pdf of the difference of two exponentially distributed random variables

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
24
down vote

favorite
21












Suppose we have $v$ and $u$, both are independent and exponentially distributed random variables with parameters $mu$ and $lambda$, respectively.



How can we calculate the pdf of $v-u$?







share|cite|improve this question




















  • You might rely on a standard procedure.
    – Did
    Feb 29 '12 at 23:03














up vote
24
down vote

favorite
21












Suppose we have $v$ and $u$, both are independent and exponentially distributed random variables with parameters $mu$ and $lambda$, respectively.



How can we calculate the pdf of $v-u$?







share|cite|improve this question




















  • You might rely on a standard procedure.
    – Did
    Feb 29 '12 at 23:03












up vote
24
down vote

favorite
21









up vote
24
down vote

favorite
21






21





Suppose we have $v$ and $u$, both are independent and exponentially distributed random variables with parameters $mu$ and $lambda$, respectively.



How can we calculate the pdf of $v-u$?







share|cite|improve this question












Suppose we have $v$ and $u$, both are independent and exponentially distributed random variables with parameters $mu$ and $lambda$, respectively.



How can we calculate the pdf of $v-u$?









share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Feb 29 '12 at 22:37









Mathematics Lover

3051210




3051210











  • You might rely on a standard procedure.
    – Did
    Feb 29 '12 at 23:03
















  • You might rely on a standard procedure.
    – Did
    Feb 29 '12 at 23:03















You might rely on a standard procedure.
– Did
Feb 29 '12 at 23:03




You might rely on a standard procedure.
– Did
Feb 29 '12 at 23:03










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
29
down vote



accepted










I too prefer to call the random variables $X$ and $Y$. You can think of $X$ and $Y$ as waiting times for two independent things (say $A$ and $B$ respectively) to happen. Suppose we wait until the first of these happens. If it is $A$, then (by the lack-of-memory property of the exponential distribution) the further waiting time until $B$ happens still has the same
exponential distribution as $Y$; if it is $B$, the further waiting time until $A$ happens still has the same exponential distribution as $X$. That says that the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X > Y$ is the distribution of $X$, and the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X < Y$ is the distribution of $-Y$. Since $P(X>Y) = fraclambdamu+lambda$, that says the PDF for $X-Y$ is
$$ f(x) = fraclambda mulambda+mu
casese^-mu x & if $x > 0$cr
e^lambda x & if $x < 0$cr$$






share|cite|improve this answer


















  • 11




    why $P(X>Y)=fraclambdamu+lambda$?
    – user65985
    Aug 14 '13 at 16:55






  • 4




    $X$ ~ $Exp(mu)$ and $Y$ ~ $Exp(lambda)$ then: $P(Y < X) = int_0^inftyint_0^xmu e^-mu ylambda e^-lambda xdydx$
    – YellowPillow
    Nov 5 '15 at 5:50






  • 1




    @YellowPillow Doesn't that give $mu over mu + lambda$?
    – Columbo
    Apr 13 '16 at 14:59











  • This can also be found by the convolution between two pdfs
    – Hunle
    Apr 28 '16 at 4:42

















up vote
21
down vote













The right answer depends very much on what your mathematical background is. I will assume that you have seen some calculus of several variables, and not much beyond that. Instead of using your $u$ and $v$, I will use $X$ and $Y$.



The density function of $X$ is $lambda e^-lambda x$ (for $x ge 0$), and $0$ elsewhere. There is a similar expression for the density function of $Y$. By independence, the joint density function of $X$ and $Y$ is
$$lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y$$
in the first quadrant, and $0$ elsewhere.



Let $Z=Y-X$. We want to find the density function of $Z$. First we will find the cumulative distribution function $F_Z(z)$ of $Z$, that is, the probability that $Zle z$.



So we want the probability that $Y-X le z$. The geometry is a little different when $z$ is positive than when $z$ is negative. I will do $z$ positive, and you can take care of negative $z$.



