# Derivative of a conditional CDF w.r.t. the condition [closed]

I would like to ask you for a help with my problem. I have random variable $$X = X_1 + \sum_{i = 2}^{n}(X_i - y_i)^{+}, \ \ \ (.)^{+} = \max(0, . ),$$ where $X_i$ are independent, continuous with known densities, CDFs. And I would like to perform a derivative of $$F_X(g(y_2))$$ w.r.t. $y_2$ and $g(x)$ is well defined continuous smooth function.

My tries looked like \begin{aligned} \frac{\partial}{\partial y_2}F_X(g(y_2)) &= \frac{\partial}{\partial y_2}\left[ F_{X | X_2 > y_2}(g(y_2)) \ \mathbb{P}(X_2 > y_2) + F_{X | X_2 \leq y_2}(g(y_2)) \ \mathbb{P}(X_2 \leq y_2)\right] =\\ &= f_{\bar{X} | X_2 > y_2}(g(y_2) + y_2) \ \mathbb{P}(X_2 > y_2)\left( \frac{\partial g(y_2)}{\partial y_2} + 1\right) - F_{X | X_2 > y_2}(g(y_2)) f_{X_2}(y_2) \\ &+ f_{\bar{X} | X_2 \leq y_2}(g(y_2)) \left( \frac{\partial g(y_2)}{\partial y_2} \right) \ \mathbb{P}(X_2 \leq y_2) + F_{X | X_2 \leq y_2}(g(y_2)) f_{X_2}(y_2), \end{aligned} where $\bar{X}$ is adjusted r.v. $X$ such that I move $y_2$ on RHS.

Please could anyone tell me if my steps are correct. I am not sure if I can derive the conditional CDF in the "standard" way because the condition $X_2 > y_2$ still depends on $y_2$. I will be glad for any idea.

## closed as off-topic by gung♦May 1 '18 at 14:12

• This question does not appear to be about statistics within the scope defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

• puzzlement: I do not understand the limitation to $X_2$ only as the $y_2$ used in the argument of the cdf is not connected with the $y_2$ used in the definition of $X$. – Xi'an May 1 '18 at 10:16
• Please do not cross-post:math.stackexchange.com/questions/2760950/…. – StubbornAtom May 1 '18 at 10:39
• @Xi'an the $y_2$ are the same in both cases. This question arises as the fact that I am looking for $y^* = g(y_2,y_3,...)$ which fulfills $F_X(y^*) = 0$ and I am wondering how does $y^*$ changes as $y_2$ changes. So I am trying to employ implicit derivation in order to get the desired relation. – Ajvn May 1 '18 at 12:11
• I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is cross posted on Mathematics. – gung May 1 '18 at 14:12
• I still do not understand the validation of this differentiation. – Xi'an May 1 '18 at 20:02