How to calculate the bias of the statistic
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
A given statistic : $T_c = sum_j=1^n frac(X_j - bar X)^2c$, where $c$ is a constant, as an estimator of variance $sigma^2.$
$X_1,ldots, X_n$ denote a random sample from a population which has normal distribution with unknown mean $mu$ and unknown variance $sigma^2$.
The statistic is distributed as $x^2_n-1$ (a chi-squared variate with $n-1$ degrees of freedom).
I am tasked to find the bias of $T_c$.
I know the formula for bias is $mathbb E hat theta - theta$.
I found $theta$ as $mu = n - 1$ for a chi-squared distribution of $n-1$ degrees of freedom.
However, I am confused as to how to calculate $mathbb E hat theta$.
What i thought of doing is to calculate $mathbb E T_c$, but i got stuck halfway through, so I am not sure if I am doing the right thing. Any help please. thanks in advance.
statistics estimation
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
A given statistic : $T_c = sum_j=1^n frac(X_j - bar X)^2c$, where $c$ is a constant, as an estimator of variance $sigma^2.$
$X_1,ldots, X_n$ denote a random sample from a population which has normal distribution with unknown mean $mu$ and unknown variance $sigma^2$.
The statistic is distributed as $x^2_n-1$ (a chi-squared variate with $n-1$ degrees of freedom).
I am tasked to find the bias of $T_c$.
I know the formula for bias is $mathbb E hat theta - theta$.
I found $theta$ as $mu = n - 1$ for a chi-squared distribution of $n-1$ degrees of freedom.
However, I am confused as to how to calculate $mathbb E hat theta$.
What i thought of doing is to calculate $mathbb E T_c$, but i got stuck halfway through, so I am not sure if I am doing the right thing. Any help please. thanks in advance.
statistics estimation
@StubbornAtom ah sorry just added the squared bracket for my $T_c$
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 1 at 13:07
Are you sure $T_c$ has distribution $mathcalX^2_n-1$. Or did you mean to say that the $X_i$'s are $mathcalX^2_n-1$ ? Also are the $X_i$'s independent ?
â Digitalis
Sep 1 at 18:11
@Digitalis Yes I would assume they are independent. Also, I have edited my original post to include the distribution of $X_i$'s
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 3:43
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
A given statistic : $T_c = sum_j=1^n frac(X_j - bar X)^2c$, where $c$ is a constant, as an estimator of variance $sigma^2.$
$X_1,ldots, X_n$ denote a random sample from a population which has normal distribution with unknown mean $mu$ and unknown variance $sigma^2$.
The statistic is distributed as $x^2_n-1$ (a chi-squared variate with $n-1$ degrees of freedom).
I am tasked to find the bias of $T_c$.
I know the formula for bias is $mathbb E hat theta - theta$.
I found $theta$ as $mu = n - 1$ for a chi-squared distribution of $n-1$ degrees of freedom.
However, I am confused as to how to calculate $mathbb E hat theta$.
What i thought of doing is to calculate $mathbb E T_c$, but i got stuck halfway through, so I am not sure if I am doing the right thing. Any help please. thanks in advance.
statistics estimation
A given statistic : $T_c = sum_j=1^n frac(X_j - bar X)^2c$, where $c$ is a constant, as an estimator of variance $sigma^2.$
$X_1,ldots, X_n$ denote a random sample from a population which has normal distribution with unknown mean $mu$ and unknown variance $sigma^2$.
The statistic is distributed as $x^2_n-1$ (a chi-squared variate with $n-1$ degrees of freedom).
I am tasked to find the bias of $T_c$.
I know the formula for bias is $mathbb E hat theta - theta$.
I found $theta$ as $mu = n - 1$ for a chi-squared distribution of $n-1$ degrees of freedom.
However, I am confused as to how to calculate $mathbb E hat theta$.
What i thought of doing is to calculate $mathbb E T_c$, but i got stuck halfway through, so I am not sure if I am doing the right thing. Any help please. thanks in advance.
statistics estimation
statistics estimation
edited Sep 2 at 19:48
Michael Hardy
206k23187466
206k23187466
asked Sep 1 at 8:30
Wei Xiong Yeo
1057
1057
@StubbornAtom ah sorry just added the squared bracket for my $T_c$
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 1 at 13:07
Are you sure $T_c$ has distribution $mathcalX^2_n-1$. Or did you mean to say that the $X_i$'s are $mathcalX^2_n-1$ ? Also are the $X_i$'s independent ?