Consider $z$ fixed and positive, and draw the line $y-x=z$. We want to find the probability that the ordered pair $(X,Y)$ ends up below that line or on it. The only relevant region is in the first quadrant. So let $D$ be the part of the first quadrant that lies below or on the line $y=x+z$. Then
$$P(Z le z)=iint_D lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y,dx,dy.$$



We will evaluate this integral, by using an iterated integral. First we will integrate with respect to $y$, and then with respect to $x$. Note that $y$ travels from $0$ to $x+z$, and then $x$ travels from $0$ to infinity. Thus
$$P(Zle x)=int_0^infty lambda e^-lambda xleft(int_y=0^x+z mu e^-mu y,dyright)dx.$$



The inner integral turns out to be $1-e^-mu(x+z)$. So now we need to find
$$int_0^infty left(lambda e^-lambda x-lambda e^-mu z e^-(lambda+mu)xright)dx.$$
The first part is easy, it is $1$. The second part is fairly routine. We end up with
$$P(Z le z)=1-fraclambdalambda+mue^-mu z.$$
For the density function $f_Z(z)$ of $Z$, differentiate the cumulative distribution function. We get
$$f_Z(z)=fraclambdamulambda+mu e^-mu z quadtextfor $z ge 0$.$$
Please note that we only dealt with positive $z$. A very similar argument will get you $f_Z(z)$ at negative values of $z$. The main difference is that the final integration is from $x=-z$ on.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Before the first double integral, should that be "below or on the line $y = x + z$"?
    – Patrick
    Mar 1 '12 at 0:10










  • @Patrick: Thank you for spotting the typo! Fixed.
    – André Nicolas
    Mar 1 '12 at 0:23

















up vote
1
down vote













There is an alternative way to get the result by applying the the Law of Total Probability:



$$
P[W] = int_Z P[W mid Z = z]P[Z=z]dz
$$



As others have done, let $X sim exp(lambda)$ and $Y sim exp(mu)$. What follows is the only slightly unintuitive step: instead of directly calculating the PDF of $Y-X$, first calculate the CDF: $ P[X-Y leq t]$ (we can then differentiate at the end).



$$
P[Y - X leq t] = P[Y leq t+X]
$$



This is where we'll apply total probability to get



$$
= int_0^infty P[Y leq t+X mid X=x]P[X=x] dx
$$
$$
= int_0^infty P[Y leq t+x]P[X=x] dx
= int_0^infty F_Y(t+x) f_X(x) dx
$$
Note substituting the CDF here is only valid if $t geq 0$,
$$
= int_0^infty (1- e^-mu(t+x)) lambda e^-lambda x dx
= lambda int_0^infty e^-lambda x dx - lambda e^-mu t int_0^infty e^-(lambda+mu)x dx
$$
$$
= lambda left[ frace^-lambda x-lambda right]^infty_0 - lambda e^-mu t left[ frace^-(lambda+mu)x-(lambda+mu) right]^infty_0
=1 - fraclambda e^-mu tlambda+mu
$$



Differentiating this last expression will gives us the PDF:



$$
f_Y-X(t) = fraclambda mu e^-mu tlambda+mu quad textfor $t geq 0$
$$






share|cite|improve this answer






















    Your Answer




    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: false,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );








     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f115022%2fpdf-of-the-difference-of-two-exponentially-distributed-random-variables%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest






























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    29
    down vote



    accepted










    I too prefer to call the random variables $X$ and $Y$. You can think of $X$ and $Y$ as waiting times for two independent things (say $A$ and $B$ respectively) to happen. Suppose we wait until the first of these happens. If it is $A$, then (by the lack-of-memory property of the exponential distribution) the further waiting time until $B$ happens still has the same
    exponential distribution as $Y$; if it is $B$, the further waiting time until $A$ happens still has the same exponential distribution as $X$. That says that the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X > Y$ is the distribution of $X$, and the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X < Y$ is the distribution of $-Y$. Since $P(X>Y) = fraclambdamu+lambda$, that says the PDF for $X-Y$ is
    $$ f(x) = fraclambda mulambda+mu
    casese^-mu x & if $x > 0$cr
    e^lambda x & if $x < 0$cr$$






    share|cite|improve this answer


















    • 11




      why $P(X>Y)=fraclambdamu+lambda$?
      – user65985
      Aug 14 '13 at 16:55






    • 4




      $X$ ~ $Exp(mu)$ and $Y$ ~ $Exp(lambda)$ then: $P(Y < X) = int_0^inftyint_0^xmu e^-mu ylambda e^-lambda xdydx$
      – YellowPillow
      Nov 5 '15 at 5:50






