Result and proof on the conditional expectation of the product of two random variables

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











up vote
6
down vote

favorite
3












My problem is the following:
$X$ and $Y$ are two random variables and $mathcalF$ is a $sigma$-algebra. Given that $X$ and $Y$ are independent, and that $X$ is independent of $mathcalF$, can I affirm that
$$mathbbE(XY mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)?$$
My intuition is yes but I did not manage to find a formal proof. Any idea ?



Thanks a lot.










share|cite|improve this question



























    up vote
    6
    down vote

    favorite
    3












    My problem is the following:
    $X$ and $Y$ are two random variables and $mathcalF$ is a $sigma$-algebra. Given that $X$ and $Y$ are independent, and that $X$ is independent of $mathcalF$, can I affirm that
    $$mathbbE(XY mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)?$$
    My intuition is yes but I did not manage to find a formal proof. Any idea ?



    Thanks a lot.










    share|cite|improve this question

























      up vote
      6
      down vote

      favorite
      3









      up vote
      6
      down vote

      favorite
      3






      3





      My problem is the following:
      $X$ and $Y$ are two random variables and $mathcalF$ is a $sigma$-algebra. Given that $X$ and $Y$ are independent, and that $X$ is independent of $mathcalF$, can I affirm that
      $$mathbbE(XY mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)?$$
      My intuition is yes but I did not manage to find a formal proof. Any idea ?



      Thanks a lot.










      share|cite|improve this question















      My problem is the following:
      $X$ and $Y$ are two random variables and $mathcalF$ is a $sigma$-algebra. Given that $X$ and $Y$ are independent, and that $X$ is independent of $mathcalF$, can I affirm that
      $$mathbbE(XY mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)?$$
      My intuition is yes but I did not manage to find a formal proof. Any idea ?



      Thanks a lot.







      probability probability-theory probability-distributions expectation






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Sep 14 '15 at 9:13









      saz

      74k553113




      74k553113










      asked Oct 29 '13 at 16:55









      vitaly

      7016




      7016




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted










          No, in general the statement is not correct.



          Example Consider sets $A_1,A_2,A_3$ such that $mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0$ and $mathbbP(A_i)>0$, $mathbbP(A_i cap A_j) = mathbbP(A_i) cdot mathbbP(A_j)$ for any two $i,j in 1,2,3$. Set $X:=1_A_1$, $Y=1_A_2$, $mathcalF := sigma(1_A_3)$. Then $X$ and $Y$ are independent, as well as $X$ and $mathcalF$, so the assumption on the independence is satisfied. For $F:= A_3$ we have



          $$int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP = int 1_A_1 cdot 1_A_2 cdot 1_A_3 , dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0 tag1 $$



          On the other hand,



          $$int_F mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF), dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1) cdot underbracemathbbE(Y)_mathbbP(A_2) cdot mathbbP(A_3)>0 tag2$$



          where we used that $Y$ and $mathcalF$ are independent (hence $mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)=mathbbE(Y)$). Since by the definition of conditional expectation



          $$0 stackrel(1)= int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP stackrel!= int_F mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) , dmathbbP$$



          we conclude from $(2)$ that



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) neq mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$




          But: If $sigma(X)$ is independent of $sigma(Y,mathcalF)$ (i.e. the smallest $sigma$-algebra containing $mathcalF$ and $sigma(Y)$), then the claim holds as the following proof shows:



          Denote by $mathcalG := sigma(mathcalF,sigma(Y))$ the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcalF$ and $Y$. Since $sigma(X)$ and $mathcalG$ are independent, we have



          $$mathbbE(X mid mathcalG) = mathbbE(X)$$



          Consequently, by the tower property



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(Y cdot underbracemathbbE(X mid mathcalG)_mathbbE(X) mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$






          share|cite|improve this answer


















          • 2




            I have used your answer to correct the Wikipedia page on conditional expectation (see <en.wikipedia.org/w/…). Thank you.
            – Ben Whitney
            Jul 9 '15 at 19:32










          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%2f544410%2fresult-and-proof-on-the-conditional-expectation-of-the-product-of-two-random-var%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest






























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted










          No, in general the statement is not correct.



