Trying to derive a result on conditional probability












-1












$begingroup$


We have $X_1,...$ indepdent random variables with common distribution $F$ and $N$ is a geometric random variable independent of $X_i$'s. Let $M = max(X_1,...X_N)$. Im trying to convince myself that



$$ P( M leq x mid N > 1 ) = F(x) P(M leq x ) $$



I understand that since $X_1$ is independent of all $X_i's$ and from $N$, when we can pull it out of the probability and we have



$$ P(X_1 leq x) P( max(X_2,....,X_N ) leq x mid N > 1 ) $$



And then we have
$$ F(x) P( max( X_1,...,X_{N-1} leq x mid N > 1 ) $$



How does



$$ P( max( X_1,...,X_{N-1} leq x mid N > 1 ) = P( M leq x ) $$



??










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Why not compute $P(Mleqslant x,N>1)$, $P(N>1)$ and $P(Mleqslant x)$ separately, and compare the results? For example, $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(Mleqslant x,N=n)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(X_1leqslant x,ldots,X_nleqslant x,N=n)$$ hence $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}F(x)^np(1-p)^{n-1}=cdots$$
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:04












  • $begingroup$
    i dont understand how this helps. How is the RHS of second expression equal to $P(M leq x )$ . I dont see it. I understand if you use the law of total probability, but I want to understand the above without using law of total probability
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:19












  • $begingroup$
    Sorry but I don't know what you mean by "the RHS of second expression". Anyway, once you would have computed the probabilities I suggested, simply use $$P(Mleqslant xmid N>1)=frac{P(Mleqslant x,N>1)}{P(N>1)}$$ and conclude.
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:22
















-1












$begingroup$


We have $X_1,...$ indepdent random variables with common distribution $F$ and $N$ is a geometric random variable independent of $X_i$'s. Let $M = max(X_1,...X_N)$. Im trying to convince myself that



$$ P( M leq x mid N > 1 ) = F(x) P(M leq x ) $$



I understand that since $X_1$ is independent of all $X_i's$ and from $N$, when we can pull it out of the probability and we have



$$ P(X_1 leq x) P( max(X_2,....,X_N ) leq x mid N > 1 ) $$



And then we have
$$ F(x) P( max( X_1,...,X_{N-1} leq x mid N > 1 ) $$



How does



$$ P( max( X_1,...,X_{N-1} leq x mid N > 1 ) = P( M leq x ) $$



??










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Why not compute $P(Mleqslant x,N>1)$, $P(N>1)$ and $P(Mleqslant x)$ separately, and compare the results? For example, $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(Mleqslant x,N=n)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(X_1leqslant x,ldots,X_nleqslant x,N=n)$$ hence $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}F(x)^np(1-p)^{n-1}=cdots$$
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:04












  • $begingroup$
    i dont understand how this helps. How is the RHS of second expression equal to $P(M leq x )$ . I dont see it. I understand if you use the law of total probability, but I want to understand the above without using law of total probability
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:19












  • $begingroup$
    Sorry but I don't know what you mean by "the RHS of second expression". Anyway, once you would have computed the probabilities I suggested, simply use $$P(Mleqslant xmid N>1)=frac{P(Mleqslant x,N>1)}{P(N>1)}$$ and conclude.
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:22














-1












-1








-1





$begingroup$


We have $X_1,...$ indepdent random variables with common distribution $F$ and $N$ is a geometric random variable independent of $X_i$'s. Let $M = max(X_1,...X_N)$. Im trying to convince myself that



$$ P( M leq x mid N > 1 ) = F(x) P(M leq x ) $$



I understand that since $X_1$ is independent of all $X_i's$ and from $N$, when we can pull it out of the probability and we have



$$ P(X_1 leq x) P( max(X_2,....,X_N ) leq x mid N > 1 ) $$



And then we have
$$ F(x) P( max( X_1,...,X_{N-1} leq x mid N > 1 ) $$



How does



$$ P( max( X_1,...,X_{N-1} leq x mid N > 1 ) = P( M leq x ) $$



??










