5
$\begingroup$

[A version of this question was previously posted by another user, but the OP deleted rather than edit the question into a more suitable form for routine textbook work. I am reposting in the hope of attracting an answer that was outlined there,]

Suppose $X_1 \sim \text{Bernoulli}(p_1),... , X_n \sim \text{Bernoulli}(p_n)$.

If a realization of $X_1$ is a success, stop. Otherwise, get a realization of $X_2$. Continue on in this manner until a success is observed, cycling back around to success probability $p_1$ when necessary (i.e. if the first $n$ trials were all failures).

Let $Y$ be a random variable representing the number of trials until a success.

Can anyone offer guidance and hints toward finding the pmf of $Y$?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ (By way of showing how to post an attempt as well as a hint ) The obvious initial strategy is to start writing it term by term $P(Y=1) = p_1$ ; $P(Y=2) = \ldots$ The main issue would then be writing down a general term; $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Oct 14 '16 at 0:00
2
$\begingroup$

We all come in contact with a special case of this distribution when going Bernoulli $\rightarrow$ Geometric distribution.

The Bernoulli distribution is the realization of an event $X_k=1$ with $\Pr(X_k=1)=\theta$. The Geometric distribution $Y$ is the realization of $y-1$ non-events and $1$ event, all iid trials i.e

$$\Pr(Y= y)=\Pr(X_1=\ldots X_{y-1}=0\cap X_y=1)$$

This should be enough of a hint.

edit2: after @Glen_b's comment

In general, any positive random variable $Y$ and in particular the discrete ones (Poisson, Geometric, Rayleigh, Weibull) can be seen as a sequence of independent (but not identically) distributed Bernoulli trials, a sequence of non-events followed by an event. Set $\Pr(X_t=1)=\theta_t$ and see that

$$\Pr(Y=y)=\theta_y\prod_{t=1}^{y-1}(1-\theta_t)$$

Sidenote

To factor any positive distribution $T\in[0,\infty)$ we can write its survival function as $S(t)=1-F(t)=e^{-\Lambda(t)}$ where \begin{align} \Lambda(0)&=0\\ \Lambda(\infty)&=\infty\\ \frac{d}{dt}\Lambda(t)&=\lambda(t)\geq 0\\ \end{align}

And note that the probability of event within $s$ steps from $t$ is

\begin{align} F(t,s)&=Pr(T\leq t+s|T>t) \\ &=\frac{\Pr(T\in[t,t+s))}{Pr(T>t)}\\ &=\frac{S(t)-S(t+s)}{S(t)} \\ &= 1-e^{-(\Lambda(t+s)-\Lambda(t))}=1-e^{-R(t,s)} \end{align}

This is called the Conditional Excess Cumulative Distribution Function. In particular, using a steplength of $1$ we have $R(t,1)=d(t)$ and we may write \begin{align} \theta_t&=1-e^{-d(t)}\\ \Pr(T\in[y,y+1))&=\theta_y\prod_{t=1}^{y-1}(1-\theta_t)= e^{-d(y)}-e^{-d(y+1)} \end{align}

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ (originally in main answer as tiny latex text) I said I would be answering this question using Cumulative Hazard Functions in a previous question but can't find a way to do it without explicitly revealing the answer. $\endgroup$ – ragulpr Oct 14 '16 at 0:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In particular I was hoping you'd define your $\theta$s from your earlier comment (e.g. something like "Let $\theta_t$ be the success probability at trial $t$, so $\theta_t = p_t$ for $i=1,2,\ldots,n$ and in general $\theta_t = p_{t\,\text{mod}\,n}$ for $t=1,2,...$"). Your notation choice makes the solution facile and readily generalizable to similar problems; a good choice of notation is very valuable and it would be worth making sure it appears. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Oct 14 '16 at 0:46
  • $\begingroup$ @Glen_b thanks for your insistence, I think your comment neatly wraps it up but I did try to incorporate what I wrote before. Also I could not keep myself from going to Cumulative-Hazard Land $\endgroup$ – ragulpr Oct 14 '16 at 1:36

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.