7
$\begingroup$

The question I have is:

Define $X,Y$ to be two independent uniform(0,1) random variables and $Z:=\frac{Y}{X}$

Compute $P(X<x|\sigma(Z))$.

The answer given apparently by "straightforward elementary computations" is for $x\geq 0$,

$$P(X<x|\sigma(Z)) = \min\{{x^2,1}\}\mathbb{I}_{Z\leq 1} + \min\{{x^2 Z^2,1}\}\mathbb{I}_{Z\geq 1}.$$

My idea was to condition on the $Z\leq 1$ and ${Z\geq 1}$ then compute using the joint density of $X$ and $Y$, but this seems to work for the first term but doesn't for the second? Any help would be much appreciated.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Is this a question from a textbook/assignment/exam? If so, please consider adding [self-study] tag and read its wiki. $\endgroup$
    – T.E.G.
    Commented Jan 19, 2017 at 23:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @whuber Is this actually a duplicate of the indicated post? That deals with the distribution of $Z$, but this doesn't seem to be asking for that. If the indicated thread does completely cover the answer to this, I think at least a brief comment here explaining why those very differently phrased questions are the same would be helpful. $\endgroup$
    – Glen_b
    Commented Jan 20, 2017 at 0:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Glen I interpreted this question as requesting the "straightforward elementary computations" needed to obtain the distribution of a ratio of independent uniform variables, and then saw those computations explicitly laid out in clear answers in the duplicate. I did not see any request, explicit or implicit, to re-interpret the more formal language of sigma algebras. If, on the other hand, the duplicate had been closed with a reference to this question, then I agree that might have required an explanation. $\endgroup$
    – whuber
    Commented Jan 20, 2017 at 0:43
  • $\begingroup$ @whuber this isn't a duplicate of that question, I'm not trying to work out the ratio distribution, I'm conditioning on the sigma algebra and then trying to obtain the above probability. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 20, 2017 at 7:44
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you Dan. After rereading your question carefully (prompted by @Glen_b) I recognized that difference and reopened it last night. $\endgroup$
    – whuber
    Commented Jan 20, 2017 at 16:11

2 Answers 2

5
$\begingroup$

The joint distribution of $(X,Z)$ can be derived from the joint distribution of $(X,Y)$ by the Jacobian formula $$f_{XZ}(x,z)=f_{XY}(x,xz)\left|\frac{\text dy}{\text dz}\right|=f_{XY}(x,xz)x$$ that is $$f_{XZ}(x,z)=x\mathbb I_{(0,1)}(x)\mathbb I_{(0,1)}(xz)$$ Thus, the conditional density of $X$ given $Z$ (or $\sigma(Z)$) is \begin{align}f_{X|Z}(x|z) &\propto x\mathbb I_{(0,1)}(x)\mathbb I_{(0,1/z)}(x)\\ &\propto \begin{cases}x\,\mathbb I_{(0,1)}(x) &\text{if }z\le1\\ x\,\mathbb I_{(0,1/z)}(x) &\text{if }z\ge 1\end{cases}\\ &=\begin{cases}2x\,\mathbb I_{(0,1)}(x) &\text{if }z\le1\\ {2}{z^2}\,x\,\mathbb I_{(0,1/z)}(x) &\text{if }z\ge 1 \end{cases} \end{align} and \begin{align}\mathbb P(X<x|Z=z) &=2\int_0^{x\wedge 1}\zeta\text d\zeta\mathbb I_{(0,1)}(z)+ {2}{z^2}\int_0^{x\wedge 1/z}\zeta\text d\zeta\mathbb I_{(0,1)}(1/z)\\ &= x^2\wedge 1 \mathbb I_{(0,1)}(z) + {z^2x^2\wedge 1}\mathbb I_{(0,1)}(1/z) \end{align}

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Intuitive Derivation

Clearly, if $x \geq 1$, then $P(X < x | Z) = 1$ no matter what the observed value of $Z$ is.

If $0 \leq x < 1$ and suppose we have observed $Z = z$. Intuitively, it holds that (this actually has a theoretical support too: see Problem 33.16 in Probability and Measure (3rd ed.) by Patrick Billingsley): \begin{align*} P(X < x | Z = z) &= \lim_{h \downarrow 0} P(X < x | z - h < Z \leq z + h) \\ &= \lim_{h \downarrow 0} P(X < x | (z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X) \\ &= \lim_{h \downarrow 0} \frac{P(X < x, (z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X)}{P((z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X)}. \tag{$\star$}\label{star} \end{align*}

Case 1:

If $0 < z < 1$, then for sufficiently small $h$, $0 < z - h < z + h < 1$, thus the probability $P((z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X)$ is the area of the region (draw a picture) \begin{align*} \{(u, v): 0 < u < 1, (z - h)u < v \leq (z + h)u\}, \end{align*} which is $\frac{1}{2} \times [(z + h) - (z - h)] \times 1 = h$.