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




We have $X_1,...$ indepdent random variables with common distribution $F$ and $N$ is a geometric random variable independent of $X_i$'s. Let $M = max(X_1,...X_N)$. Im trying to convince myself that



$$ P( M leq x mid N > 1 ) = F(x) P(M leq x ) $$



I understand that since $X_1$ is independent of all $X_i's$ and from $N$, when we can pull it out of the probability and we have



$$ P(X_1 leq x) P( max(X_2,....,X_N ) leq x mid N > 1 ) $$



And then we have
$$ F(x) P( max( X_1,...,X_{N-1} leq x mid N > 1 ) $$



How does



$$ P( max( X_1,...,X_{N-1} leq x mid N > 1 ) = P( M leq x ) $$



??







probability






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Dec 4 '18 at 18:53









NeymarNeymar

355114




355114












  • $begingroup$
    Why not compute $P(Mleqslant x,N>1)$, $P(N>1)$ and $P(Mleqslant x)$ separately, and compare the results? For example, $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(Mleqslant x,N=n)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(X_1leqslant x,ldots,X_nleqslant x,N=n)$$ hence $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}F(x)^np(1-p)^{n-1}=cdots$$
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:04












  • $begingroup$
    i dont understand how this helps. How is the RHS of second expression equal to $P(M leq x )$ . I dont see it. I understand if you use the law of total probability, but I want to understand the above without using law of total probability
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:19












  • $begingroup$
    Sorry but I don't know what you mean by "the RHS of second expression". Anyway, once you would have computed the probabilities I suggested, simply use $$P(Mleqslant xmid N>1)=frac{P(Mleqslant x,N>1)}{P(N>1)}$$ and conclude.
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:22


















  • $begingroup$
    Why not compute $P(Mleqslant x,N>1)$, $P(N>1)$ and $P(Mleqslant x)$ separately, and compare the results? For example, $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(Mleqslant x,N=n)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(X_1leqslant x,ldots,X_nleqslant x,N=n)$$ hence $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}F(x)^np(1-p)^{n-1}=cdots$$
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:04












  • $begingroup$
    i dont understand how this helps. How is the RHS of second expression equal to $P(M leq x )$ . I dont see it. I understand if you use the law of total probability, but I want to understand the above without using law of total probability
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:19












  • $begingroup$
    Sorry but I don't know what you mean by "the RHS of second expression". Anyway, once you would have computed the probabilities I suggested, simply use $$P(Mleqslant xmid N>1)=frac{P(Mleqslant x,N>1)}{P(N>1)}$$ and conclude.
    $endgroup$
    – Did
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:22
















$begingroup$
Why not compute $P(Mleqslant x,N>1)$, $P(N>1)$ and $P(Mleqslant x)$ separately, and compare the results? For example, $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(Mleqslant x,N=n)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(X_1leqslant x,ldots,X_nleqslant x,N=n)$$ hence $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}F(x)^np(1-p)^{n-1}=cdots$$
$endgroup$
– Did
Dec 4 '18 at 21:04






$begingroup$
Why not compute $P(Mleqslant x,N>1)$, $P(N>1)$ and $P(Mleqslant x)$ separately, and compare the results? For example, $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(Mleqslant x,N=n)=sum_{ngeqslant2}P(X_1leqslant x,ldots,X_nleqslant x,N=n)$$ hence $$P(Mleqslant x,N>1)=sum_{ngeqslant2}F(x)^np(1-p)^{n-1}=cdots$$
$endgroup$
– Did
Dec 4 '18 at 21:04














$begingroup$
i dont understand how this helps. How is the RHS of second expression equal to $P(M leq x )$ . I dont see it. I understand if you use the law of total probability, but I want to understand the above without using law of total probability
$endgroup$
– Neymar
Dec 4 '18 at 21:19






$begingroup$
i dont understand how this helps. How is the RHS of second expression equal to $P(M leq x )$ . I dont see it. I understand if you use the law of total probability, but I want to understand the above without using law of total probability
$endgroup$
– Neymar
Dec 4 '18 at 21:19














$begingroup$
Sorry but I don't know what you mean by "the RHS of second expression". Anyway, once you would have computed the probabilities I suggested, simply use $$P(Mleqslant xmid N>1)=frac{P(Mleqslant x,N>1)}{P(N>1)}$$ and conclude.
$endgroup$
– Did
Dec 4 '18 at 21:22




$begingroup$
Sorry but I don't know what you mean by "the RHS of second expression". Anyway, once you would have computed the probabilities I suggested, simply use $$P(Mleqslant xmid N>1)=frac{P(Mleqslant x,N>1)}{P(N>1)}$$ and conclude.
$endgroup$
– Did
Dec 4 '18 at 21:22










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

Essentially, the conditional distribution of $N-1$ given $N > 1$ is also geometric.



$$P(N-1 = k mid N > 1) = P(N = k+1)/P(N>1) = (1-p)^k p / (1 - p) = (1-p)^{k-1} p.$$