          Example Consider sets $A_1,A_2,A_3$ such that $mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0$ and $mathbbP(A_i)>0$, $mathbbP(A_i cap A_j) = mathbbP(A_i) cdot mathbbP(A_j)$ for any two $i,j in 1,2,3$. Set $X:=1_A_1$, $Y=1_A_2$, $mathcalF := sigma(1_A_3)$. Then $X$ and $Y$ are independent, as well as $X$ and $mathcalF$, so the assumption on the independence is satisfied. For $F:= A_3$ we have



          $$int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP = int 1_A_1 cdot 1_A_2 cdot 1_A_3 , dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0 tag1 $$



          On the other hand,



          $$int_F mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF), dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1) cdot underbracemathbbE(Y)_mathbbP(A_2) cdot mathbbP(A_3)>0 tag2$$



          where we used that $Y$ and $mathcalF$ are independent (hence $mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)=mathbbE(Y)$). Since by the definition of conditional expectation



          $$0 stackrel(1)= int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP stackrel!= int_F mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) , dmathbbP$$



          we conclude from $(2)$ that



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) neq mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$




          But: If $sigma(X)$ is independent of $sigma(Y,mathcalF)$ (i.e. the smallest $sigma$-algebra containing $mathcalF$ and $sigma(Y)$), then the claim holds as the following proof shows:



          Denote by $mathcalG := sigma(mathcalF,sigma(Y))$ the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcalF$ and $Y$. Since $sigma(X)$ and $mathcalG$ are independent, we have



          $$mathbbE(X mid mathcalG) = mathbbE(X)$$



          Consequently, by the tower property



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(Y cdot underbracemathbbE(X mid mathcalG)_mathbbE(X) mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$






          share|cite|improve this answer


















          • 2




            I have used your answer to correct the Wikipedia page on conditional expectation (see <en.wikipedia.org/w/…). Thank you.
            – Ben Whitney
            Jul 9 '15 at 19:32














          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted










          No, in general the statement is not correct.



          Example Consider sets $A_1,A_2,A_3$ such that $mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0$ and $mathbbP(A_i)>0$, $mathbbP(A_i cap A_j) = mathbbP(A_i) cdot mathbbP(A_j)$ for any two $i,j in 1,2,3$. Set $X:=1_A_1$, $Y=1_A_2$, $mathcalF := sigma(1_A_3)$. Then $X$ and $Y$ are independent, as well as $X$ and $mathcalF$, so the assumption on the independence is satisfied. For $F:= A_3$ we have



          $$int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP = int 1_A_1 cdot 1_A_2 cdot 1_A_3 , dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0 tag1 $$



          On the other hand,



          $$int_F mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF), dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1) cdot underbracemathbbE(Y)_mathbbP(A_2) cdot mathbbP(A_3)>0 tag2$$



          where we used that $Y$ and $mathcalF$ are independent (hence $mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)=mathbbE(Y)$). Since by the definition of conditional expectation



          $$0 stackrel(1)= int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP stackrel!= int_F mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) , dmathbbP$$



          we conclude from $(2)$ that



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) neq mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$




          But: If $sigma(X)$ is independent of $sigma(Y,mathcalF)$ (i.e. the smallest $sigma$-algebra containing $mathcalF$ and $sigma(Y)$), then the claim holds as the following proof shows:



          Denote by $mathcalG := sigma(mathcalF,sigma(Y))$ the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcalF$ and $Y$. Since $sigma(X)$ and $mathcalG$ are independent, we have



          $$mathbbE(X mid mathcalG) = mathbbE(X)$$



          Consequently, by the tower property



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(Y cdot underbracemathbbE(X mid mathcalG)_mathbbE(X) mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$






          share|cite|improve this answer


















          • 2




            I have used your answer to correct the Wikipedia page on conditional expectation (see <en.wikipedia.org/w/…). Thank you.
            – Ben Whitney
            Jul 9 '15 at 19:32












          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted






          No, in general the statement is not correct.