    • 1




      @YellowPillow Doesn't that give $mu over mu + lambda$?
      – Columbo
      Apr 13 '16 at 14:59











    • This can also be found by the convolution between two pdfs
      – Hunle
      Apr 28 '16 at 4:42














    up vote
    29
    down vote



    accepted










    I too prefer to call the random variables $X$ and $Y$. You can think of $X$ and $Y$ as waiting times for two independent things (say $A$ and $B$ respectively) to happen. Suppose we wait until the first of these happens. If it is $A$, then (by the lack-of-memory property of the exponential distribution) the further waiting time until $B$ happens still has the same
    exponential distribution as $Y$; if it is $B$, the further waiting time until $A$ happens still has the same exponential distribution as $X$. That says that the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X > Y$ is the distribution of $X$, and the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X < Y$ is the distribution of $-Y$. Since $P(X>Y) = fraclambdamu+lambda$, that says the PDF for $X-Y$ is
    $$ f(x) = fraclambda mulambda+mu
    casese^-mu x & if $x > 0$cr
    e^lambda x & if $x < 0$cr$$






    share|cite|improve this answer


















    • 11




      why $P(X>Y)=fraclambdamu+lambda$?
      – user65985
      Aug 14 '13 at 16:55






    • 4




      $X$ ~ $Exp(mu)$ and $Y$ ~ $Exp(lambda)$ then: $P(Y < X) = int_0^inftyint_0^xmu e^-mu ylambda e^-lambda xdydx$
      – YellowPillow
      Nov 5 '15 at 5:50






    • 1




      @YellowPillow Doesn't that give $mu over mu + lambda$?
      – Columbo
      Apr 13 '16 at 14:59











    • This can also be found by the convolution between two pdfs
      – Hunle
      Apr 28 '16 at 4:42












    up vote
    29
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    29
    down vote



    accepted






    I too prefer to call the random variables $X$ and $Y$. You can think of $X$ and $Y$ as waiting times for two independent things (say $A$ and $B$ respectively) to happen. Suppose we wait until the first of these happens. If it is $A$, then (by the lack-of-memory property of the exponential distribution) the further waiting time until $B$ happens still has the same
    exponential distribution as $Y$; if it is $B$, the further waiting time until $A$ happens still has the same exponential distribution as $X$. That says that the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X > Y$ is the distribution of $X$, and the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X < Y$ is the distribution of $-Y$. Since $P(X>Y) = fraclambdamu+lambda$, that says the PDF for $X-Y$ is
    $$ f(x) = fraclambda mulambda+mu
    casese^-mu x & if $x > 0$cr
    e^lambda x & if $x < 0$cr$$






    share|cite|improve this answer














    I too prefer to call the random variables $X$ and $Y$. You can think of $X$ and $Y$ as waiting times for two independent things (say $A$ and $B$ respectively) to happen. Suppose we wait until the first of these happens. If it is $A$, then (by the lack-of-memory property of the exponential distribution) the further waiting time until $B$ happens still has the same
    exponential distribution as $Y$; if it is $B$, the further waiting time until $A$ happens still has the same exponential distribution as $X$. That says that the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X > Y$ is the distribution of $X$, and the conditional distribution of $X-Y$ given $X < Y$ is the distribution of $-Y$. Since $P(X>Y) = fraclambdamu+lambda$, that says the PDF for $X-Y$ is
    $$ f(x) = fraclambda mulambda+mu
    casese^-mu x & if $x > 0$cr
    e^lambda x & if $x < 0$cr$$