So $max(X_1, ldots, X_{N-1})$ given $N > 1$ has the same distribution as $M$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I understand, but Im not convinced, since by your reasoning, then we would have also $$ P(M leq x ) = P ( M leq x mid N > 0 ) $$
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:30












  • $begingroup$
    @Neymar I am using geometric distributions that take values $1,2,ldots$, so $N>0$ always holds.
    $endgroup$
    – angryavian
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:45











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',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
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%2f3025962%2ftrying-to-derive-a-result-on-conditional-probability%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









1












$begingroup$

Essentially, the conditional distribution of $N-1$ given $N > 1$ is also geometric.



$$P(N-1 = k mid N > 1) = P(N = k+1)/P(N>1) = (1-p)^k p / (1 - p) = (1-p)^{k-1} p.$$



So $max(X_1, ldots, X_{N-1})$ given $N > 1$ has the same distribution as $M$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I understand, but Im not convinced, since by your reasoning, then we would have also $$ P(M leq x ) = P ( M leq x mid N > 0 ) $$
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:30












  • $begingroup$
    @Neymar I am using geometric distributions that take values $1,2,ldots$, so $N>0$ always holds.
    $endgroup$
    – angryavian
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:45
















1












$begingroup$

Essentially, the conditional distribution of $N-1$ given $N > 1$ is also geometric.



$$P(N-1 = k mid N > 1) = P(N = k+1)/P(N>1) = (1-p)^k p / (1 - p) = (1-p)^{k-1} p.$$



So $max(X_1, ldots, X_{N-1})$ given $N > 1$ has the same distribution as $M$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    I understand, but Im not convinced, since by your reasoning, then we would have also $$ P(M leq x ) = P ( M leq x mid N > 0 ) $$
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:30












  • $begingroup$
    @Neymar I am using geometric distributions that take values $1,2,ldots$, so $N>0$ always holds.
    $endgroup$
    – angryavian
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:45














1












1








1





$begingroup$

Essentially, the conditional distribution of $N-1$ given $N > 1$ is also geometric.



$$P(N-1 = k mid N > 1) = P(N = k+1)/P(N>1) = (1-p)^k p / (1 - p) = (1-p)^{k-1} p.$$



So $max(X_1, ldots, X_{N-1})$ given $N > 1$ has the same distribution as $M$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Essentially, the conditional distribution of $N-1$ given $N > 1$ is also geometric.



$$P(N-1 = k mid N > 1) = P(N = k+1)/P(N>1) = (1-p)^k p / (1 - p) = (1-p)^{k-1} p.$$



So $max(X_1, ldots, X_{N-1})$ given $N > 1$ has the same distribution as $M$.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Dec 4 '18 at 18:58









angryavianangryavian

40.4k23280




40.4k23280












  • $begingroup$
    I understand, but Im not convinced, since by your reasoning, then we would have also $$ P(M leq x ) = P ( M leq x mid N > 0 ) $$
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:30












  • $begingroup$
    @Neymar I am using geometric distributions that take values $1,2,ldots$, so $N>0$ always holds.
    $endgroup$
    – angryavian
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:45


















  • $begingroup$
    I understand, but Im not convinced, since by your reasoning, then we would have also $$ P(M leq x ) = P ( M leq x mid N > 0 ) $$
    $endgroup$
    – Neymar
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:30












  • $begingroup$
    @Neymar I am using geometric distributions that take values $1,2,ldots$, so $N>0$ always holds.
    $endgroup$
    – angryavian
    Dec 4 '18 at 21:45
















$begingroup$
I understand, but Im not convinced, since by your reasoning, then we would have also $$ P(M leq x ) = P ( M leq x mid N > 0 ) $$
$endgroup$
– Neymar
Dec 4 '18 at 21:30






$begingroup$
I understand, but Im not convinced, since by your reasoning, then we would have also $$ P(M leq x ) = P ( M leq x mid N > 0 ) $$
$endgroup$
– Neymar
Dec 4 '18 at 21:30














$begingroup$
@Neymar I am using geometric distributions that take values $1,2,ldots$, so $N>0$ always holds.
$endgroup$
– angryavian
Dec 4 '18 at 21:45




$begingroup$
@Neymar I am using geometric distributions that take values $1,2,ldots$, so $N>0$ always holds.
$endgroup$
– angryavian
Dec 4 '18 at 21:45


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3025962%2ftrying-to-derive-a-result-on-conditional-probability%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Quarter-circle Tiles

build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

Mont Emei