â Digitalis
Sep 1 at 18:11
@Digitalis Yes I would assume they are independent. Also, I have edited my original post to include the distribution of $X_i$'s
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 3:43
add a comment |Â
@StubbornAtom ah sorry just added the squared bracket for my $T_c$
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 1 at 13:07
Are you sure $T_c$ has distribution $mathcalX^2_n-1$. Or did you mean to say that the $X_i$'s are $mathcalX^2_n-1$ ? Also are the $X_i$'s independent ?
â Digitalis
Sep 1 at 18:11
@Digitalis Yes I would assume they are independent. Also, I have edited my original post to include the distribution of $X_i$'s
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 3:43
@StubbornAtom ah sorry just added the squared bracket for my $T_c$
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 1 at 13:07
@StubbornAtom ah sorry just added the squared bracket for my $T_c$
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 1 at 13:07
Are you sure $T_c$ has distribution $mathcalX^2_n-1$. Or did you mean to say that the $X_i$'s are $mathcalX^2_n-1$ ? Also are the $X_i$'s independent ?
â Digitalis
Sep 1 at 18:11
Are you sure $T_c$ has distribution $mathcalX^2_n-1$. Or did you mean to say that the $X_i$'s are $mathcalX^2_n-1$ ? Also are the $X_i$'s independent ?
â Digitalis
Sep 1 at 18:11
@Digitalis Yes I would assume they are independent. Also, I have edited my original post to include the distribution of $X_i$'s
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 3:43
@Digitalis Yes I would assume they are independent. Also, I have edited my original post to include the distribution of $X_i$'s
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 3:43
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Since $T_c$ is an estimator of $sigma^2$. $T_c$ will be unbiased for $theta = sigma^2$ if $mathbbE_mu,sigma^2(T_c) = sigma^2 quad forall mu, sigma^2 in mathbbR times mathbbR_0^+$
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)&= frac1cmathbbE Big( sum_j=1^n X_j^2 + barX^2 -2X_j barX Big) \
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)
endalign*
Now calculate $mathbbE(X_j^2),mathbbE(barX^2)$ & $ mathbbE (X_j barX)$.
1.
Using Var$(X) = mathbbE(X^2) - mathbbE(X)^2$ we find $mathbbE(X_j^2) = sigma^2 + mu^2$.
2.
beginalign*
mathbbE(barX^2) &= mathbbEBig( big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig) big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig)Big) \
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( big(sum_i^n X_ibig) big(sum_i^n X_ibig)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( sum_i neq j X_iX_j + sum_i X_i^2Big) \
&=frac1n^2 Big(sum_i neq j mathbbE(X_i)mathbbE(X_j) + sum_i mathbbE(X_i^2)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 Big( n(n-1)mu^2 + n(mu^2 + sigma^2) Big)\
&= frac(n-1)mu^2 + mu^2 + sigma^2n =mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
3.
beginalign*
mathbbE (X_j barX)&= frac1n sum_i^n mathbbE(X_jX_i) \
&=frac1n big( sum_ineq jmathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i) big) + frac1n mathbbE(X_j^2)\
&= frac1n (n-1) mu^2 + frac1n(mu^2 + sigma^2)\
&= mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
By using the values we have found we obtain
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)\
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n (sigma^2 + mu^2) + ( mu^2 + fracsigma^2n ) - 2 (mu^2 + fracsigma^2n) \
&= frac(n-1)sigma^2c
endalign*
So $T_c$ is biased for $sigma^2$ for all values of $c neq n-1$
Thanks so much for the help!! I have a few questions though. For 2, I ended up trying something with Var($bar X$) (similar to 1.) and ended up with the same answer as yours. Is it possible to use Var($bar X$) = $mathbb E (bar X^2 )$ - $mathbb E ( bar X )^2$ ? For Var($bar X$), i took out 1/n and it became 1/$n^2$ , which eventually gives me the $sigma^2$ / n. In addition, I'm rather confused on your working for 2, I'm not exactly sure how you got from the 2nd to 3rd step. I'm quite confused on your working for 3 in general as well (from 1st to 2nd step, and first part of 3rd step)
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 16:18
Yes it is possible to use that formula and it is actually much easier to calculate that way :). Concerning how to get from 2nd to 3rd in 2 it's just explicitly multiplying all the terms in both sums. Concerning number 3: It comes down to calculating $mathbbE(X_jX_i)$ in two different cases. If $i = j$ then $mathbbE(X_jX_i) = mathbbE(X_j^2)$. If $i neq j$ then $X_j$ and $X_i$ are independent and we have $mathbbE(X_jX_i) =mathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i)$.
