Is this proof for linearity of Expectation correct?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm studying the first properties of expectation and on my notes I have a proof for its linearity. However my notes arent fully clear so I tried reinterpreting them, and this is the result:
Linearity of Expectation (proof):
Let $X$ and $Y$ be random variables, and $textImage(X) = s_1, s_2, dots, s_k, dots $, and $textImage(X) = t_1, t_2, dots, t_k, dots $ where both sets have at most countably many elements (the random variables are discrete). Let's put $P_i = mathbbP( X = s_i)$ and $Q_j = mathbbP(Y = t_j)$ and eventually $pi_ij = mathbbP[ (X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$ which is the probability that $X = s_i$ and meanwhile $Y = t_j$.
We have that $textImage(X+Y) = s_1+t_1, s_2+t_1, dots, s_2+t_1, s_2 + t_2, dots, s_k
+t_1, s_k + t_2, dots $.
So by definition of expectation:
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^infty(s_i+t_j)mathbbP(X+Y = s_i+t_j) = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^infty(s_i+t_j)pi_ij$
Using distributive property of multiplication
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^inftys_ipi_ij + sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jpi_ij =
sumlimits_i=0^inftys_isumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jsumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$
We observe now that by definiton $pi_ij$ is $mathbbP[(X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$
and therefore
$sumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij = sumlimits_j=0^inftymathbbP[(X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$
Where $Y = t_i$ is the same as $T^-1(t_j) = mathcalD_jinOmega ;;$ and $Omega$ is the sample space. Because $Y$ is a function $mathcalD_j$ are disjoint and so they make a partition for $Omega$, i.e. $bigcuplimits_j=0^inftymathcalD_j = Omega$.
Using additivity for measures
$sumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij = mathbbP( bigcuplimits_j=0^infty[(X = s_i) cap (Y = t_j) ] = mathbbP[ (X = s_i) capbigcuplimits_j=0^infty Y = t_j ] = mathbbP[ (X = s_i) cap Omega ] = mathbbP(X = s_i) $
By reproducing the same procedure for $sumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$ we find out that
$sumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij = mathbbP( Y = t_j )$
Substituting in $E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftys_isumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jsumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$
we get:
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftys_imathbbP(X = s_i) + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jmathbbP(Y = t_j) = E[X] + E[Y]$.
Is it correct? My biggest doubt is where we state that $mathbbP(X+Y = s_i+t_j) = pi_ij$ cause I expect that there could be more than one way to get $X+Y = s_i+t_j$, and not only if $X = s_i$ and $Y = t_j$.
probability-theory expected-value
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm studying the first properties of expectation and on my notes I have a proof for its linearity. However my notes arent fully clear so I tried reinterpreting them, and this is the result:
Linearity of Expectation (proof):
Let $X$ and $Y$ be random variables, and $textImage(X) = s_1, s_2, dots, s_k, dots $, and $textImage(X) = t_1, t_2, dots, t_k, dots $ where both sets have at most countably many elements (the random variables are discrete). Let's put $P_i = mathbbP( X = s_i)$ and $Q_j = mathbbP(Y = t_j)$ and eventually $pi_ij = mathbbP[ (X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$ which is the probability that $X = s_i$ and meanwhile $Y = t_j$.
We have that $textImage(X+Y) = s_1+t_1, s_2+t_1, dots, s_2+t_1, s_2 + t_2, dots, s_k
+t_1, s_k + t_2, dots $.
So by definition of expectation:
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^infty(s_i+t_j)mathbbP(X+Y = s_i+t_j) = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^infty(s_i+t_j)pi_ij$
Using distributive property of multiplication
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^inftys_ipi_ij + sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jpi_ij =
sumlimits_i=0^inftys_isumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jsumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$
We observe now that by definiton $pi_ij$ is $mathbbP[(X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$
and therefore
$sumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij = sumlimits_j=0^inftymathbbP[(X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$
Where $Y = t_i$ is the same as $T^-1(t_j) = mathcalD_jinOmega ;;$ and $Omega$ is the sample space. Because $Y$ is a function $mathcalD_j$ are disjoint and so they make a partition for $Omega$, i.e. $bigcuplimits_j=0^inftymathcalD_j = Omega$.
Using additivity for measures
$sumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij = mathbbP( bigcuplimits_j=0^infty[(X = s_i) cap (Y = t_j) ] = mathbbP[ (X = s_i) capbigcuplimits_j=0^infty Y = t_j ] = mathbbP[ (X = s_i) cap Omega ] = mathbbP(X = s_i) $
By reproducing the same procedure for $sumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$ we find out that
$sumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij = mathbbP( Y = t_j )$
Substituting in $E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftys_isumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jsumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$
we get:
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftys_imathbbP(X = s_i) + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jmathbbP(Y = t_j) = E[X] + E[Y]$.