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Jul 16 '13 at 19:03









    Darko Veberic

    1053




    1053










    answered Mar 1 '12 at 3:36









    Robert Israel

    305k22201443




    305k22201443







    • 11




      why $P(X>Y)=fraclambdamu+lambda$?
      – user65985
      Aug 14 '13 at 16:55






    • 4




      $X$ ~ $Exp(mu)$ and $Y$ ~ $Exp(lambda)$ then: $P(Y < X) = int_0^inftyint_0^xmu e^-mu ylambda e^-lambda xdydx$
      – YellowPillow
      Nov 5 '15 at 5:50






    • 1




      @YellowPillow Doesn't that give $mu over mu + lambda$?
      – Columbo
      Apr 13 '16 at 14:59











    • This can also be found by the convolution between two pdfs
      – Hunle
      Apr 28 '16 at 4:42












    • 11




      why $P(X>Y)=fraclambdamu+lambda$?
      – user65985
      Aug 14 '13 at 16:55






    • 4




      $X$ ~ $Exp(mu)$ and $Y$ ~ $Exp(lambda)$ then: $P(Y < X) = int_0^inftyint_0^xmu e^-mu ylambda e^-lambda xdydx$
      – YellowPillow
      Nov 5 '15 at 5:50






    • 1




      @YellowPillow Doesn't that give $mu over mu + lambda$?
      – Columbo
      Apr 13 '16 at 14:59











    • This can also be found by the convolution between two pdfs
      – Hunle
      Apr 28 '16 at 4:42







    11




    11




    why $P(X>Y)=fraclambdamu+lambda$?
    – user65985
    Aug 14 '13 at 16:55




    why $P(X>Y)=fraclambdamu+lambda$?
    – user65985
    Aug 14 '13 at 16:55




    4




    4




    $X$ ~ $Exp(mu)$ and $Y$ ~ $Exp(lambda)$ then: $P(Y < X) = int_0^inftyint_0^xmu e^-mu ylambda e^-lambda xdydx$
    – YellowPillow
    Nov 5 '15 at 5:50




    $X$ ~ $Exp(mu)$ and $Y$ ~ $Exp(lambda)$ then: $P(Y < X) = int_0^inftyint_0^xmu e^-mu ylambda e^-lambda xdydx$
    – YellowPillow
    Nov 5 '15 at 5:50




    1




    1




    @YellowPillow Doesn't that give $mu over mu + lambda$?
    – Columbo
    Apr 13 '16 at 14:59





    @YellowPillow Doesn't that give $mu over mu + lambda$?
    – Columbo
    Apr 13 '16 at 14:59













    This can also be found by the convolution between two pdfs
    – Hunle
    Apr 28 '16 at 4:42




    This can also be found by the convolution between two pdfs
    – Hunle
    Apr 28 '16 at 4:42










    up vote
    21
    down vote













    The right answer depends very much on what your mathematical background is. I will assume that you have seen some calculus of several variables, and not much beyond that. Instead of using your $u$ and $v$, I will use $X$ and $Y$.



    The density function of $X$ is $lambda e^-lambda x$ (for $x ge 0$), and $0$ elsewhere. There is a similar expression for the density function of $Y$. By independence, the joint density function of $X$ and $Y$ is
    $$lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y$$
    in the first quadrant, and $0$ elsewhere.



    Let $Z=Y-X$. We want to find the density function of $Z$. First we will find the cumulative distribution function $F_Z(z)$ of $Z$, that is, the probability that $Zle z$.



    So we want the probability that $Y-X le z$. The geometry is a little different when $z$ is positive than when $z$ is negative. I will do $z$ positive, and you can take care of negative $z$.



    Consider $z$ fixed and positive, and draw the line $y-x=z$. We want to find the probability that the ordered pair $(X,Y)$ ends up below that line or on it. The only relevant region is in the first quadrant. So let $D$ be the part of the first quadrant that lies below or on the line $y=x+z$. Then
    $$P(Z le z)=iint_D lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y,dx,dy.$$



    We will evaluate this integral, by using an iterated integral. First we will integrate with respect to $y$, and then with respect to $x$. Note that $y$ travels from $0$ to $x+z$, and then $x$ travels from $0$ to infinity. Thus
    $$P(Zle x)=int_0^infty lambda e^-lambda xleft(int_y=0^x+z mu e^-mu y,dyright)dx.$$



