3
$\begingroup$

I am interested in the expectation and the variance of the maximum of several independent, normal distributed variances. That is, given a set of $I$ different RVs with $X_i \sim \mathcal{N}(\mu_i, \sigma_i^2)$, I want to find $$ \mathbb{E}[\max~X_i], \\ \text{Var}[\max~X_i]. $$

I have found Ross' "Computing Bounds on the Expected Maximum of Correlated Normal Variables", but the method there given requires a numerical integration. I am interested in a closed form and would prefer a closed form approximation over an exact iterative method.

Anyone can point me into the right direction?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Related: Covariance of INID order statistics. You won't find a closed form in general, even for the expectation. I'm curious why you would find a closed form approximation preferable to an iterative method that could be more accurate: your response might help guide answers to this question. $\endgroup$ – whuber Nov 20 '13 at 13:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Brendon Independent, the article happens to have information on that as well. $\endgroup$ – bayerj Nov 20 '13 at 13:35
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @whuber I prefer a closed form so that it can be used as part of an optimization, for which I need a derivative. Thus, what I really mean is that the solution needs to be in a differentiable form. $\endgroup$ – bayerj Nov 20 '13 at 13:36
  • $\begingroup$ Are you sure you need a derivative for your optimization? There are several derivative-free methods (ones that don't substitute a finite difference approximation) available, Nelder-Mead being the most widely known for multidimensional problems. $\endgroup$ – jbowman Nov 20 '13 at 13:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I haven't had time to look at it in detail, but the paper On the Maximum of Bivariate Normal Random Variables, by Alan P. Ker, looks like it might be a useful starting point. $\endgroup$ – Brendon Nov 20 '13 at 14:18
2
$\begingroup$

You can find a closed form (well, if you accept to use special functions) for the density of $X = \max (X_1, \dots, X_n)$.

Let $F_i, f_i$ be the cdf and the density of $X_i$, for $i=1, ..., n$. The cdf of $X$ is

$$\begin{aligned} F(x) &= \mathbb P(X \le x) \\ &= \mathbb P(X_1 \le x, \dots, X_n \le x) \\ &= \mathbb P(X_1 \le x) \cdots \mathbb P( X_n \le x) \\ &= F_1(x) \cdots F_n(x). \end{aligned}$$

Its density is then obtained by derivation: $$f(x) = F(x)\left( {f_1 \over F_1} + \cdots + {f_n \over F_n} \right).$$

Using this, you can find expected value and variance to a good accuracy and reasonable computing time with numerical integration procedures (cf integrate in R).

I bet that in this case, you can permute integral and derivation with respect to the parameter, so you can obtain the derivatives in a similar way.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, but I need a closed form; no numerical integration. $\endgroup$ – bayerj Nov 21 '13 at 10:07
  • $\begingroup$ The difference is thin. Many 'special functions' are computed through iterative procedures, even if you don’t see it. I understand that you want to avoid doing lots of iteration so that you get something fast enough. In that case, just write the numerical integration as a sum, using, say, 10 trapezoids. This will produce a closed form approximation as requested. $\endgroup$ – Elvis Nov 23 '13 at 5:54

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.