6
$\begingroup$

I am trying to take consecutive powers of a Gamma Distribution. For example, if

$X \sim \textrm{Gamma}(k, \theta)$,

I would like to find $X^2$, $X^3$, and in general $X^m$ for $m>0$.

The pdf using the shape-scale parametrization is

$f(x;k,\theta) = \frac{x^{k-1}e^{-\frac{x}{\theta}}}{\theta^k\Gamma(k)} \quad \text{ for } x > 0 \text{ and } k, \theta > 0$.

I have started to do this by working by the following:

$P(X^m \leq x) = P(-\sqrt[m]{x} \leq X \leq \sqrt[m]{x}) = \int_{-\sqrt[m]{x}}^{\sqrt[m]{x}} \frac{t^{k-1}e^{-\frac{t}{\theta}}}{\theta^k\Gamma(k)} \,dt$.

Then, $\quad f_{X^m}(x) = \frac{d}{dx}\int_{-\sqrt[m]{x}}^{\sqrt[m]{x}} \frac{t^{k-1}e^{-\frac{t}{\theta}}}{\theta^k\Gamma(k)} \,dt$ $\quad$

which by the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus equates to:

$\dfrac{(\sqrt[m]{x})^{k-1}e^{-\dfrac{\sqrt[m]{x}}{\theta}}}{\theta^k\Gamma(k)}\cdot(\sqrt[m]{x})'-\dfrac{(-\sqrt[m]{x})^{k-1}e^{-\dfrac{-\sqrt[m]{x}}{\theta}}}{\theta^k\Gamma(k)}\cdot(-\sqrt[m]{x})'$.

After this, I am stuck because there are many different cases to consider, such as when $m$ is an integer, etc.

Could anyone tell me if my strategy is correct? Thanks!

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ "I would like to find $X^2$, $X^3$," -- you can't mean what you say. Do you mean you want to find the distribution of $X^2$ (and so on)? Do you mean you want to find the expectation of $X^2$ etc? Or something else? Please clarify via an edit of your question. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b -Reinstate Monica Jan 16 '15 at 10:29
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ You could use directly the Jacobian formula and by all means forgo the use of the $\sqrt[n]{x}$ notation. $\endgroup$ – Xi'an Jan 16 '15 at 12:25
  • $\begingroup$ I am trying to show that $T^m$ for $m>0$ is a gamma distribution as well, that is, the gamma distribution is closed under taking powers. $\endgroup$ – user123276 Jan 16 '15 at 15:53
9
$\begingroup$

Your strategy will fail. Powers of $X$ follow Generalized Gamma distributions. Their densities are given by

$$f(x; k, \gamma, 1) = \frac{1}{\Gamma (k)} x^{\gamma k} e^{-x^{\gamma }} \left(\gamma \frac{dx}{x} \right).$$

(The third parameter, here set to a unit value $\sigma=1$, is a scale parameter.) For the power $m$ of $X \sim \Gamma(k)$, the shape parameter is $\gamma = 1/m$. This all becomes obvious when you think of $x^\gamma$ as being another variable, say $u$, and note that

$$\frac{du}{u} = \frac{d(x^\gamma)}{x^\gamma} = \gamma \frac{d x}{x}.$$

The remaining factors, $u^k e^{-u}/\Gamma(k)$, give the PDF of a Gamma distribution (with respect to the measure $du/u$).

The issue before us is whether for any given $k$ it is possible to find other parameters $k^\prime$ and $\sigma^\prime$ such that $f(x,k, \gamma, \sigma)=f(x;k^\prime, 1, \sigma^\prime)$, where $\gamma = 1/m$ for some integral $m \gt 1$: that is what it would mean for $X^m$ to have an (ordinary) Gamma distribution.

We can settle this by looking at moments. Integration shows that the (non-central) moments of the generalized Gamma distribution are

$$\mu_i = \sigma^i\frac{\Gamma(k+m i)}{\Gamma(k)}.$$

For integral values of $m$ their successive ratios are

$$\frac{\mu_{i+1}}{\mu_i} = \frac{\sigma^{i+1}\Gamma(k + mi + m)}{\sigma^i\Gamma(k + m i)} = \sigma(k + mi)(k+mi+1)\cdots (k+mi+m-1).$$

Trying to solve equations (or rather, prove they have no solutions) involving these formulas looks messy. Instead, consider the limiting values

$$\lim_{i\to \infty}\frac{\mu_{i+1}}{i\mu_i}.$$

For $m=1$ (a true Gamma distribution) this is the limiting value of $\sigma(k+i)/i$, obviously equal to $\sigma$, whereas for $m\gt 1$ this is the limiting value of $\sigma(k+mi)\cdots(k+mi+m-1)/i$, which (being of order $i^{m-1}$) diverges. Therefore the distribution of $X^m$ for $m\gt 1$ (and integral) cannot have the same moments as any possible Gamma function, proving it is not a Gamma function.


It should be clear that the generalized Gamma distribution family is indeed closed under taking (positive) powers.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ thank you for your explanation. you mentioned that the generalized gamma distribution family is indeed closed by taking powers. to do this would I just use my integration method? $\endgroup$ – user123276 Jan 21 '15 at 5:45
  • $\begingroup$ It's even simpler than that. Suppose $X$ has a generalized Gamma distribution. That means $X$ has the same distribution as a (positive) power $\gamma$ of some gamma-distributed variable $Y$. Therefore for any positive power $\alpha$, the distribution of $X^\alpha$ is that of $(Y^\gamma)^\alpha=Y^{\gamma\alpha}$, showing that $X^\alpha$ also has a generalized Gamma distribution. Consequently, generalized gammas are closed under taking (positive) powers. $\endgroup$ – whuber Jan 21 '15 at 15:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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