â Digitalis
Sep 2 at 16:44
I don't know if I've ever before down-voted a clear and correct answer, but this seems to make the problem horribly more complicated than it really is.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 2 at 20:00
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
$$
frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 sim chi^2_n-1.
$$
Therefore
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1.
$$
So
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1).
$$
Subtract $sigma^2$ from that to get the bias.
Hi, I understand why the first expectation is n-1 (because of chi-squared), but how did you manage to get the second result without doing the lengthy working as mentioned above? Is it by manipulating the (n-1) result algebraically? So the first expectation found is solely used to find $mathbb E hat theta$, and I just subtract $theta$ which is $sigma^2$ from it as per the bias formula?
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 2:05
1
@WeiXiongYeo : $$ beginalign & textWe have operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$ Then cancel $sigma^2$ from the top and the bottom.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 3 at 2:40
1
Thank you so much for the help too!!
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 3:22
1
$$ beginalign & textWe have \ & operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get \ \ & fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get \ \ & operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:26
1
@WeiXiongYeo : You have $operatornamevar(chi^2_k) = 2k.$ So the variance of the first expression in my answer is $2(n-1).$ If you multiply both sides by $sigma^2/c,$ you multiply the variance by $sigma^4/c^2,$ so you get $$ operatornamevarleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X right)^2 = fracsigma^4c^2 2(n-1). $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:36
 |Â
show 3 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Since $T_c$ is an estimator of $sigma^2$. $T_c$ will be unbiased for $theta = sigma^2$ if $mathbbE_mu,sigma^2(T_c) = sigma^2 quad forall mu, sigma^2 in mathbbR times mathbbR_0^+$
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)&= frac1cmathbbE Big( sum_j=1^n X_j^2 + barX^2 -2X_j barX Big) \
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)
endalign*
Now calculate $mathbbE(X_j^2),mathbbE(barX^2)$ & $ mathbbE (X_j barX)$.
1.
Using Var$(X) = mathbbE(X^2) - mathbbE(X)^2$ we find $mathbbE(X_j^2) = sigma^2 + mu^2$.
2.
beginalign*
mathbbE(barX^2) &= mathbbEBig( big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig) big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig)Big) \
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( big(sum_i^n X_ibig) big(sum_i^n X_ibig)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( sum_i neq j X_iX_j + sum_i X_i^2Big) \
&=frac1n^2 Big(sum_i neq j mathbbE(X_i)mathbbE(X_j) + sum_i mathbbE(X_i^2)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 Big( n(n-1)mu^2 + n(mu^2 + sigma^2) Big)\
&= frac(n-1)mu^2 + mu^2 + sigma^2n =mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
3.
beginalign*
mathbbE (X_j barX)&= frac1n sum_i^n mathbbE(X_jX_i) \
&=frac1n big( sum_ineq jmathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i) big) + frac1n mathbbE(X_j^2)\
&= frac1n (n-1) mu^2 + frac1n(mu^2 + sigma^2)\
&= mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
By using the values we have found we obtain
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)\
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n (sigma^2 + mu^2) + ( mu^2 + fracsigma^2n ) - 2 (mu^2 + fracsigma^2n) \
&= frac(n-1)sigma^2c
endalign*
So $T_c$ is biased for $sigma^2$ for all values of $c neq n-1$
Thanks so much for the help!! I have a few questions though. For 2, I ended up trying something with Var($bar X$) (similar to 1.) and ended up with the same answer as yours. Is it possible to use Var($bar X$) = $mathbb E (bar X^2 )$ - $mathbb E ( bar X )^2$ ? For Var($bar X$), i took out 1/n and it became 1/$n^2$ , which eventually gives me the $sigma^2$ / n. In addition, I'm rather confused on your working for 2, I'm not exactly sure how you got from the 2nd to 3rd step. I'm quite confused on your working for 3 in general as well (from 1st to 2nd step, and first part of 3rd step)
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 16:18
Yes it is possible to use that formula and it is actually much easier to calculate that way :). Concerning how to get from 2nd to 3rd in 2 it's just explicitly multiplying all the terms in both sums. Concerning number 3: It comes down to calculating $mathbbE(X_jX_i)$ in two different cases. If $i = j$ then $mathbbE(X_jX_i) = mathbbE(X_j^2)$. If $i neq j$ then $X_j$ and $X_i$ are independent and we have $mathbbE(X_jX_i) =mathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i)$.
