Is the CDF of a bivariate normal distribution with mean $(0,0)$ and $\Sigma = ((1,\rho),(\rho,1))$ monotone in the correlation coefficient $\rho$?
2 Answers
Yes.
By definition, the value of the CDF (call it $F_\rho$) at $(s,t)$ is the chance that the first component is less than or equal to $s$ and the second is less than or equal to $t$:
$$F_\rho(s,t) = \frac{1}{2 \pi \sqrt{1-\rho ^2}}\int_{-\infty}^t \int_{-\infty}^s e^{-\frac{\frac{x^2}{2}-\rho x y+\frac{y^2}{2}}{1-\rho ^2}} dx dy.$$
Performing the $x$ integration and then differentiating with respect to $\rho$ under the integral sign yields
$$\frac{-1}{2 \pi \left(1-\rho ^2\right)^{3/2}} \int_{-\infty}^t e^{\frac{s^2-2 \rho s y+y^2}{2 \left(\rho ^2-1\right)}} (y-\rho s) dy.$$
This can be integrated directly to produce the PDF $$f_\rho(s,t) = \frac{1}{2 \pi \sqrt{1-\rho ^2}}e^{-\frac{\frac{s^2}{2}-\rho s t+\frac{t^2}{2}}{1-\rho ^2}}.$$
Because the integrands are so well-behaved, we may reverse the order of integration and differentiation, concluding that for all $(s,t)$,
$$\frac{\partial}{\partial \rho} F_\rho(s,t) = f_\rho(s,t).$$
Because $f_\rho(s,t)\gt 0$ everywhere, $F_\rho$ is strictly monotone in $\rho$ everywhere, QED.
-
$\begingroup$ I don't understand how you can "perform the x integration." This is the integral of something like $e^{g(x)}$. Can you elaborate a bit more? Thanks. $\endgroup$ Nov 21, 2013 at 18:44
-
1$\begingroup$ @Emilio You get an expression involving an error function upon doing that integral (as you would expect), but then the derivative with respect to $\rho$ reduces it back to an exponential. Numerical integration and differentiation confirmed that result for $-0.98\le\rho\le 0.98$ (beyond that range there are difficulties with floating point roundoff error, even when using tricks like taking logarithmic derivatives). $\endgroup$– whuber ♦Nov 21, 2013 at 19:14
-
1$\begingroup$ This result is published on p. 255 of Kotz, Balakrishnan, & Johnson (2000) Continuous MV Distributions (2nd ed) where they reference Sungar (1990) Comm in Stats---Sim and Comp 19:1339. First attributed to Sibuya (1960) in Annals of the Inst of Stat Math 11:195. $\endgroup$– RickDec 14, 2016 at 13:04
The answer would appear to be YES. I am not sure how this is usually proven (since the bivariate Normal cdf does not have a convenient closed form) ... but as a quick thought, I would appeal perhaps to graphical ideas. In particular, consider the contours of the zero mean bivariate Normal as $\rho$ increases, as per:

(source: tri.org.au)
Choose any $(x,y)$ point ... The cdf at $(x,y)$ is the joint integral of the pdf up to $(x,y)$. When $\rho = -1$, the contours of the pdf lie maximally out of alignment with the rectangular area defined by the integral. When $\rho = 1$, the opposite extreme is attained.
-
$\begingroup$ +1 I started with a similar investigation but ran into challenging numerical problems at extreme values of $\rho$ (beyond $\pm 0.98$). Your illustrations nicely summarize what I saw. Although this work strongly suggested the derivative of the CDF with respect to $\rho$ exactly equals the PDF, the strange behaviors at the extremes indicated that a more rigorous demonstration would be desirable. $\endgroup$– whuber ♦Nov 21, 2013 at 18:05
-
1$\begingroup$ Interesting approach, but what does it mean exactly "the area defined by the integral is orthogonally opposite to the alignment of the contours"? Thanks. $\endgroup$ Nov 21, 2013 at 18:57
-
$\begingroup$ Orthogonal may not have been the best term. Re-worded. Perhaps someone else will express the graphical argument more delicately :) $\endgroup$– wolfiesNov 21, 2013 at 19:16