    The inner integral turns out to be $1-e^-mu(x+z)$. So now we need to find
    $$int_0^infty left(lambda e^-lambda x-lambda e^-mu z e^-(lambda+mu)xright)dx.$$
    The first part is easy, it is $1$. The second part is fairly routine. We end up with
    $$P(Z le z)=1-fraclambdalambda+mue^-mu z.$$
    For the density function $f_Z(z)$ of $Z$, differentiate the cumulative distribution function. We get
    $$f_Z(z)=fraclambdamulambda+mu e^-mu z quadtextfor $z ge 0$.$$
    Please note that we only dealt with positive $z$. A very similar argument will get you $f_Z(z)$ at negative values of $z$. The main difference is that the final integration is from $x=-z$ on.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Before the first double integral, should that be "below or on the line $y = x + z$"?
      – Patrick
      Mar 1 '12 at 0:10










    • @Patrick: Thank you for spotting the typo! Fixed.
      – André Nicolas
      Mar 1 '12 at 0:23














    up vote
    21
    down vote













    The right answer depends very much on what your mathematical background is. I will assume that you have seen some calculus of several variables, and not much beyond that. Instead of using your $u$ and $v$, I will use $X$ and $Y$.



    The density function of $X$ is $lambda e^-lambda x$ (for $x ge 0$), and $0$ elsewhere. There is a similar expression for the density function of $Y$. By independence, the joint density function of $X$ and $Y$ is
    $$lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y$$
    in the first quadrant, and $0$ elsewhere.



    Let $Z=Y-X$. We want to find the density function of $Z$. First we will find the cumulative distribution function $F_Z(z)$ of $Z$, that is, the probability that $Zle z$.



    So we want the probability that $Y-X le z$. The geometry is a little different when $z$ is positive than when $z$ is negative. I will do $z$ positive, and you can take care of negative $z$.



    Consider $z$ fixed and positive, and draw the line $y-x=z$. We want to find the probability that the ordered pair $(X,Y)$ ends up below that line or on it. The only relevant region is in the first quadrant. So let $D$ be the part of the first quadrant that lies below or on the line $y=x+z$. Then
    $$P(Z le z)=iint_D lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y,dx,dy.$$



    We will evaluate this integral, by using an iterated integral. First we will integrate with respect to $y$, and then with respect to $x$. Note that $y$ travels from $0$ to $x+z$, and then $x$ travels from $0$ to infinity. Thus
    $$P(Zle x)=int_0^infty lambda e^-lambda xleft(int_y=0^x+z mu e^-mu y,dyright)dx.$$



    The inner integral turns out to be $1-e^-mu(x+z)$. So now we need to find
    $$int_0^infty left(lambda e^-lambda x-lambda e^-mu z e^-(lambda+mu)xright)dx.$$
    The first part is easy, it is $1$. The second part is fairly routine. We end up with
    $$P(Z le z)=1-fraclambdalambda+mue^-mu z.$$
    For the density function $f_Z(z)$ of $Z$, differentiate the cumulative distribution function. We get
    $$f_Z(z)=fraclambdamulambda+mu e^-mu z quadtextfor $z ge 0$.$$
    Please note that we only dealt with positive $z$. A very similar argument will get you $f_Z(z)$ at negative values of $z$. The main difference is that the final integration is from $x=-z$ on.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Before the first double integral, should that be "below or on the line $y = x + z$"?
      – Patrick
      Mar 1 '12 at 0:10










    • @Patrick: Thank you for spotting the typo! Fixed.
      – André Nicolas
      Mar 1 '12 at 0:23












    up vote
    21
    down vote










    up vote
    21
    down vote









    The right answer depends very much on what your mathematical background is. I will assume that you have seen some calculus of several variables, and not much beyond that. Instead of using your $u$ and $v$, I will use $X$ and $Y$.



    The density function of $X$ is $lambda e^-lambda x$ (for $x ge 0$), and $0$ elsewhere. There is a similar expression for the density function of $Y$. By independence, the joint density function of $X$ and $Y$ is
    $$lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y$$
    in the first quadrant, and $0$ elsewhere.