â Digitalis
Sep 2 at 16:44
I don't know if I've ever before down-voted a clear and correct answer, but this seems to make the problem horribly more complicated than it really is.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 2 at 20:00
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Since $T_c$ is an estimator of $sigma^2$. $T_c$ will be unbiased for $theta = sigma^2$ if $mathbbE_mu,sigma^2(T_c) = sigma^2 quad forall mu, sigma^2 in mathbbR times mathbbR_0^+$
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)&= frac1cmathbbE Big( sum_j=1^n X_j^2 + barX^2 -2X_j barX Big) \
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)
endalign*
Now calculate $mathbbE(X_j^2),mathbbE(barX^2)$ & $ mathbbE (X_j barX)$.
1.
Using Var$(X) = mathbbE(X^2) - mathbbE(X)^2$ we find $mathbbE(X_j^2) = sigma^2 + mu^2$.
2.
beginalign*
mathbbE(barX^2) &= mathbbEBig( big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig) big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig)Big) \
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( big(sum_i^n X_ibig) big(sum_i^n X_ibig)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( sum_i neq j X_iX_j + sum_i X_i^2Big) \
&=frac1n^2 Big(sum_i neq j mathbbE(X_i)mathbbE(X_j) + sum_i mathbbE(X_i^2)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 Big( n(n-1)mu^2 + n(mu^2 + sigma^2) Big)\
&= frac(n-1)mu^2 + mu^2 + sigma^2n =mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
3.
beginalign*
mathbbE (X_j barX)&= frac1n sum_i^n mathbbE(X_jX_i) \
&=frac1n big( sum_ineq jmathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i) big) + frac1n mathbbE(X_j^2)\
&= frac1n (n-1) mu^2 + frac1n(mu^2 + sigma^2)\
&= mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
By using the values we have found we obtain
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)\
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n (sigma^2 + mu^2) + ( mu^2 + fracsigma^2n ) - 2 (mu^2 + fracsigma^2n) \
&= frac(n-1)sigma^2c
endalign*
So $T_c$ is biased for $sigma^2$ for all values of $c neq n-1$
Thanks so much for the help!! I have a few questions though. For 2, I ended up trying something with Var($bar X$) (similar to 1.) and ended up with the same answer as yours. Is it possible to use Var($bar X$) = $mathbb E (bar X^2 )$ - $mathbb E ( bar X )^2$ ? For Var($bar X$), i took out 1/n and it became 1/$n^2$ , which eventually gives me the $sigma^2$ / n. In addition, I'm rather confused on your working for 2, I'm not exactly sure how you got from the 2nd to 3rd step. I'm quite confused on your working for 3 in general as well (from 1st to 2nd step, and first part of 3rd step)
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 16:18
Yes it is possible to use that formula and it is actually much easier to calculate that way :). Concerning how to get from 2nd to 3rd in 2 it's just explicitly multiplying all the terms in both sums. Concerning number 3: It comes down to calculating $mathbbE(X_jX_i)$ in two different cases. If $i = j$ then $mathbbE(X_jX_i) = mathbbE(X_j^2)$. If $i neq j$ then $X_j$ and $X_i$ are independent and we have $mathbbE(X_jX_i) =mathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i)$.
â Digitalis
Sep 2 at 16:44
I don't know if I've ever before down-voted a clear and correct answer, but this seems to make the problem horribly more complicated than it really is.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 2 at 20:00
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Since $T_c$ is an estimator of $sigma^2$. $T_c$ will be unbiased for $theta = sigma^2$ if $mathbbE_mu,sigma^2(T_c) = sigma^2 quad forall mu, sigma^2 in mathbbR times mathbbR_0^+$
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)&= frac1cmathbbE Big( sum_j=1^n X_j^2 + barX^2 -2X_j barX Big) \
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)
endalign*
Now calculate $mathbbE(X_j^2),mathbbE(barX^2)$ & $ mathbbE (X_j barX)$.
