3
$\begingroup$

In Lehmann-Casella (Theory of Point Estimation) they state without proof that if $T \sim Bin(n,p)$, then $g(p)$ is estimable only if it is a polynomial in $p$ of degree $\leq n$. How does one go about proving this?

Here is their somewhat justification:

In fact, it follows from Equation (1.2) that a function $g(p)$ can be U-estimable only if it is a polynomial of degree $\leq n$. Let $\delta(k)$ be the estimator. Then $g(p)$ has to satisfy Eqn 1.2: $$(1.2) ~~~~~~~\sum_{k=0}^n \delta(k) {n \choose k} p^k (1-p)^{n-k} = g(p), ~\forall 0 < p < 1.$$

$\endgroup$
1

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

The left-hand-side of $(1.2)$ is a weighted sum of polynomials with degree $n$, which is itself a polynomial of degree (no greater than) $n$. If you want to see this more clearly then you can use the binomial theorem to write it in its explicit form:

$$\begin{align} LHS &\equiv \sum_{k=0}^n \delta(k) {n \choose k} p^k (1-p)^{n-k} \\[12pt] &= \sum_{k=0}^n \delta(k) {n \choose k} p^k \sum_{i=0}^{n-k} {n-k \choose i} (-p)^i \\[12pt] &= \sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{i=0}^{n-k} {n-k \choose i} {n \choose k} (-1)^i \delta(k) p^{k+i} \\[12pt] &= \sum_{k=0}^n \sum_{r=k}^n {n-k \choose r-k} {n \choose k} (-1)^{r-k} \delta(k) p^r \\[12pt] &= \sum_{r=k}^n \Bigg[ \sum_{k=0}^n {n-k \choose r-k} {n \choose k} (-1)^{r-k} \delta(k) \Bigg] p^r. \\[12pt] \end{align}$$

$\endgroup$

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.