    Let $Z=Y-X$. We want to find the density function of $Z$. First we will find the cumulative distribution function $F_Z(z)$ of $Z$, that is, the probability that $Zle z$.



    So we want the probability that $Y-X le z$. The geometry is a little different when $z$ is positive than when $z$ is negative. I will do $z$ positive, and you can take care of negative $z$.



    Consider $z$ fixed and positive, and draw the line $y-x=z$. We want to find the probability that the ordered pair $(X,Y)$ ends up below that line or on it. The only relevant region is in the first quadrant. So let $D$ be the part of the first quadrant that lies below or on the line $y=x+z$. Then
    $$P(Z le z)=iint_D lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y,dx,dy.$$



    We will evaluate this integral, by using an iterated integral. First we will integrate with respect to $y$, and then with respect to $x$. Note that $y$ travels from $0$ to $x+z$, and then $x$ travels from $0$ to infinity. Thus
    $$P(Zle x)=int_0^infty lambda e^-lambda xleft(int_y=0^x+z mu e^-mu y,dyright)dx.$$



    The inner integral turns out to be $1-e^-mu(x+z)$. So now we need to find
    $$int_0^infty left(lambda e^-lambda x-lambda e^-mu z e^-(lambda+mu)xright)dx.$$
    The first part is easy, it is $1$. The second part is fairly routine. We end up with
    $$P(Z le z)=1-fraclambdalambda+mue^-mu z.$$
    For the density function $f_Z(z)$ of $Z$, differentiate the cumulative distribution function. We get
    $$f_Z(z)=fraclambdamulambda+mu e^-mu z quadtextfor $z ge 0$.$$
    Please note that we only dealt with positive $z$. A very similar argument will get you $f_Z(z)$ at negative values of $z$. The main difference is that the final integration is from $x=-z$ on.






    share|cite|improve this answer














    The right answer depends very much on what your mathematical background is. I will assume that you have seen some calculus of several variables, and not much beyond that. Instead of using your $u$ and $v$, I will use $X$ and $Y$.



    The density function of $X$ is $lambda e^-lambda x$ (for $x ge 0$), and $0$ elsewhere. There is a similar expression for the density function of $Y$. By independence, the joint density function of $X$ and $Y$ is
    $$lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y$$
    in the first quadrant, and $0$ elsewhere.



    Let $Z=Y-X$. We want to find the density function of $Z$. First we will find the cumulative distribution function $F_Z(z)$ of $Z$, that is, the probability that $Zle z$.



    So we want the probability that $Y-X le z$. The geometry is a little different when $z$ is positive than when $z$ is negative. I will do $z$ positive, and you can take care of negative $z$.



    Consider $z$ fixed and positive, and draw the line $y-x=z$. We want to find the probability that the ordered pair $(X,Y)$ ends up below that line or on it. The only relevant region is in the first quadrant. So let $D$ be the part of the first quadrant that lies below or on the line $y=x+z$. Then
    $$P(Z le z)=iint_D lambdamu e^-lambda xe^-mu y,dx,dy.$$



    We will evaluate this integral, by using an iterated integral. First we will integrate with respect to $y$, and then with respect to $x$. Note that $y$ travels from $0$ to $x+z$, and then $x$ travels from $0$ to infinity. Thus
    $$P(Zle x)=int_0^infty lambda e^-lambda xleft(int_y=0^x+z mu e^-mu y,dyright)dx.$$



    The inner integral turns out to be $1-e^-mu(x+z)$. So now we need to find
    $$int_0^infty left(lambda e^-lambda x-lambda e^-mu z e^-(lambda+mu)xright)dx.$$
    The first part is easy, it is $1$. The second part is fairly routine. We end up with
    $$P(Z le z)=1-fraclambdalambda+mue^-mu z.$$
    For the density function $f_Z(z)$ of $Z$, differentiate the cumulative distribution function. We get
    $$f_Z(z)=fraclambdamulambda+mu e^-mu z quadtextfor $z ge 0$.$$
    Please note that we only dealt with positive $z$. A very similar argument will get you $f_Z(z)$ at negative values of $z$. The main difference is that the final integration is from $x=-z$ on.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited Mar 1 '12 at 0:21

























    answered Mar 1 '12 at 0:00









    André Nicolas

    446k36413790




    446k36413790











    • Before the first double integral, should that be "below or on the line $y = x + z$"?
      – Patrick
      Mar 1 '12 at 0:10










