Skip to main content
edited tags
Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1
edited tags
Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1
added 55 characters in body
Source Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1

There is a theorem (here, Theorem 3.2.) which says: Let $x_i \sim p_i(\mu_i, \sigma_i^2)$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ be a set of pairwise uncorrelated random variables. Consider the linear estimator $y_{n,\alpha}(x_1, ..., x_n) = \sum_{i = 1}^n \alpha_i x_i$, where $\sum_{i = 1}^n \alpha_i = 1$. Then, the variance of the estimator is minimized for (its proof can be also found in this question):

$$\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-2}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-2}}.$$

My question is: In another, but somehow similar context (but not minimization), I have obtained numerically, for my problem at hand, that: $$\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-1}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-1}}.$$ I really appreciate that people familiar with statistics could elaborate that if my obtained formula is known in other context, or what is the meaning behind that if we want to compare it with the known formula in the above theorem. In other words, if the $\alpha_i$ in the theorem minimizes the variance of the estimator, what is the interpretation of my $\alpha_i$?

EDIT

In general, whenwhere $\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-2}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-2}}$ minimizes the variance of the estimator, if we decrease the exponent from $-2$ to $-3$ or increase it from $-2$ to $-1$, how the variance of estimator will change? In particular, ifwhich is my main question, whether $-1$ is a special value like $-2$.

There is a theorem (here, Theorem 3.2.) which says: Let $x_i \sim p_i(\mu_i, \sigma_i^2)$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ be a set of pairwise uncorrelated random variables. Consider the linear estimator $y_{n,\alpha}(x_1, ..., x_n) = \sum_{i = 1}^n \alpha_i x_i$, where $\sum_{i = 1}^n \alpha_i = 1$. Then, the variance of the estimator is minimized for (its proof can be also found in this question):

$$\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-2}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-2}}.$$

My question is: In another, but somehow similar context (but not minimization), I have obtained numerically, for my problem at hand, that: $$\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-1}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-1}}.$$ I really appreciate people familiar with statistics could elaborate that if my obtained formula is known in other context, or what is the meaning behind that if we want to compare it with the known formula in the above theorem. In other words, if the $\alpha_i$ in the theorem minimizes the variance, what is the interpretation of my $\alpha_i$?

EDIT

In general, when $\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-2}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-2}}$ minimizes the variance of the estimator, if we decrease the exponent from $-2$ to $-3$ or increase it from $-2$ to $-1$, how the variance of estimator will change? In particular, if $-1$ is a special value like $-2$.

There is a theorem (here, Theorem 3.2.) which says: Let $x_i \sim p_i(\mu_i, \sigma_i^2)$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ be a set of pairwise uncorrelated random variables. Consider the linear estimator $y_{n,\alpha}(x_1, ..., x_n) = \sum_{i = 1}^n \alpha_i x_i$, where $\sum_{i = 1}^n \alpha_i = 1$. Then, the variance of the estimator is minimized for (its proof can be also found in this question):

$$\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-2}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-2}}.$$

My question is: In another, but somehow similar context (but not minimization), I have obtained numerically, for my problem at hand, that: $$\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-1}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-1}}.$$ I really appreciate that people familiar with statistics could elaborate that if my obtained formula is known in other context, or what is the meaning behind that if we want to compare it with the known formula in the above theorem. In other words, if the $\alpha_i$ in the theorem minimizes the variance of the estimator, what is the interpretation of my $\alpha_i$?

EDIT

In general, where $\alpha_i = \frac{\sigma_i^{-2}}{\sum_{j = 1}^n \sigma_j^{-2}}$ minimizes the variance of the estimator, if we decrease the exponent from $-2$ to $-3$ or increase it from $-2$ to $-1$, how the variance of estimator will change? In particular, which is my main question, whether $-1$ is a special value like $-2$.

added 28 characters in body
Source Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1
Loading
edited title
Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1
Loading
added 261 characters in body
Source Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1
Loading
added 166 characters in body
Source Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1
Loading
added 166 characters in body
Source Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1
Loading
Source Link
Dave
  • 1
  • 1
Loading