          Example Consider sets $A_1,A_2,A_3$ such that $mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0$ and $mathbbP(A_i)>0$, $mathbbP(A_i cap A_j) = mathbbP(A_i) cdot mathbbP(A_j)$ for any two $i,j in 1,2,3$. Set $X:=1_A_1$, $Y=1_A_2$, $mathcalF := sigma(1_A_3)$. Then $X$ and $Y$ are independent, as well as $X$ and $mathcalF$, so the assumption on the independence is satisfied. For $F:= A_3$ we have



          $$int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP = int 1_A_1 cdot 1_A_2 cdot 1_A_3 , dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0 tag1 $$



          On the other hand,



          $$int_F mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF), dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1) cdot underbracemathbbE(Y)_mathbbP(A_2) cdot mathbbP(A_3)>0 tag2$$



          where we used that $Y$ and $mathcalF$ are independent (hence $mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)=mathbbE(Y)$). Since by the definition of conditional expectation



          $$0 stackrel(1)= int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP stackrel!= int_F mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) , dmathbbP$$



          we conclude from $(2)$ that



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) neq mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$




          But: If $sigma(X)$ is independent of $sigma(Y,mathcalF)$ (i.e. the smallest $sigma$-algebra containing $mathcalF$ and $sigma(Y)$), then the claim holds as the following proof shows:



          Denote by $mathcalG := sigma(mathcalF,sigma(Y))$ the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcalF$ and $Y$. Since $sigma(X)$ and $mathcalG$ are independent, we have



          $$mathbbE(X mid mathcalG) = mathbbE(X)$$



          Consequently, by the tower property



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(Y cdot underbracemathbbE(X mid mathcalG)_mathbbE(X) mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$






          share|cite|improve this answer














          No, in general the statement is not correct.



          Example Consider sets $A_1,A_2,A_3$ such that $mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0$ and $mathbbP(A_i)>0$, $mathbbP(A_i cap A_j) = mathbbP(A_i) cdot mathbbP(A_j)$ for any two $i,j in 1,2,3$. Set $X:=1_A_1$, $Y=1_A_2$, $mathcalF := sigma(1_A_3)$. Then $X$ and $Y$ are independent, as well as $X$ and $mathcalF$, so the assumption on the independence is satisfied. For $F:= A_3$ we have



          $$int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP = int 1_A_1 cdot 1_A_2 cdot 1_A_3 , dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1 cap A_2 cap A_3) = 0 tag1 $$



          On the other hand,



          $$int_F mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF), dmathbbP = mathbbP(A_1) cdot underbracemathbbE(Y)_mathbbP(A_2) cdot mathbbP(A_3)>0 tag2$$



          where we used that $Y$ and $mathcalF$ are independent (hence $mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)=mathbbE(Y)$). Since by the definition of conditional expectation



          $$0 stackrel(1)= int_F X cdot Y , dmathbbP stackrel!= int_F mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) , dmathbbP$$



          we conclude from $(2)$ that



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) neq mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$




          But: If $sigma(X)$ is independent of $sigma(Y,mathcalF)$ (i.e. the smallest $sigma$-algebra containing $mathcalF$ and $sigma(Y)$), then the claim holds as the following proof shows:



          Denote by $mathcalG := sigma(mathcalF,sigma(Y))$ the $sigma$-algebra generated by $mathcalF$ and $Y$. Since $sigma(X)$ and $mathcalG$ are independent, we have



          $$mathbbE(X mid mathcalG) = mathbbE(X)$$



          Consequently, by the tower property



          $$mathbbE(X cdot Y mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(Y cdot underbracemathbbE(X mid mathcalG)_mathbbE(X) mid mathcalF) = mathbbE(X) cdot mathbbE(Y mid mathcalF)$$







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Sep 5 at 7:55









          gofvonx

          1,042828




          1,042828










          answered Oct 29 '13 at 18:11









          saz

          74k553113




          74k553113







          • 2




            I have used your answer to correct the Wikipedia page on conditional expectation (see <en.wikipedia.org/w/…). Thank you.
            – Ben Whitney
            Jul 9 '15 at 19:32












          • 2




            I have used your answer to correct the Wikipedia page on conditional expectation (see <en.wikipedia.org/w/…). Thank you.
            – Ben Whitney
            Jul 9 '15 at 19:32







          2




          2




          I have used your answer to correct the Wikipedia page on conditional expectation (see <en.wikipedia.org/w/…). Thank you.
          – Ben Whitney
          Jul 9 '15 at 19:32




          I have used your answer to correct the Wikipedia page on conditional expectation (see <en.wikipedia.org/w/…). Thank you.
          – Ben Whitney
          Jul 9 '15 at 19:32

















           

          draft saved


          draft discarded















































           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f544410%2fresult-and-proof-on-the-conditional-expectation-of-the-product-of-two-random-var%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest













































































          這個網誌中的熱門文章

          How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

          Carbon dioxide

          Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?