Is it correct? My biggest doubt is where we state that $mathbbP(X+Y = s_i+t_j) = pi_ij$ cause I expect that there could be more than one way to get $X+Y = s_i+t_j$, and not only if $X = s_i$ and $Y = t_j$.
probability-theory expected-value
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I'm studying the first properties of expectation and on my notes I have a proof for its linearity. However my notes arent fully clear so I tried reinterpreting them, and this is the result:
Linearity of Expectation (proof):
Let $X$ and $Y$ be random variables, and $textImage(X) = s_1, s_2, dots, s_k, dots $, and $textImage(X) = t_1, t_2, dots, t_k, dots $ where both sets have at most countably many elements (the random variables are discrete). Let's put $P_i = mathbbP( X = s_i)$ and $Q_j = mathbbP(Y = t_j)$ and eventually $pi_ij = mathbbP[ (X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$ which is the probability that $X = s_i$ and meanwhile $Y = t_j$.
We have that $textImage(X+Y) = s_1+t_1, s_2+t_1, dots, s_2+t_1, s_2 + t_2, dots, s_k
+t_1, s_k + t_2, dots $.
So by definition of expectation:
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^infty(s_i+t_j)mathbbP(X+Y = s_i+t_j) = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^infty(s_i+t_j)pi_ij$
Using distributive property of multiplication
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^inftys_ipi_ij + sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jpi_ij =
sumlimits_i=0^inftys_isumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jsumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$
We observe now that by definiton $pi_ij$ is $mathbbP[(X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$
and therefore
$sumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij = sumlimits_j=0^inftymathbbP[(X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$
Where $Y = t_i$ is the same as $T^-1(t_j) = mathcalD_jinOmega ;;$ and $Omega$ is the sample space. Because $Y$ is a function $mathcalD_j$ are disjoint and so they make a partition for $Omega$, i.e. $bigcuplimits_j=0^inftymathcalD_j = Omega$.
Using additivity for measures
$sumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij = mathbbP( bigcuplimits_j=0^infty[(X = s_i) cap (Y = t_j) ] = mathbbP[ (X = s_i) capbigcuplimits_j=0^infty Y = t_j ] = mathbbP[ (X = s_i) cap Omega ] = mathbbP(X = s_i) $
By reproducing the same procedure for $sumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$ we find out that
$sumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij = mathbbP( Y = t_j )$
Substituting in $E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftys_isumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jsumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$
we get:
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftys_imathbbP(X = s_i) + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jmathbbP(Y = t_j) = E[X] + E[Y]$.
Is it correct? My biggest doubt is where we state that $mathbbP(X+Y = s_i+t_j) = pi_ij$ cause I expect that there could be more than one way to get $X+Y = s_i+t_j$, and not only if $X = s_i$ and $Y = t_j$.
probability-theory expected-value
I'm studying the first properties of expectation and on my notes I have a proof for its linearity. However my notes arent fully clear so I tried reinterpreting them, and this is the result:
Linearity of Expectation (proof):
Let $X$ and $Y$ be random variables, and $textImage(X) = s_1, s_2, dots, s_k, dots $, and $textImage(X) = t_1, t_2, dots, t_k, dots $ where both sets have at most countably many elements (the random variables are discrete). Let's put $P_i = mathbbP( X = s_i)$ and $Q_j = mathbbP(Y = t_j)$ and eventually $pi_ij = mathbbP[ (X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$ which is the probability that $X = s_i$ and meanwhile $Y = t_j$.
We have that $textImage(X+Y) = s_1+t_1, s_2+t_1, dots, s_2+t_1, s_2 + t_2, dots, s_k
+t_1, s_k + t_2, dots $.
So by definition of expectation:
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^infty(s_i+t_j)mathbbP(X+Y = s_i+t_j) = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^infty(s_i+t_j)pi_ij$
Using distributive property of multiplication
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^inftys_ipi_ij + sumlimits_i=0^inftysumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jpi_ij =
sumlimits_i=0^inftys_isumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jsumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$
We observe now that by definiton $pi_ij$ is $mathbbP[(X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$
and therefore
$sumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij = sumlimits_j=0^inftymathbbP[(X = s_i)cap(Y = t_j)]$
Where $Y = t_i$ is the same as $T^-1(t_j) = mathcalD_jinOmega ;;$ and $Omega$ is the sample space. Because $Y$ is a function $mathcalD_j$ are disjoint and so they make a partition for $Omega$, i.e. $bigcuplimits_j=0^inftymathcalD_j = Omega$.