1.
Using Var$(X) = mathbbE(X^2) - mathbbE(X)^2$ we find $mathbbE(X_j^2) = sigma^2 + mu^2$.
2.
beginalign*
mathbbE(barX^2) &= mathbbEBig( big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig) big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig)Big) \
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( big(sum_i^n X_ibig) big(sum_i^n X_ibig)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( sum_i neq j X_iX_j + sum_i X_i^2Big) \
&=frac1n^2 Big(sum_i neq j mathbbE(X_i)mathbbE(X_j) + sum_i mathbbE(X_i^2)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 Big( n(n-1)mu^2 + n(mu^2 + sigma^2) Big)\
&= frac(n-1)mu^2 + mu^2 + sigma^2n =mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
3.
beginalign*
mathbbE (X_j barX)&= frac1n sum_i^n mathbbE(X_jX_i) \
&=frac1n big( sum_ineq jmathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i) big) + frac1n mathbbE(X_j^2)\
&= frac1n (n-1) mu^2 + frac1n(mu^2 + sigma^2)\
&= mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
By using the values we have found we obtain
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)\
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n (sigma^2 + mu^2) + ( mu^2 + fracsigma^2n ) - 2 (mu^2 + fracsigma^2n) \
&= frac(n-1)sigma^2c
endalign*
So $T_c$ is biased for $sigma^2$ for all values of $c neq n-1$
Since $T_c$ is an estimator of $sigma^2$. $T_c$ will be unbiased for $theta = sigma^2$ if $mathbbE_mu,sigma^2(T_c) = sigma^2 quad forall mu, sigma^2 in mathbbR times mathbbR_0^+$
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)&= frac1cmathbbE Big( sum_j=1^n X_j^2 + barX^2 -2X_j barX Big) \
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)
endalign*
Now calculate $mathbbE(X_j^2),mathbbE(barX^2)$ & $ mathbbE (X_j barX)$.
1.
Using Var$(X) = mathbbE(X^2) - mathbbE(X)^2$ we find $mathbbE(X_j^2) = sigma^2 + mu^2$.
2.
beginalign*
mathbbE(barX^2) &= mathbbEBig( big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig) big(frac1n sum_i^n X_ibig)Big) \
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( big(sum_i^n X_ibig) big(sum_i^n X_ibig)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 mathbbEBig( sum_i neq j X_iX_j + sum_i X_i^2Big) \
&=frac1n^2 Big(sum_i neq j mathbbE(X_i)mathbbE(X_j) + sum_i mathbbE(X_i^2)Big)\
&= frac1n^2 Big( n(n-1)mu^2 + n(mu^2 + sigma^2) Big)\
&= frac(n-1)mu^2 + mu^2 + sigma^2n =mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
3.
beginalign*
mathbbE (X_j barX)&= frac1n sum_i^n mathbbE(X_jX_i) \
&=frac1n big( sum_ineq jmathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i) big) + frac1n mathbbE(X_j^2)\
&= frac1n (n-1) mu^2 + frac1n(mu^2 + sigma^2)\
&= mu^2 + fracsigma^2n
endalign*
By using the values we have found we obtain
beginalign*
mathbbE(T_c)
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n mathbbE(X_j^2) + mathbbE(barX^2) - 2 mathbbE (X_j barX)\
&= frac1c sum_j=1^n (sigma^2 + mu^2) + ( mu^2 + fracsigma^2n ) - 2 (mu^2 + fracsigma^2n) \
&= frac(n-1)sigma^2c
endalign*
So $T_c$ is biased for $sigma^2$ for all values of $c neq n-1$
answered Sep 2 at 14:34
Digitalis
318114
318114
Thanks so much for the help!! I have a few questions though. For 2, I ended up trying something with Var($bar X$) (similar to 1.) and ended up with the same answer as yours. Is it possible to use Var($bar X$) = $mathbb E (bar X^2 )$ - $mathbb E ( bar X )^2$ ? For Var($bar X$), i took out 1/n and it became 1/$n^2$ , which eventually gives me the $sigma^2$ / n. In addition, I'm rather confused on your working for 2, I'm not exactly sure how you got from the 2nd to 3rd step. I'm quite confused on your working for 3 in general as well (from 1st to 2nd step, and first part of 3rd step)
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 16:18
Yes it is possible to use that formula and it is actually much easier to calculate that way :). Concerning how to get from 2nd to 3rd in 2 it's just explicitly multiplying all the terms in both sums. Concerning number 3: It comes down to calculating $mathbbE(X_jX_i)$ in two different cases. If $i = j$ then $mathbbE(X_jX_i) = mathbbE(X_j^2)$. If $i neq j$ then $X_j$ and $X_i$ are independent and we have $mathbbE(X_jX_i) =mathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i)$.
