mean $0$ and variance $1$! Thus, we have shown that $\frac{X - \mu}{\sigma} \sim N(0,1)$. **Fun Fact:** If this random variable reminds you of a Z-score, *it should*!
</details>
**Problem 5:** Suppose the joint pdf of two random variables $X$ and $Y$ is given by $f_{X,Y}(x,y) = \lambda \beta e^{-x\lambda - y\beta}$. Determine if $X$ and $Y$ are independent, showing why or why not.
<details>
<summary>Solution:</summary>
To determine whether $X$ and $Y$ are independent (or not), we need to determine if their joint pdf is "separable." Doing some algebra, we can see that
\begin{align*}
f_{X,Y}(x,y) & = \lambda \beta e^{-x \lambda - y\beta} \\
& = \lambda \beta e^{-x \lambda} e^{-y \beta} \\
& = \left( \lambda e^{-x \lambda} \right) \left( \beta e^{-y \beta} \right)
\end{align*}
and so since we can write the joint distribution as a function of $X$ multiplied by a function of $Y$, $X$ and $Y$ are independent (and in this case, both have exponential distributions).
</details>
**Problem 6:** Suppose the joint pdf of two random variables $X$ and $Y$ is given by $f_{X,Y}(x,y) = \frac{\Gamma(\alpha + \beta)}{\Gamma(\alpha) \Gamma(\beta)} \binom{n}{y} x^{y + \alpha - 1} (1-x)^{n-y + \beta - 1}$. Determine if $X$ and $Y$ are independent, showing why or why not.
<details>
<summary>Solution:</summary>
To determine whether $X$ and $Y$ are independent (or not), we need to determine if their joint pdf is "separable." Right away, we should note that a piece of the pdf contains $x^y$, and therefore we are *never* going to be able to fully separate out this joint pdf into a function of $x$ times a function $y$. Therefore, $X$ and $Y$ are *not* independent. In this case, we actually have $X \sim Beta(\alpha, \beta)$, and $Y \mid X \sim Binomial(n, y)$ (we'll return to this example in the Bayes chapter!).
</details>
**Problem 7:** Let $X$ and $Y$ be independent random variables with $X \sim Exponential(1)$ and $Y \sim Exponential(1)$. Find the joint distribution of $Z = X - Y$ and $W = X + Y$, and use this joint distribution to show that $Z \sim Laplace(0, 1)$.
<details>
<summary>Solution:</summary>
Let $X$ and $Y$ be independent random variables with $X \sim Exponential(1)$ and $Y \sim Exponential(1)$. Find the joint distribution of $Z = X - Y$ and $W = X + Y$, and use this joint distribution to show that $Z \sim Laplace(0, 1)$.
We'll need a couple things before we can directly apply the Jacobian method:
- The joint distribution, $\pi_{X,Y}(x,y)$
- Our function $f(x,y)$ and its inverse
- Our Jacobian matrix, given by $J_{f}(z,w) = \begin{pmatrix} \frac{\partial x}{\partial z} & \frac{\partial x}{\partial w} \\\frac{\partial y}{\partial z} & \frac{\partial y}{\partial w} \end{pmatrix}$
- Our Jacobian, given by $\bigg| J_{f}(z,w) \bigg|$
- The support of the joint distribution $\pi_{Z,W}(z,w)$ (we'll do this step at the end).
Since $X$ and $Y$ are independent, we have $$
\pi_{X,Y}(x,y) = e^{-x}e^{-y} = e^{-x - y}
$$ Now we must determine what our function $f$ is, and its inverse. From the problem set-up, we have $f(x, y) \longmapsto (x - y, x + y)$. To find the inverse function, we can rearrange these outputs to define $x$ and $y$ solely in terms of $z$ and $w$. Some algebra included below: \begin{align*}
x & = z + y \\
y & = w - x \\
x & = z + w - x \\
2x & = z + w \\
x & = \frac{z + w}{2} \quad \text{(Our first equation)!} \\
y & = w - \frac{z + w}{2} \\
y & = \frac{2w - z - w}{2} \\
y & = \frac{w - z}{2} \quad \text{(Our second equation!)}
\end{align*} Which gives us $f^{-1}(z,w) \longmapsto (\frac{z + w}{2}, \frac{w - z}{2})$. The Jacobian matrix is then given by $$
J_f(z,w) = \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{\partial (\frac{z + w}{2})}{\partial z} & \frac{\partial (\frac{z + w}{2})}{\partial w} \\
\frac{\partial (\frac{w - z}{2})}{\partial z} & \frac{\partial (\frac{w - z}{2})}{\partial w}
\end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}
\frac{1}{2} & \frac{1}{2} \\
\frac{-1}{2} & \frac{1}{2}
\end{pmatrix}
$$ and the Jacobian is given by $|J_f(z,w)| = (1/2)(1/2) - (1/2)(-1/2) = 1/2$.
Now we determine the support of the distribution $\pi_{Z,W} (z,w)$. Since $X$ and $Y$ are exponential, we know that \begin{align*}
& 0 \leq x < \infty \\
& 0 \leq y < \infty
\end{align*} Plugging in some things and rearranging, we get \begin{align*}
& 0 \leq \frac{z + w}{2} < \infty \\
& 0 \leq z + w < \infty \\
& -z \leq w < \infty \quad \text{(or)} -w \leq z < \infty
\end{align*} and\
\begin{align*}
& 0 \leq \frac{w - z}{2} < \infty \\
& 0 \leq w - z < \infty \\
& z \leq w < \infty
\end{align*}
Putting these together, we have $-w \leq z \leq w < \infty$, so the support for $z$, marginally is given by $[-w, w]$. The support for $w$, marginally, is given by $[0, \infty)$, since it is a sum of two random variables that have that same support. Note that this therefore means $z$ can range from $(-\infty, \infty)$, depending on the value of $w$.
We can now finally apply the Jacobian method to obtain $\pi_{Z,W}(z,w)$ using the separate pieces we have calculated, obtaining: \begin{align*}
\pi_{Z,W}(z,w) & = \pi_{X,Y}(f^{-1}(z,w)) \times | J_f(z,w) | \times I \{ -w \leq z \leq w, 0 \leq w < \infty \}\\
& = \exp(-\frac{z + w}{2} - \frac{w-z}{2}) \times \frac{1}{2} \times I \{ -w \leq z \leq w, 0 \leq w < \infty \}\\
& = \frac{1}{2} \exp(\frac{-z - w - w + z}{2}) \times I \{ -w \leq z \leq w, 0 \leq w < \infty \}\\
& = \frac{1}{2} e^{-w} \times I \{ -w \leq z \leq w, 0 \leq w < \infty \}
\end{align*} Now that we have the joint distribution $\pi_{Z,W}(z,w)$, we must integrate with respect to $W$ to get the marginal distribution of $Z$. Recall that we have both $-z \leq w < \infty$ and $z \leq w < \infty$, so we consider these two cases separately. We have $$
\pi_Z(z) = \begin{cases}
\int_z^\infty \frac{1}{2} e^{-w} dw = - \frac{1}{2} e^{-w} \big|_z^\infty = \frac{1}{2}e^{-z} & 0 \leq z < \infty\\
\int_{-z}^\infty \frac{1}{2} e^{-w} dw = - \frac{1}{2} e^{-w} \big|_{-z}^\infty = \frac{1}{2}e^{z} & -\infty < z \leq 0
\end{cases}
$$ which can equivalently be written as $$
\pi_Z(z) = \frac{1}{2} e^{-|z|} \quad -\infty < z < \infty
$$ which implies $Z \sim Laplace(0,1)$.
</details>