Using additivity for measures
$sumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij = mathbbP( bigcuplimits_j=0^infty[(X = s_i) cap (Y = t_j) ] = mathbbP[ (X = s_i) capbigcuplimits_j=0^infty Y = t_j ] = mathbbP[ (X = s_i) cap Omega ] = mathbbP(X = s_i) $
By reproducing the same procedure for $sumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$ we find out that
$sumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij = mathbbP( Y = t_j )$
Substituting in $E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftys_isumlimits_j=0^inftypi_ij + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jsumlimits_i=0^inftypi_ij$
we get:
$E[X+Y] = sumlimits_i=0^inftys_imathbbP(X = s_i) + sumlimits_j=0^inftyt_jmathbbP(Y = t_j) = E[X] + E[Y]$.
Is it correct? My biggest doubt is where we state that $mathbbP(X+Y = s_i+t_j) = pi_ij$ cause I expect that there could be more than one way to get $X+Y = s_i+t_j$, and not only if $X = s_i$ and $Y = t_j$.
probability-theory expected-value
probability-theory expected-value
edited Sep 3 at 13:48
drhab
89k541122
89k541122
asked Sep 3 at 13:10
Baffo rasta
4711
4711
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Your proof is fine and shows that expectation of two discrete random variables that are both defined on the same probability space is the sum of the individual expectations (if they exist of course).
You make use of the distributions of $X,Y,X+Y$ but that is not necessary.
There is a route closer to definitions and working for all integrable random variables (not only discrete).
Let $X,Y$ be random variables defined on probability space $(Omega,mathcal A,mathsf P)$.
Then also $Z=X+Y$ prescribed by $omegamapsto X(omega)+Y(omega)$ is a random variable and - if $X$ and $Y$ are integrable - this with:
$$mathbb EZ:=int Z(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)+Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)mathsf P(domega)+int Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=mathbb EX+mathbb EY$$
Essential is just the fact that for integrable functions $f,g$ : $$int f+g;dmu=int f;dmu+int g;dmu$$for any measure $mu$.
thanks for your answer, however integral of a measure is treated in the successive part of my notes so I can't use it in my proof.
â Baffo rasta
Sep 3 at 14:13
1
Yes, you can: by using the point measure $Bbb P$.
â amsmath
Sep 3 at 14:17
As @amsmath says. But important for you is that you practicize the definition of $mathbb EX$ as it is given in your notes. If that definition makes use of the distribution of $X$ then you cannot do better (yet). Things will clear up later then.
â drhab
Sep 3 at 14:26
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Your proof is fine and shows that expectation of two discrete random variables that are both defined on the same probability space is the sum of the individual expectations (if they exist of course).
You make use of the distributions of $X,Y,X+Y$ but that is not necessary.
There is a route closer to definitions and working for all integrable random variables (not only discrete).
Let $X,Y$ be random variables defined on probability space $(Omega,mathcal A,mathsf P)$.
Then also $Z=X+Y$ prescribed by $omegamapsto X(omega)+Y(omega)$ is a random variable and - if $X$ and $Y$ are integrable - this with:
$$mathbb EZ:=int Z(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)+Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)mathsf P(domega)+int Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=mathbb EX+mathbb EY$$
Essential is just the fact that for integrable functions $f,g$ : $$int f+g;dmu=int f;dmu+int g;dmu$$for any measure $mu$.
thanks for your answer, however integral of a measure is treated in the successive part of my notes so I can't use it in my proof.
â Baffo rasta
Sep 3 at 14:13
1
Yes, you can: by using the point measure $Bbb P$.
â amsmath
Sep 3 at 14:17
As @amsmath says. But important for you is that you practicize the definition of $mathbb EX$ as it is given in your notes. If that definition makes use of the distribution of $X$ then you cannot do better (yet). Things will clear up later then.
â drhab
Sep 3 at 14:26
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Your proof is fine and shows that expectation of two discrete random variables that are both defined on the same probability space is the sum of the individual expectations (if they exist of course).
You make use of the distributions of $X,Y,X+Y$ but that is not necessary.
There is a route closer to definitions and working for all integrable random variables (not only discrete).
Let $X,Y$ be random variables defined on probability space $(Omega,mathcal A,mathsf P)$.
