1
$\begingroup$

Let $\{X_i\}_{i=1}^n$ be conditional independent given $\theta$ with distribution

$$p_{X_i | \theta} (x |\theta) = \frac{1}{2i\theta}, \ -i\theta<x<i\theta.$$

Find a two dimensional sufficient statistic for $\theta.$

Attempted solution with the factorization theorem:

$$p_{X | \theta} = \prod_{i=1}^{n}\frac{1}{2i\theta}1_{x_i > -i\theta} 1_{x_i < i\theta} = \frac{1}{(2i\theta)^n} 1_{\min(x_i) > -i\theta} 1_{\max(x_i) < i\theta}$$

So we can choose $T(x) = \big(T_1(x), T_2(x)\big) = \big(\min(x_i), \max(x_i)\big) $ and $g\big(\theta, T_1(x), T_2(x)\big) = \frac{1}{(2i\theta)^n} 1_{T_1 > -i\theta} 1_{T_2 < i\theta}$.

By the factorization theorem, $T(x)$ should be a sufficient two dimensional statistic, correct?

By a side note about the dimension of a sufficient statistic, we can always increase the dimension trivially, e.g by saying that $T_n(x) = 1$ and multiplying by it? On the other hand, we can't reduce the dimension to a certain point? In this example, is a two dimensional statistic the lowest we can go?

$\endgroup$
7
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ That's not quite right, because the indicator functions correspond to different sets. You want $x_1 \in (-\theta, \theta)$, $x_2 \in (-2\theta, 2\theta)$, etc. Can you see how to make all of them indicators of the same set? $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 22 at 17:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Also, the product of the $i$ terms in the denominator of your likelihood is incorrect, but this doesn't particularly matter (it's a multiplicative constant). $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 22 at 17:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ On your side note: that's correct. The sufficient statistic with the lowest possible dimension is said to be minimal sufficient. In this particular example, you can find a one-dimensional sufficient statistic if you look a bit harder. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 22 at 18:48
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah, you might say $|x_i| < 2 \theta$, correct? What do you mean with $i$ in the denominator? $\endgroup$
    – Oskar
    Commented Mar 23 at 14:53
  • $\begingroup$ The product of the $2 i \theta$ terms in the denominator in the likelihood is not $(2i\theta)^n$. $\endgroup$ Commented Mar 23 at 18:30

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

The reasoning is ok, but there are some mistakes in the execution

$$p_{X \mid \theta} = \prod_{i=1}^{n}\frac{1}{2i\theta}1_{x_i > -i\theta} 1_{x_i < i\theta} = \frac{1}{(2i\theta)^n} 1_{\min(x_i) > -i\theta} 1_{\max(x_i) < i\theta} $$

  • The product isn't right (the $i$ should be eliminated and be replaced with some function of $i$, search for 'factorials' to get inspiration)

    $$ \prod_{i=1}^{n}\frac{1}{2i\theta} \neq \frac{1}{(2i\theta)^n}$$

  • The indicator functions aren't transformed correctly

    $$\prod_{i=1}^{n} 1_{x_i > -i\theta} 1_{x_i < i\theta} \neq 1_{\min(x_i) > -i\theta} 1_{\max(x_i) < i\theta} ;$$

    this $i$ should be brought inside the $\min$ and $\max$ functions. Expressions like $\max(x_i) < i\theta$ make no sense. On the left side $\max(x_i)$ turns $x_1,x_2,x_3, \dots, x_n$ into a single number. On the right side you still have this $i$, but what is its value?

$\endgroup$

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.