â Digitalis
Sep 2 at 16:44
I don't know if I've ever before down-voted a clear and correct answer, but this seems to make the problem horribly more complicated than it really is.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 2 at 20:00
add a comment |Â
Thanks so much for the help!! I have a few questions though. For 2, I ended up trying something with Var($bar X$) (similar to 1.) and ended up with the same answer as yours. Is it possible to use Var($bar X$) = $mathbb E (bar X^2 )$ - $mathbb E ( bar X )^2$ ? For Var($bar X$), i took out 1/n and it became 1/$n^2$ , which eventually gives me the $sigma^2$ / n. In addition, I'm rather confused on your working for 2, I'm not exactly sure how you got from the 2nd to 3rd step. I'm quite confused on your working for 3 in general as well (from 1st to 2nd step, and first part of 3rd step)
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 16:18
Yes it is possible to use that formula and it is actually much easier to calculate that way :). Concerning how to get from 2nd to 3rd in 2 it's just explicitly multiplying all the terms in both sums. Concerning number 3: It comes down to calculating $mathbbE(X_jX_i)$ in two different cases. If $i = j$ then $mathbbE(X_jX_i) = mathbbE(X_j^2)$. If $i neq j$ then $X_j$ and $X_i$ are independent and we have $mathbbE(X_jX_i) =mathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i)$.
â Digitalis
Sep 2 at 16:44
I don't know if I've ever before down-voted a clear and correct answer, but this seems to make the problem horribly more complicated than it really is.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 2 at 20:00
Thanks so much for the help!! I have a few questions though. For 2, I ended up trying something with Var($bar X$) (similar to 1.) and ended up with the same answer as yours. Is it possible to use Var($bar X$) = $mathbb E (bar X^2 )$ - $mathbb E ( bar X )^2$ ? For Var($bar X$), i took out 1/n and it became 1/$n^2$ , which eventually gives me the $sigma^2$ / n. In addition, I'm rather confused on your working for 2, I'm not exactly sure how you got from the 2nd to 3rd step. I'm quite confused on your working for 3 in general as well (from 1st to 2nd step, and first part of 3rd step)
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 16:18
Thanks so much for the help!! I have a few questions though. For 2, I ended up trying something with Var($bar X$) (similar to 1.) and ended up with the same answer as yours. Is it possible to use Var($bar X$) = $mathbb E (bar X^2 )$ - $mathbb E ( bar X )^2$ ? For Var($bar X$), i took out 1/n and it became 1/$n^2$ , which eventually gives me the $sigma^2$ / n. In addition, I'm rather confused on your working for 2, I'm not exactly sure how you got from the 2nd to 3rd step. I'm quite confused on your working for 3 in general as well (from 1st to 2nd step, and first part of 3rd step)
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 16:18
Yes it is possible to use that formula and it is actually much easier to calculate that way :). Concerning how to get from 2nd to 3rd in 2 it's just explicitly multiplying all the terms in both sums. Concerning number 3: It comes down to calculating $mathbbE(X_jX_i)$ in two different cases. If $i = j$ then $mathbbE(X_jX_i) = mathbbE(X_j^2)$. If $i neq j$ then $X_j$ and $X_i$ are independent and we have $mathbbE(X_jX_i) =mathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i)$.
â Digitalis
Sep 2 at 16:44
Yes it is possible to use that formula and it is actually much easier to calculate that way :). Concerning how to get from 2nd to 3rd in 2 it's just explicitly multiplying all the terms in both sums. Concerning number 3: It comes down to calculating $mathbbE(X_jX_i)$ in two different cases. If $i = j$ then $mathbbE(X_jX_i) = mathbbE(X_j^2)$. If $i neq j$ then $X_j$ and $X_i$ are independent and we have $mathbbE(X_jX_i) =mathbbE(X_j)mathbbE(X_i)$.