    • @Patrick: Thank you for spotting the typo! Fixed.
      – André Nicolas
      Mar 1 '12 at 0:23
















    • Before the first double integral, should that be "below or on the line $y = x + z$"?
      – Patrick
      Mar 1 '12 at 0:10










    • @Patrick: Thank you for spotting the typo! Fixed.
      – André Nicolas
      Mar 1 '12 at 0:23















    Before the first double integral, should that be "below or on the line $y = x + z$"?
    – Patrick
    Mar 1 '12 at 0:10




    Before the first double integral, should that be "below or on the line $y = x + z$"?
    – Patrick
    Mar 1 '12 at 0:10












    @Patrick: Thank you for spotting the typo! Fixed.
    – André Nicolas
    Mar 1 '12 at 0:23




    @Patrick: Thank you for spotting the typo! Fixed.
    – André Nicolas
    Mar 1 '12 at 0:23










    up vote
    1
    down vote













    There is an alternative way to get the result by applying the the Law of Total Probability:



    $$
    P[W] = int_Z P[W mid Z = z]P[Z=z]dz
    $$



    As others have done, let $X sim exp(lambda)$ and $Y sim exp(mu)$. What follows is the only slightly unintuitive step: instead of directly calculating the PDF of $Y-X$, first calculate the CDF: $ P[X-Y leq t]$ (we can then differentiate at the end).



    $$
    P[Y - X leq t] = P[Y leq t+X]
    $$



    This is where we'll apply total probability to get



    $$
    = int_0^infty P[Y leq t+X mid X=x]P[X=x] dx
    $$
    $$
    = int_0^infty P[Y leq t+x]P[X=x] dx
    = int_0^infty F_Y(t+x) f_X(x) dx
    $$
    Note substituting the CDF here is only valid if $t geq 0$,
    $$
    = int_0^infty (1- e^-mu(t+x)) lambda e^-lambda x dx
    = lambda int_0^infty e^-lambda x dx - lambda e^-mu t int_0^infty e^-(lambda+mu)x dx
    $$
    $$
    = lambda left[ frace^-lambda x-lambda right]^infty_0 - lambda e^-mu t left[ frace^-(lambda+mu)x-(lambda+mu) right]^infty_0
    =1 - fraclambda e^-mu tlambda+mu
    $$



    Differentiating this last expression will gives us the PDF:



    $$
    f_Y-X(t) = fraclambda mu e^-mu tlambda+mu quad textfor $t geq 0$
    $$






    share|cite|improve this answer


























      up vote
      1
      down vote













      There is an alternative way to get the result by applying the the Law of Total Probability:



      $$
      P[W] = int_Z P[W mid Z = z]P[Z=z]dz
      $$



      As others have done, let $X sim exp(lambda)$ and $Y sim exp(mu)$. What follows is the only slightly unintuitive step: instead of directly calculating the PDF of $Y-X$, first calculate the CDF: $ P[X-Y leq t]$ (we can then differentiate at the end).



      $$
      P[Y - X leq t] = P[Y leq t+X]
      $$



      This is where we'll apply total probability to get



      $$
      = int_0^infty P[Y leq t+X mid X=x]P[X=x] dx
      $$
      $$
      = int_0^infty P[Y leq t+x]P[X=x] dx
      = int_0^infty F_Y(t+x) f_X(x) dx
      $$
      Note substituting the CDF here is only valid if $t geq 0$,
      $$
      = int_0^infty (1- e^-mu(t+x)) lambda e^-lambda x dx
      = lambda int_0^infty e^-lambda x dx - lambda e^-mu t int_0^infty e^-(lambda+mu)x dx
      $$
      $$
      = lambda left[ frace^-lambda x-lambda right]^infty_0 - lambda e^-mu t left[ frace^-(lambda+mu)x-(lambda+mu) right]^infty_0
      =1 - fraclambda e^-mu tlambda+mu
      $$