Then also $Z=X+Y$ prescribed by $omegamapsto X(omega)+Y(omega)$ is a random variable and - if $X$ and $Y$ are integrable - this with:
$$mathbb EZ:=int Z(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)+Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)mathsf P(domega)+int Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=mathbb EX+mathbb EY$$
Essential is just the fact that for integrable functions $f,g$ : $$int f+g;dmu=int f;dmu+int g;dmu$$for any measure $mu$.
thanks for your answer, however integral of a measure is treated in the successive part of my notes so I can't use it in my proof.
â Baffo rasta
Sep 3 at 14:13
1
Yes, you can: by using the point measure $Bbb P$.
â amsmath
Sep 3 at 14:17
As @amsmath says. But important for you is that you practicize the definition of $mathbb EX$ as it is given in your notes. If that definition makes use of the distribution of $X$ then you cannot do better (yet). Things will clear up later then.
â drhab
Sep 3 at 14:26
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Your proof is fine and shows that expectation of two discrete random variables that are both defined on the same probability space is the sum of the individual expectations (if they exist of course).
You make use of the distributions of $X,Y,X+Y$ but that is not necessary.
There is a route closer to definitions and working for all integrable random variables (not only discrete).
Let $X,Y$ be random variables defined on probability space $(Omega,mathcal A,mathsf P)$.
Then also $Z=X+Y$ prescribed by $omegamapsto X(omega)+Y(omega)$ is a random variable and - if $X$ and $Y$ are integrable - this with:
$$mathbb EZ:=int Z(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)+Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)mathsf P(domega)+int Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=mathbb EX+mathbb EY$$
Essential is just the fact that for integrable functions $f,g$ : $$int f+g;dmu=int f;dmu+int g;dmu$$for any measure $mu$.
Your proof is fine and shows that expectation of two discrete random variables that are both defined on the same probability space is the sum of the individual expectations (if they exist of course).
You make use of the distributions of $X,Y,X+Y$ but that is not necessary.
There is a route closer to definitions and working for all integrable random variables (not only discrete).
Let $X,Y$ be random variables defined on probability space $(Omega,mathcal A,mathsf P)$.
Then also $Z=X+Y$ prescribed by $omegamapsto X(omega)+Y(omega)$ is a random variable and - if $X$ and $Y$ are integrable - this with:
$$mathbb EZ:=int Z(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)+Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=int X(omega)mathsf P(domega)+int Y(omega)mathsf P(domega)=mathbb EX+mathbb EY$$
Essential is just the fact that for integrable functions $f,g$ : $$int f+g;dmu=int f;dmu+int g;dmu$$for any measure $mu$.
answered Sep 3 at 13:59
drhab
89k541122
89k541122
thanks for your answer, however integral of a measure is treated in the successive part of my notes so I can't use it in my proof.
â Baffo rasta
Sep 3 at 14:13
1
Yes, you can: by using the point measure $Bbb P$.
â amsmath
Sep 3 at 14:17
As @amsmath says. But important for you is that you practicize the definition of $mathbb EX$ as it is given in your notes. If that definition makes use of the distribution of $X$ then you cannot do better (yet). Things will clear up later then.
â drhab
Sep 3 at 14:26
add a comment |Â
thanks for your answer, however integral of a measure is treated in the successive part of my notes so I can't use it in my proof.
â Baffo rasta
Sep 3 at 14:13
1
Yes, you can: by using the point measure $Bbb P$.
â amsmath
Sep 3 at 14:17
As @amsmath says. But important for you is that you practicize the definition of $mathbb EX$ as it is given in your notes. If that definition makes use of the distribution of $X$ then you cannot do better (yet). Things will clear up later then.
â drhab
Sep 3 at 14:26
thanks for your answer, however integral of a measure is treated in the successive part of my notes so I can't use it in my proof.
â Baffo rasta
Sep 3 at 14:13
thanks for your answer, however integral of a measure is treated in the successive part of my notes so I can't use it in my proof.
â Baffo rasta
Sep 3 at 14:13
1
1
Yes, you can: by using the point measure $Bbb P$.
â amsmath
Sep 3 at 14:17
Yes, you can: by using the point measure $Bbb P$.
â amsmath
Sep 3 at 14:17
As @amsmath says. But important for you is that you practicize the definition of $mathbb EX$ as it is given in your notes. If that definition makes use of the distribution of $X$ then you cannot do better (yet). Things will clear up later then.
â drhab
Sep 3 at 14:26
As @amsmath says. But important for you is that you practicize the definition of $mathbb EX$ as it is given in your notes. If that definition makes use of the distribution of $X$ then you cannot do better (yet). Things will clear up later then.
â drhab
Sep 3 at 14:26
add a comment |Â
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%2f2903847%2fis-this-proof-for-linearity-of-expectation-correct%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