1
$\begingroup$

`If in a econometric model I have:

$y = \beta x + u$

where u is the error term, we have:

$u = y - \beta x$

Supposing that $\beta=1$, $y\sim N(0,1)$, $x \sim N(0,1)$ and $x$, $y$ are independent. Is $u$ the sum of two independent standard normal r.v.s?

The answer should be that it isn't but I'm not able to figure it out why.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Consider adding the self-study tag. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2019 at 23:44
  • $\begingroup$ $u$ is actually the difference -- not the sum -- between two standard normal random variables. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2019 at 23:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @StatsStudent: But if $x$ is a random variable then $-x$ is also a random variable, and the difference can be written as a sum: $y-x = y +(-x)$. $\endgroup$
    – Ben
    Commented Jan 2, 2019 at 23:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ben, I just confused myself! Aaaack! You're right. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 2, 2019 at 23:52
  • $\begingroup$ @StatsStudent could u explain me how do u write the letter x,y,B etc? $\endgroup$
    – Albert
    Commented Jan 3, 2019 at 9:45

2 Answers 2

4
$\begingroup$

In the second equation, "Supposing that β=1, y∼N(0,1), x∼N(0,1) and x, y are independent" is defining another model and hence another distribution on $u$, which is unrelated with the $u$ introduced in the first equation.

This mistake is called the fiducial fallacy, named after Fisher's attempt at turning likelihoods into probability distributions. When inverting $y = \beta x + u$ where $x,u\stackrel{\text{iid}}{\sim}\mathbf{N}(0,1)$, into $u=y-\beta x$, $y$ and $x$ are not independent and $u$ remains, both marginally and conditionally (on $x$), a $\mathbf{N}(0,1)$ variate.

Indeed, if we set from the original model, where $y=\beta x +u$, $x,u\stackrel{\text{iid}}{\sim}\mathbf{N}(0,1)$, the joint density of $(x,u)$ is $$\exp\{-(x^2+u^2)/2\}/2\pi\tag{1}$$ hence the joint density of $(y,x)$ is $$\exp\{-(x^2+[y-\beta x]^2)/2\}/2\pi\tag{2}$$ as the Jacobian is equal to one and the joint density of $(y,u)$ is $$\exp\{-(u^2+\beta^{-2}[y-u]^2)/2\}/2\pi\beta\tag{3}$$ as the Jacobian is equal to $1/\beta$. Therefore the

  • marginal distribution of $u$ when integrating $x$ out in (1) or $y$ in (3) is $\mathbf{N}(0,1)$
  • conditional distribution of $u$ given $x$ in (1) is $\mathbf{N}(0,1)$
  • conditional distribution of $u$ given $y$ in (3) is $\mathbf{N}((1+\beta^2)^{-1}y,(1+\beta^{-2})^{-1})$
  • distribution of $u$ as the transform $u=y-\beta x$ of $(x,y)$ distributed from (2) is $\mathbf{N}(0,1)$
$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ could u explain better why u remain a N(0,1), instead of being influenced by the distribution of y? what change in the distribution of u if is conditioned on x or not? $\endgroup$
    – Albert
    Commented Jan 3, 2019 at 9:42
2
$\begingroup$

From the specified value $\beta=1$ you have $u = y - \beta x = y - x = y + (-x)$, and since $-x$ and $y$ are random variables, $u$ is clearly a sum of random variables.

$\endgroup$

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.