      Differentiating this last expression will gives us the PDF:



      $$
      f_Y-X(t) = fraclambda mu e^-mu tlambda+mu quad textfor $t geq 0$
      $$






      share|cite|improve this answer
























        up vote
        1
        down vote










        up vote
        1
        down vote









        There is an alternative way to get the result by applying the the Law of Total Probability:



        $$
        P[W] = int_Z P[W mid Z = z]P[Z=z]dz
        $$



        As others have done, let $X sim exp(lambda)$ and $Y sim exp(mu)$. What follows is the only slightly unintuitive step: instead of directly calculating the PDF of $Y-X$, first calculate the CDF: $ P[X-Y leq t]$ (we can then differentiate at the end).



        $$
        P[Y - X leq t] = P[Y leq t+X]
        $$



        This is where we'll apply total probability to get



        $$
        = int_0^infty P[Y leq t+X mid X=x]P[X=x] dx
        $$
        $$
        = int_0^infty P[Y leq t+x]P[X=x] dx
        = int_0^infty F_Y(t+x) f_X(x) dx
        $$
        Note substituting the CDF here is only valid if $t geq 0$,
        $$
        = int_0^infty (1- e^-mu(t+x)) lambda e^-lambda x dx
        = lambda int_0^infty e^-lambda x dx - lambda e^-mu t int_0^infty e^-(lambda+mu)x dx
        $$
        $$
        = lambda left[ frace^-lambda x-lambda right]^infty_0 - lambda e^-mu t left[ frace^-(lambda+mu)x-(lambda+mu) right]^infty_0
        =1 - fraclambda e^-mu tlambda+mu
        $$



        Differentiating this last expression will gives us the PDF:



        $$
        f_Y-X(t) = fraclambda mu e^-mu tlambda+mu quad textfor $t geq 0$
        $$






        share|cite|improve this answer














        There is an alternative way to get the result by applying the the Law of Total Probability:



        $$
        P[W] = int_Z P[W mid Z = z]P[Z=z]dz
        $$



        As others have done, let $X sim exp(lambda)$ and $Y sim exp(mu)$. What follows is the only slightly unintuitive step: instead of directly calculating the PDF of $Y-X$, first calculate the CDF: $ P[X-Y leq t]$ (we can then differentiate at the end).



        $$
        P[Y - X leq t] = P[Y leq t+X]
        $$



        This is where we'll apply total probability to get



        $$
        = int_0^infty P[Y leq t+X mid X=x]P[X=x] dx
        $$
        $$
        = int_0^infty P[Y leq t+x]P[X=x] dx
        = int_0^infty F_Y(t+x) f_X(x) dx
        $$
        Note substituting the CDF here is only valid if $t geq 0$,
        $$
        = int_0^infty (1- e^-mu(t+x)) lambda e^-lambda x dx
        = lambda int_0^infty e^-lambda x dx - lambda e^-mu t int_0^infty e^-(lambda+mu)x dx
        $$
        $$
        = lambda left[ frace^-lambda x-lambda right]^infty_0 - lambda e^-mu t left[ frace^-(lambda+mu)x-(lambda+mu) right]^infty_0
        =1 - fraclambda e^-mu tlambda+mu
        $$



        Differentiating this last expression will gives us the PDF:



        $$
        f_Y-X(t) = fraclambda mu e^-mu tlambda+mu quad textfor $t geq 0$
        $$







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited Aug 12 at 22:47









        RationalHusky

        1065




        1065










        answered Nov 11 '15 at 0:14









        Alex P. Miller

        1114




        1114






















             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


























             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f115022%2fpdf-of-the-difference-of-two-exponentially-distributed-random-variables%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest













































































            1CeX KCFAuhJyvmEmdrexPd,Mw8,uEZI91lqDkb,0JLoMN9l yaX6REjj4F25ybB
            uEG,Nv79IR KWZ,QNCpnz quywGnxXufknlXcNJdVQ 3lL,nmUax2P

            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            Propositional logic and tautologies

            Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility