Know the concentration estimate expectation?
$begingroup$
Here is the problem:
let $X$ be a random variable such that:
$$P{X > c(m+t) }<2e^{-t^2} forall t >0$$
where $c>0,m>0$ are constant.
Then I was asked to prove that :
$$ mathbb{E}[X] leq cm$$
however I can't get rid of constant, here is my attempt:
begin{align}
mathbb{E}[X] &= int_0^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u\
&= int_{cm}^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u +int_{0}^{cm} P{X>u} mathrm{d}u \
&leq int_{cm}^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u+ cm
\&= int_{cm}^infty P{X>cm+cdelta}mathrm{d}u+ cm (delta>0)
\&= cint_{0}^infty P{X>cm+cdelta}mathrm{d}delta (Change of vairible)
\& leq cint_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2} mathrm{d}delta +cm (assumption)
end{align}
what I have been missing here?
probability concentration-of-measure
$endgroup$
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Here is the problem:
let $X$ be a random variable such that:
$$P{X > c(m+t) }<2e^{-t^2} forall t >0$$
where $c>0,m>0$ are constant.
Then I was asked to prove that :
$$ mathbb{E}[X] leq cm$$
however I can't get rid of constant, here is my attempt:
begin{align}
mathbb{E}[X] &= int_0^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u\
&= int_{cm}^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u +int_{0}^{cm} P{X>u} mathrm{d}u \
&leq int_{cm}^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u+ cm
\&= int_{cm}^infty P{X>cm+cdelta}mathrm{d}u+ cm (delta>0)
\&= cint_{0}^infty P{X>cm+cdelta}mathrm{d}delta (Change of vairible)
\& leq cint_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2} mathrm{d}delta +cm (assumption)
end{align}
what I have been missing here?
probability concentration-of-measure
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
In light of the answer, this begs the question; who asked you to prove that?
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Dec 30 '18 at 18:11
$begingroup$
@ClementC. math.uci.edu/~rvershyn/papers/HDP-book/HDP-book.pdf exercise 4.4.6
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Dec 30 '18 at 23:07
$begingroup$
Doesn't Exercise 4.4.6 include another constant $C$? (I.e., I wonder if the author doesn't use the "notation" that $C$ is an absolute constant, which may not take the same value across results).
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 1 at 17:57
$begingroup$
@ClementC. you are right , C is an absolute constant ,so Constant C is free to choose ? For small c in this question, I think if constant part is $frac{1}{c}int_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2}$,we could take c to be large , then the constant term can be neglect, or I did integration wrong ...
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Jan 2 at 13:19
$begingroup$
Well, with what your wrote in your OP, you get $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m)$. so since $mgeq 1$ in the book ($m,n$ are integers, right, and "your" $m$ is their $sqrt{n}+sqrt{m}$), you do have $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m) leq ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)m = c'm$, setting $c'stackrel{rm def}{=} ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)$.
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 2 at 13:52
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Here is the problem:
let $X$ be a random variable such that:
$$P{X > c(m+t) }<2e^{-t^2} forall t >0$$
where $c>0,m>0$ are constant.
Then I was asked to prove that :
$$ mathbb{E}[X] leq cm$$
however I can't get rid of constant, here is my attempt:
begin{align}
mathbb{E}[X] &= int_0^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u\
&= int_{cm}^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u +int_{0}^{cm} P{X>u} mathrm{d}u \
&leq int_{cm}^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u+ cm
\&= int_{cm}^infty P{X>cm+cdelta}mathrm{d}u+ cm (delta>0)
\&= cint_{0}^infty P{X>cm+cdelta}mathrm{d}delta (Change of vairible)
\& leq cint_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2} mathrm{d}delta +cm (assumption)
end{align}
what I have been missing here?
probability concentration-of-measure
$endgroup$
Here is the problem:
let $X$ be a random variable such that:
$$P{X > c(m+t) }<2e^{-t^2} forall t >0$$
where $c>0,m>0$ are constant.
Then I was asked to prove that :
$$ mathbb{E}[X] leq cm$$
however I can't get rid of constant, here is my attempt:
begin{align}
mathbb{E}[X] &= int_0^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u\
&= int_{cm}^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u +int_{0}^{cm} P{X>u} mathrm{d}u \
&leq int_{cm}^infty P{X>u}mathrm{d}u+ cm
\&= int_{cm}^infty P{X>cm+cdelta}mathrm{d}u+ cm (delta>0)
\&= cint_{0}^infty P{X>cm+cdelta}mathrm{d}delta (Change of vairible)
\& leq cint_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2} mathrm{d}delta +cm (assumption)
end{align}
what I have been missing here?
probability concentration-of-measure
probability concentration-of-measure
edited Jan 2 at 12:18
ShaoyuPei
asked Dec 30 '18 at 11:40
ShaoyuPeiShaoyuPei
1778
1778
$begingroup$
In light of the answer, this begs the question; who asked you to prove that?
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Dec 30 '18 at 18:11
$begingroup$
@ClementC. math.uci.edu/~rvershyn/papers/HDP-book/HDP-book.pdf exercise 4.4.6
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Dec 30 '18 at 23:07
$begingroup$
Doesn't Exercise 4.4.6 include another constant $C$? (I.e., I wonder if the author doesn't use the "notation" that $C$ is an absolute constant, which may not take the same value across results).
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 1 at 17:57
$begingroup$
@ClementC. you are right , C is an absolute constant ,so Constant C is free to choose ? For small c in this question, I think if constant part is $frac{1}{c}int_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2}$,we could take c to be large , then the constant term can be neglect, or I did integration wrong ...
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Jan 2 at 13:19
$begingroup$
Well, with what your wrote in your OP, you get $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m)$. so since $mgeq 1$ in the book ($m,n$ are integers, right, and "your" $m$ is their $sqrt{n}+sqrt{m}$), you do have $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m) leq ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)m = c'm$, setting $c'stackrel{rm def}{=} ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)$.
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 2 at 13:52
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
In light of the answer, this begs the question; who asked you to prove that?
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Dec 30 '18 at 18:11
$begingroup$
@ClementC. math.uci.edu/~rvershyn/papers/HDP-book/HDP-book.pdf exercise 4.4.6
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Dec 30 '18 at 23:07
$begingroup$
Doesn't Exercise 4.4.6 include another constant $C$? (I.e., I wonder if the author doesn't use the "notation" that $C$ is an absolute constant, which may not take the same value across results).
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 1 at 17:57
$begingroup$
@ClementC. you are right , C is an absolute constant ,so Constant C is free to choose ? For small c in this question, I think if constant part is $frac{1}{c}int_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2}$,we could take c to be large , then the constant term can be neglect, or I did integration wrong ...
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Jan 2 at 13:19
$begingroup$
Well, with what your wrote in your OP, you get $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m)$. so since $mgeq 1$ in the book ($m,n$ are integers, right, and "your" $m$ is their $sqrt{n}+sqrt{m}$), you do have $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m) leq ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)m = c'm$, setting $c'stackrel{rm def}{=} ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)$.
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 2 at 13:52
$begingroup$
In light of the answer, this begs the question; who asked you to prove that?
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Dec 30 '18 at 18:11
$begingroup$
In light of the answer, this begs the question; who asked you to prove that?
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Dec 30 '18 at 18:11
$begingroup$
@ClementC. math.uci.edu/~rvershyn/papers/HDP-book/HDP-book.pdf exercise 4.4.6
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Dec 30 '18 at 23:07
$begingroup$
@ClementC. math.uci.edu/~rvershyn/papers/HDP-book/HDP-book.pdf exercise 4.4.6
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Dec 30 '18 at 23:07
$begingroup$
Doesn't Exercise 4.4.6 include another constant $C$? (I.e., I wonder if the author doesn't use the "notation" that $C$ is an absolute constant, which may not take the same value across results).
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 1 at 17:57
$begingroup$
Doesn't Exercise 4.4.6 include another constant $C$? (I.e., I wonder if the author doesn't use the "notation" that $C$ is an absolute constant, which may not take the same value across results).
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 1 at 17:57
$begingroup$
@ClementC. you are right , C is an absolute constant ,so Constant C is free to choose ? For small c in this question, I think if constant part is $frac{1}{c}int_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2}$,we could take c to be large , then the constant term can be neglect, or I did integration wrong ...
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Jan 2 at 13:19
$begingroup$
@ClementC. you are right , C is an absolute constant ,so Constant C is free to choose ? For small c in this question, I think if constant part is $frac{1}{c}int_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2}$,we could take c to be large , then the constant term can be neglect, or I did integration wrong ...
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Jan 2 at 13:19
$begingroup$
Well, with what your wrote in your OP, you get $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m)$. so since $mgeq 1$ in the book ($m,n$ are integers, right, and "your" $m$ is their $sqrt{n}+sqrt{m}$), you do have $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m) leq ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)m = c'm$, setting $c'stackrel{rm def}{=} ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)$.
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 2 at 13:52
$begingroup$
Well, with what your wrote in your OP, you get $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m)$. so since $mgeq 1$ in the book ($m,n$ are integers, right, and "your" $m$ is their $sqrt{n}+sqrt{m}$), you do have $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m) leq ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)m = c'm$, setting $c'stackrel{rm def}{=} ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)$.
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 2 at 13:52
|
show 1 more comment
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The inequality is false. For example if $Z$ has uniform distribution on $(0,1)$ and $X=cZ+cm$ then the hypothesis reduces to $P(Z>t) leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ or $1-t leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ for $tin (0,1)$ which can be proved easily by writing the inequality as $e^{t^{2}}(1-t)-2leq 0$. [ The left side is decreasing and it has the value $-1$ at $t=0$]. Note that $EX=frac c 2 +cm>cm$ if $c>0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
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
});
}
});
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3056746%2fknow-the-concentration-estimate-expectation%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
$begingroup$
The inequality is false. For example if $Z$ has uniform distribution on $(0,1)$ and $X=cZ+cm$ then the hypothesis reduces to $P(Z>t) leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ or $1-t leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ for $tin (0,1)$ which can be proved easily by writing the inequality as $e^{t^{2}}(1-t)-2leq 0$. [ The left side is decreasing and it has the value $-1$ at $t=0$]. Note that $EX=frac c 2 +cm>cm$ if $c>0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The inequality is false. For example if $Z$ has uniform distribution on $(0,1)$ and $X=cZ+cm$ then the hypothesis reduces to $P(Z>t) leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ or $1-t leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ for $tin (0,1)$ which can be proved easily by writing the inequality as $e^{t^{2}}(1-t)-2leq 0$. [ The left side is decreasing and it has the value $-1$ at $t=0$]. Note that $EX=frac c 2 +cm>cm$ if $c>0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The inequality is false. For example if $Z$ has uniform distribution on $(0,1)$ and $X=cZ+cm$ then the hypothesis reduces to $P(Z>t) leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ or $1-t leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ for $tin (0,1)$ which can be proved easily by writing the inequality as $e^{t^{2}}(1-t)-2leq 0$. [ The left side is decreasing and it has the value $-1$ at $t=0$]. Note that $EX=frac c 2 +cm>cm$ if $c>0$.
$endgroup$
The inequality is false. For example if $Z$ has uniform distribution on $(0,1)$ and $X=cZ+cm$ then the hypothesis reduces to $P(Z>t) leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ or $1-t leq 2e^{-t^{2}}$ for $tin (0,1)$ which can be proved easily by writing the inequality as $e^{t^{2}}(1-t)-2leq 0$. [ The left side is decreasing and it has the value $-1$ at $t=0$]. Note that $EX=frac c 2 +cm>cm$ if $c>0$.
answered Dec 30 '18 at 12:33
Kavi Rama MurthyKavi Rama Murthy
63.7k42464
63.7k42464
add a comment |
add a comment |
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.
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
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3056746%2fknow-the-concentration-estimate-expectation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
Required, but never shown
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
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
$begingroup$
In light of the answer, this begs the question; who asked you to prove that?
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Dec 30 '18 at 18:11
$begingroup$
@ClementC. math.uci.edu/~rvershyn/papers/HDP-book/HDP-book.pdf exercise 4.4.6
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Dec 30 '18 at 23:07
$begingroup$
Doesn't Exercise 4.4.6 include another constant $C$? (I.e., I wonder if the author doesn't use the "notation" that $C$ is an absolute constant, which may not take the same value across results).
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 1 at 17:57
$begingroup$
@ClementC. you are right , C is an absolute constant ,so Constant C is free to choose ? For small c in this question, I think if constant part is $frac{1}{c}int_{0}^infty e^{-delta^2}$,we could take c to be large , then the constant term can be neglect, or I did integration wrong ...
$endgroup$
– ShaoyuPei
Jan 2 at 13:19
$begingroup$
Well, with what your wrote in your OP, you get $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m)$. so since $mgeq 1$ in the book ($m,n$ are integers, right, and "your" $m$ is their $sqrt{n}+sqrt{m}$), you do have $ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+m) leq ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)m = c'm$, setting $c'stackrel{rm def}{=} ccdot(frac{sqrt{pi}}{2}+1)$.
$endgroup$
– Clement C.
Jan 2 at 13:52