â Digitalis
Sep 2 at 16:44
I don't know if I've ever before down-voted a clear and correct answer, but this seems to make the problem horribly more complicated than it really is.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 2 at 20:00
I don't know if I've ever before down-voted a clear and correct answer, but this seems to make the problem horribly more complicated than it really is.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 2 at 20:00
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
$$
frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 sim chi^2_n-1.
$$
Therefore
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1.
$$
So
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1).
$$
Subtract $sigma^2$ from that to get the bias.
Hi, I understand why the first expectation is n-1 (because of chi-squared), but how did you manage to get the second result without doing the lengthy working as mentioned above? Is it by manipulating the (n-1) result algebraically? So the first expectation found is solely used to find $mathbb E hat theta$, and I just subtract $theta$ which is $sigma^2$ from it as per the bias formula?
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 2:05
1
@WeiXiongYeo : $$ beginalign & textWe have operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$ Then cancel $sigma^2$ from the top and the bottom.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 3 at 2:40
1
Thank you so much for the help too!!
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 3:22
1
$$ beginalign & textWe have \ & operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get \ \ & fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get \ \ & operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:26
1
@WeiXiongYeo : You have $operatornamevar(chi^2_k) = 2k.$ So the variance of the first expression in my answer is $2(n-1).$ If you multiply both sides by $sigma^2/c,$ you multiply the variance by $sigma^4/c^2,$ so you get $$ operatornamevarleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X right)^2 = fracsigma^4c^2 2(n-1). $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:36
 |Â
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
$$
frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 sim chi^2_n-1.
$$
Therefore
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1.
$$
So
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1).
$$
Subtract $sigma^2$ from that to get the bias.
Hi, I understand why the first expectation is n-1 (because of chi-squared), but how did you manage to get the second result without doing the lengthy working as mentioned above? Is it by manipulating the (n-1) result algebraically? So the first expectation found is solely used to find $mathbb E hat theta$, and I just subtract $theta$ which is $sigma^2$ from it as per the bias formula?
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 2:05
1
@WeiXiongYeo : $$ beginalign & textWe have operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$ Then cancel $sigma^2$ from the top and the bottom.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 3 at 2:40
1
Thank you so much for the help too!!
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 3:22
1
$$ beginalign & textWe have \ & operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get \ \ & fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get \ \ & operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:26
1
@WeiXiongYeo : You have $operatornamevar(chi^2_k) = 2k.$ So the variance of the first expression in my answer is $2(n-1).$ If you multiply both sides by $sigma^2/c,$ you multiply the variance by $sigma^4/c^2,$ so you get $$ operatornamevarleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X right)^2 = fracsigma^4c^2 2(n-1). $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:36
 |Â
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
$$
frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 sim chi^2_n-1.
$$
Therefore
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1.
$$
So
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1).
$$
Subtract $sigma^2$ from that to get the bias.
$$
frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 sim chi^2_n-1.
$$
Therefore
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1.
$$
So
$$
operatorname Eleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1).
$$
Subtract $sigma^2$ from that to get the bias.
answered Sep 2 at 19:59
Michael Hardy
206k23187466
206k23187466
Hi, I understand why the first expectation is n-1 (because of chi-squared), but how did you manage to get the second result without doing the lengthy working as mentioned above? Is it by manipulating the (n-1) result algebraically? So the first expectation found is solely used to find $mathbb E hat theta$, and I just subtract $theta$ which is $sigma^2$ from it as per the bias formula?
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 2:05
1
@WeiXiongYeo : $$ beginalign & textWe have operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$ Then cancel $sigma^2$ from the top and the bottom.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 3 at 2:40
1
Thank you so much for the help too!!