Similarly, the probability $P(X < x, (z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X)$ is the area of the region \begin{align*} \{(u, v): 0 < u < x, (z - h)u < v \leq (z + h)u\}, \end{align*} which is $\frac{1}{2} \times [(z + h)x - (z - h)x] \times x = hx^2$. It thus follows by $\eqref{star}$ that \begin{align*} P(X < x | Z = z) = \lim_{h \to 0}\frac{hx^2}{h} = x^2. \end{align*}

Case 2:

If $z > 1$, this case is slightly more involved than Case 1, as $\eqref{star}$ depends on the order of $x$ and $z^{-1}$. While the probability of $P((z - h)X < Y < (z + h)X)$ is always (again, draw the picture) \begin{align*} & \operatorname{Area}(S_1) := \operatorname{Area}(\{(u, v): (z + h)^{-1}v < u < (z - h)^{-1}v, 0 < v < 1\}) \\ =& \frac{1}{2} \times \left(\frac{1}{z - h} - \frac{1}{z + h}\right) \times 1 = \frac{h}{z^2 - h^2}, \end{align*} the shape of the region $\{(u, v): 0 < u < x\} \cap S_1$ is different depending on whether $x \leq z^{-1}$ or $x > z^{-1}$. One can verify that \begin{align*} & P(X < x, (z - h)X < Y \leq (z + h)X) \\ =& \begin{cases} \frac{1}{2} \times [(z + h)x - (z - h)x] \times x = hx^2 & x < z^{-1}, \\ \frac{1}{2} \times \left(\frac{1}{z - h} - \frac{1}{z + h}\right) \times 1 = \frac{h}{z^2 - h^2} & x \geq z^{-1}. \end{cases} \end{align*} It thus follows by $\eqref{star}$ that \begin{align*} P(X < x | Z = z) = \begin{cases} \lim_{h \downarrow 0}\frac{hx^2}{\frac{h}{z^2 - h^2}} = x^2z^2 & x < z^{-1} \\ 1 & x \geq z^{-1} \end{cases} = \min(x^2z^2, 1). \end{align*}

In summary, Case 1 and Case 2 show that \begin{align*} P(X < x | Z) = \min(x^2, 1)I_{(0, 1]}(Z) + \min(x^2Z^2, 1)I_{[1, \infty)}(Z). \tag{$\dagger$}\label{dagger} \end{align*}

Rigorous Proof

Now we verify $\eqref{dagger}$ by checking it satisfies the two defining properties of conditional probability:

  1. $P(X < x |Z)$ is measurable $\sigma(Z)$.
  2. For any $G \in \sigma(Z)$, $\int_G P(X < x | Z)dP = P(G \cap \{X < x\})$.

Bullet point 1 is obvious in view of $\eqref{dagger}$ is a function of $Z$. To verify bullet point 2, we need to show for any $z \in (0, +\infty)$, \begin{align*} \int\limits_{Z \leq z}\left[\min(x^2, 1)I_{(0, 1]}(Z) + \min(x^2Z^2, 1)I_{[1, \infty)}(Z)\right]dP = P(X \leq x, Z \leq z). \end{align*} Or equivalently, \begin{align*} \int_0^z\left[\min(x^2, 1)I_{(0, 1]}(t) + \min(x^2t^2, 1)I_{[1, \infty)}(t)\right]f_Z(t)dt = P(X \leq x, Z \leq z), \tag{0}\label{0} \end{align*} where $f_Z$ denotes the density of $Z = \frac{Y}{X}$. By the independence of $X$ and $Y$, the distribution function of $Z$ is \begin{align*} F_Z(z) = P(Y \leq zX) = \int_0^1P(Y \leq zx)dx. \tag{1}\label{1} \end{align*}

If $z > 1$, the integral in $\eqref{1}$ is \begin{align*} & \int_0^{z^{-1}}P(Y \leq zx)dx + \int_{z^{-1}}^1P(Y \leq zx)dx \\ =& \int_0^{z^{-1}}zxdx + \int_{z^{-1}}^11dx = \frac{1}{2z} + 1 - \frac{1}{z} = 1 - \frac{1}{2z}. \tag{2}\label{2} \end{align*}

If $z \leq 1$, the integral in $\eqref{1}$ is \begin{align*} \int_0^1 zx dx = \frac{1}{2}z. \tag{3}\label{3} \end{align*} $\eqref{2}$ and $\eqref{3}$ thus imply the density of $Z$ is given by \begin{align*} f_Z(z) = \begin{cases} \frac{1}{2} & z \leq 1, \\ \frac{1}{2}z^{-2} & z > 1. \end{cases} \tag{4}\label{4} \end{align*}

When $z \leq 1$, it follows by $\eqref{4}$ that the left hand side of $\eqref{0}$ is \begin{align*} \int_0^z \min(x^2, 1)\frac{1}{2}dt = \frac{1}{2}\min(x^2, 1)z, \end{align*} while the right hand side of $\eqref{0}$ is \begin{align*} P(X \leq x, Y \leq Xz) = \int_0^1 P(t \leq x, Y \leq tz)dt = \frac{1}{2}z\min(x^2, 1). \end{align*} Hence $\eqref{0}$ holds.

When $z > 1$, it follows by $\eqref{4}$ that the left hand side of $\eqref{0}$ is \begin{align*} & \int_0^1 \min(x^2, 1)\frac{1}{2}dt + \int_1^z \min(x^2t^2, 1) \frac{1}{2}t^{-2}dt \\ =& \frac{1}{2}\min(x^2, 1) + \frac{1}{2}\int_1^z \min(x^2, t^{-2})dt \\ =& \begin{cases} \frac{1}{2}zx^2 & x \leq z^{-1}, \\ x - \frac{1}{2z} & z^{-1} < x < 1, \\ 1 - \frac{1}{2z} & x \geq 1, \end{cases} \end{align*} while the right hand side of $\eqref{0}$ is \begin{align*} & P(X \leq x, Y \leq Xz) = \int_0^1 P(t \leq x, Y \leq tz)dt \\ =& \begin{cases} \frac{1}{2}zx^2 & x \leq z^{-1}, \\ x - \frac{1}{2z} & z^{-1} < x < 1, \\ 1 - \frac{1}{2z} & x \geq 1. \end{cases} \end{align*} Hence $\eqref{0}$ holds. This completes the proof.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.