Law of large numbers with continuous dependency
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have an i.i.d. sequence of random variables $X_n sim X$, and a sequence $Y_n to y_0$ in probability, where $y_0$ is a constant. Suppose also that $f : mathbbR^2 to mathbbR$ is continuous.
First question: Is it the case that
$$frac1n sum_i=1^n f(X_i, Y_n) to mathbbE[f(X, y_0)]$$
in probability? I suspect the answer is no but I am having trouble finding a counterexample.
The result does hold provided we put additional assumptions on $f$. For instance, either
(1) that $f(x, cdot)$ is $L(x)$-Lipschitz for each $x$, with $mathbbE[L(X)] < infty$;
or
(2) that $f(cdot, y) to f(cdot, y_0)$ in the supremum norm whenever $y to y_0$.
Second question: is there a relationship between these two conditions? That is, is one strictly weaker than the other? For instance, if (1) holds with $L(x)$ bounded then it is clear that (2) holds. But how about more generally?
probability-theory probability-limit-theorems
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have an i.i.d. sequence of random variables $X_n sim X$, and a sequence $Y_n to y_0$ in probability, where $y_0$ is a constant. Suppose also that $f : mathbbR^2 to mathbbR$ is continuous.
First question: Is it the case that
$$frac1n sum_i=1^n f(X_i, Y_n) to mathbbE[f(X, y_0)]$$
in probability? I suspect the answer is no but I am having trouble finding a counterexample.
The result does hold provided we put additional assumptions on $f$. For instance, either
(1) that $f(x, cdot)$ is $L(x)$-Lipschitz for each $x$, with $mathbbE[L(X)] < infty$;
or
(2) that $f(cdot, y) to f(cdot, y_0)$ in the supremum norm whenever $y to y_0$.
Second question: is there a relationship between these two conditions? That is, is one strictly weaker than the other? For instance, if (1) holds with $L(x)$ bounded then it is clear that (2) holds. But how about more generally?
probability-theory probability-limit-theorems
I would search for an example where $Ef(X,y)$ is not continuous in $y$ at $y_0$, or for examples of non-uniform integrability.
â kimchi lover
Sep 3 at 14:53
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Suppose we have an i.i.d. sequence of random variables $X_n sim X$, and a sequence $Y_n to y_0$ in probability, where $y_0$ is a constant. Suppose also that $f : mathbbR^2 to mathbbR$ is continuous.
First question: Is it the case that
$$frac1n sum_i=1^n f(X_i, Y_n) to mathbbE[f(X, y_0)]$$
in probability? I suspect the answer is no but I am having trouble finding a counterexample.
The result does hold provided we put additional assumptions on $f$. For instance, either
(1) that $f(x, cdot)$ is $L(x)$-Lipschitz for each $x$, with $mathbbE[L(X)] < infty$;
or
(2) that $f(cdot, y) to f(cdot, y_0)$ in the supremum norm whenever $y to y_0$.
Second question: is there a relationship between these two conditions? That is, is one strictly weaker than the other? For instance, if (1) holds with $L(x)$ bounded then it is clear that (2) holds. But how about more generally?
probability-theory probability-limit-theorems
Suppose we have an i.i.d. sequence of random variables $X_n sim X$, and a sequence $Y_n to y_0$ in probability, where $y_0$ is a constant. Suppose also that $f : mathbbR^2 to mathbbR$ is continuous.
First question: Is it the case that
$$frac1n sum_i=1^n f(X_i, Y_n) to mathbbE[f(X, y_0)]$$
in probability? I suspect the answer is no but I am having trouble finding a counterexample.
The result does hold provided we put additional assumptions on $f$. For instance, either
(1) that $f(x, cdot)$ is $L(x)$-Lipschitz for each $x$, with $mathbbE[L(X)] < infty$;
or
(2) that $f(cdot, y) to f(cdot, y_0)$ in the supremum norm whenever $y to y_0$.
Second question: is there a relationship between these two conditions? That is, is one strictly weaker than the other? For instance, if (1) holds with $L(x)$ bounded then it is clear that (2) holds. But how about more generally?
probability-theory probability-limit-theorems
probability-theory probability-limit-theorems
asked Sep 3 at 9:57
12qu
1207
1207
I would search for an example where $Ef(X,y)$ is not continuous in $y$ at $y_0$, or for examples of non-uniform integrability.
â kimchi lover
Sep 3 at 14:53
add a comment |Â
I would search for an example where $Ef(X,y)$ is not continuous in $y$ at $y_0$, or for examples of non-uniform integrability.
â kimchi lover
Sep 3 at 14:53
I would search for an example where $Ef(X,y)$ is not continuous in $y$ at $y_0$, or for examples of non-uniform integrability.
â kimchi lover
Sep 3 at 14:53
I would search for an example where $Ef(X,y)$ is not continuous in $y$ at $y_0$, or for examples of non-uniform integrability.
â kimchi lover
Sep 3 at 14:53
add a comment |Â
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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%2f2903715%2flaw-of-large-numbers-with-continuous-dependency%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
I would search for an example where $Ef(X,y)$ is not continuous in $y$ at $y_0$, or for examples of non-uniform integrability.
â kimchi lover
Sep 3 at 14:53