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 3:22
1
$$ beginalign & textWe have \ & operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get \ \ & fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get \ \ & operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:26
1
@WeiXiongYeo : You have $operatornamevar(chi^2_k) = 2k.$ So the variance of the first expression in my answer is $2(n-1).$ If you multiply both sides by $sigma^2/c,$ you multiply the variance by $sigma^4/c^2,$ so you get $$ operatornamevarleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X right)^2 = fracsigma^4c^2 2(n-1). $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:36
 |Â
show 3 more comments
Hi, I understand why the first expectation is n-1 (because of chi-squared), but how did you manage to get the second result without doing the lengthy working as mentioned above? Is it by manipulating the (n-1) result algebraically? So the first expectation found is solely used to find $mathbb E hat theta$, and I just subtract $theta$ which is $sigma^2$ from it as per the bias formula?
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 2:05
1
@WeiXiongYeo : $$ beginalign & textWe have operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$ Then cancel $sigma^2$ from the top and the bottom.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 3 at 2:40
1
Thank you so much for the help too!!
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 3:22
1
$$ beginalign & textWe have \ & operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get \ \ & fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get \ \ & operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:26
1
@WeiXiongYeo : You have $operatornamevar(chi^2_k) = 2k.$ So the variance of the first expression in my answer is $2(n-1).$ If you multiply both sides by $sigma^2/c,$ you multiply the variance by $sigma^4/c^2,$ so you get $$ operatornamevarleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X right)^2 = fracsigma^4c^2 2(n-1). $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:36
Hi, I understand why the first expectation is n-1 (because of chi-squared), but how did you manage to get the second result without doing the lengthy working as mentioned above? Is it by manipulating the (n-1) result algebraically? So the first expectation found is solely used to find $mathbb E hat theta$, and I just subtract $theta$ which is $sigma^2$ from it as per the bias formula?
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 2:05
Hi, I understand why the first expectation is n-1 (because of chi-squared), but how did you manage to get the second result without doing the lengthy working as mentioned above? Is it by manipulating the (n-1) result algebraically? So the first expectation found is solely used to find $mathbb E hat theta$, and I just subtract $theta$ which is $sigma^2$ from it as per the bias formula?
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 2:05
1
1
@WeiXiongYeo : $$ beginalign & textWe have operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$ Then cancel $sigma^2$ from the top and the bottom.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 3 at 2:40
@WeiXiongYeo : $$ beginalign & textWe have operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$ Then cancel $sigma^2$ from the top and the bottom.
â Michael Hardy
Sep 3 at 2:40
1
1
Thank you so much for the help too!!
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 3:22
Thank you so much for the help too!!
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 3 at 3:22
1
1
$$ beginalign & textWe have \ & operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get \ \ & fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get \ \ & operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:26
$$ beginalign & textWe have \ & operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X)^2 right) = n-1. \ \ & textMultiplying both sides by frac sigma^2 c, text we get \ \ & fracsigma^2 c operatorname Eleft( frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). \ \ & textUsing linearity of expectation we get \ \ & operatorname Eleft( fracsigma^2 c cdot frac 1 sigma^2 sum_i=1^n (X_i-overline X)^2 right) = fracsigma^2 c (n-1). endalign $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:26
1
1
@WeiXiongYeo : You have $operatornamevar(chi^2_k) = 2k.$ So the variance of the first expression in my answer is $2(n-1).$ If you multiply both sides by $sigma^2/c,$ you multiply the variance by $sigma^4/c^2,$ so you get $$ operatornamevarleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X right)^2 = fracsigma^4c^2 2(n-1). $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:36
@WeiXiongYeo : You have $operatornamevar(chi^2_k) = 2k.$ So the variance of the first expression in my answer is $2(n-1).$ If you multiply both sides by $sigma^2/c,$ you multiply the variance by $sigma^4/c^2,$ so you get $$ operatornamevarleft( frac 1 c sum_i=1^n (X_i - overline X right)^2 = fracsigma^4c^2 2(n-1). $$
â Michael Hardy
Sep 5 at 2:36
 |Â
show 3 more comments
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2901494%2fhow-to-calculate-the-bias-of-the-statistic%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
@StubbornAtom ah sorry just added the squared bracket for my $T_c$
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 1 at 13:07
Are you sure $T_c$ has distribution $mathcalX^2_n-1$. Or did you mean to say that the $X_i$'s are $mathcalX^2_n-1$ ? Also are the $X_i$'s independent ?
â Digitalis
Sep 1 at 18:11
@Digitalis Yes I would assume they are independent. Also, I have edited my original post to include the distribution of $X_i$'s
â Wei Xiong Yeo
Sep 2 at 3:43