4
$\begingroup$

Define $T = \theta + X$, where $X \sim \textrm{Exp}(\lambda)$, and $\theta$ is a constant.

I would like to compute a confidence interval for $\theta$ from observations $t_1, \ldots, t_n$ drawn from $T$. If you like, I can observe $\theta$ plus noise that follows an exponential distribution.

I can see that a maximum likelihood estimate $\hat{\theta}$ of $\theta$ is $\min\{t_1, \ldots, t_n\}$: the likelihood is $0$ when $\hat{\theta} > t_i$ for any $i$, and the log-likelihood for $\hat{\theta} \leq \min\{t_1, \ldots, t_n\}$ is given by

$$ \log(\lambda) + \sum_{i = 1}^n -\lambda (t_i - \hat{\theta}) = \log(\lambda) + \lambda n \hat{\theta} - \lambda \sum_{i=1}^n t_i $$

which increases as $\hat{\theta}$ increases regardless of $\lambda$ (given $\lambda > 0$), so the maximum likelihood estimate is $\hat{\theta} = \min\{t_1, \ldots, t_n\}$.

To build a confidence interval, $\hat{\theta}$ would be an upper bound, but I am stuck on computing a lower bound. I want to compute a value $\hat{\theta}_L$ from $t_1, \ldots, t_n$, such that $P(\theta \in [\hat{\theta}_L,\ \hat{\theta}]) = p$ for some $p \in (0, 1)$. How would I go about that?

A search brought up nothing but some literature on synchronizing clocks. Perhaps I am using the wrong terminology.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Do you know the exponential rate $\lambda?$ Or is that also to be estimated? If $\lambda$ is unknown, you might google 'two-parameter exponential' and 'delayed exponential' distributions. // The CI for $\theta$ depends on $\lambda.$ // Also see this Q&A. $\endgroup$
    – BruceET
    Commented Sep 20, 2018 at 20:52
  • $\begingroup$ I don’t know $\lambda$, it has to be estimated as well. $\endgroup$
    – Ruud
    Commented Sep 22, 2018 at 14:45

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

Suppose we have a random sample of size $n = 100$ from $\mathsf{Expo}(rate = \lambda = 0.02).$ Then the smallest observation has $V = X_{(1)} \sim \mathsf{Expo}(rate = n\lambda = 2)$ because $$F_V(t) = P(V \le t) = 1 - P(V > t) = 1 - [P(X_i > t)]^n = 1 - (e^{-\lambda t})^n = 1 - e^{-n\lambda t},$$ for $ t > 0,$ is the CDF of $\mathsf{Expo}(rate = n\lambda).$ Also, $\lambda V \sim \mathsf{Expo}(n).$

Now suppose $Y = X + \theta$ with $Y_{(1)} = V + \theta = W.$ Then $$P(L < \lambda V < U) = P(L/ \lambda < W - \theta < U /\lambda)\\= P(W - U/\lambda < \theta < W - L/\lambda) = 0.95,$$ where $L = 0.00025$ and $U =0.0369,$ so that a 95% confidence interval for $\theta$ is $(W - U/\lambda, W - U/\lambda).$

qexp(c(.025,.975), 100)
[1] 0.0002531781 0.0368887945

In particular, suppose $\lambda = 0.02,\, \theta = 20$ and we have the random sample $Y_1, Y_2, \dots, Y_{100}$ as generated in R below, with minimum $Y_{(1)} = 20.07.$

set.seed(920);  n = 100;  lam = .02;  th = 20
y = rexp(n,  lam) + th
w.obs = min(x);  w.obs
[1] 20.07364

Then knowing that $\lambda = 0.02,$ we would have the 95% CI $(18.23, 20.06)$ for $\theta,$ shown as vertical red bars in the figure below.

w.obs - qexp(c(.975,.025), 100)/.02
[1] 18.22920 20.06098
stripchart(y, pch="|", col="blue")
abline(v=c(18.23,20.06), col="red", lwd=2)

enter image description here

The following simulation shows that this type of confidence interval covers the true value of $\theta$ for 95% of samples generated with the specified parameters.

set.seed(1234);  n = 100; lam = .02; th = 20
w = replicate(10^5, min(rexp(n,lam)+th))
mean(w-qexp(.975, 100)/lam < th & w-qexp(.025, 100)/lam > th) 
[1] 0.94984

Notes: (a) In the un-shifted case $(\theta = 0),$ Wikipedia discusses estimation of the exponential rate $\lambda.$ While $\bar X$ is an unbiased estimator for the mean $\mu = 1/\lambda,$ The MLE for $\lambda$ is biased; an unbiased estimator of $\lambda$ is $(1-2/n)/\bar X.$ The Wikikpedia article discusses CIs for $\lambda.$

In particular, for the $n=100$ observations $X_i$ considered above, $\lambda\bar X \sim \mathsf{Gamma}(n,n)$ and R code qgamma(c(.025, .975), 100,100)/mean(y-20) returns the 95% CI $(0.015, 0.022),$ which contains $\lambda = 0.02.$

(b) You can search the Internet for the general case $(\lambda$ and $\theta$ both unknown) with key words '2-parameter exponential distribution' and 'shifted exponential distribution'. Estimation in the general case is of interest in reliability theory and survival analysis. Web pages, lecture notes, and papers at various degrees of sophistication are available, some of them behind credit card barriers.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, this makes sense. It seems a bit weird to me to take an interval that does not include the MLE of $\theta$ though. Are there any caveats to using c(0.0, 0.95) for the boundaries rather than c(.025, .975)? $\endgroup$
    – Ruud
    Commented Sep 22, 2018 at 15:04
  • $\begingroup$ MLE aside, you know $\theta$ is smaller than observed min, and by an amount influenced by $\lambda.$ With fewer than 100 observations upper edge of CI might be obs min. $\endgroup$
    – BruceET
    Commented Sep 22, 2018 at 15:29

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