this is my first post on StackExchange so I hope I'm posting in the right place. I'm trying to derive the correct probability density function for the net displacement of random variables X and Y from the origin assuming that they're independent, normally-distributed and have equal variance.

To start with, the joint probability of any independent x,y is given by the probability density of a bivariate normal distribution.

$$P(x,y) = {1 \over 2\Pi\sigma_x\sigma_y} e^{\big({-1 \over 2}\big[ {(x-\mu_x)^2 \over \sigma_x^2} + {(y-\mu_y)^2 \over \sigma_y^2}\big]\big) }$$

If we further assume that the standard deviation of x and y are equal, then:

$$P(x,y) = {1 \over 2\Pi\sigma^2} e^{\big({-1 \over 2}\big[ {(x-\mu_x)^2 + (y-\mu_y)^2 \over \sigma^2}\big]\big) }$$

Finally, if I'm interested in the probability that an (x,y) coordinate pair is a certain distance, r, from the origin (x=0, y=0) then I can substitute:

$$r^2 = (x-\mu_x)^2 + (y-\mu_y)^2$$

To specify the joint probability density in terms of r, the net displacement of (x,y) from the origin as follows:

$$P(r) = {1 \over 2\Pi\sigma^2} e^{\big({-r^2 \over \sigma^2}\big) }$$

However, using program R I find that this clearly isn't the correct density function for the displacement of two independent, normally-distributed random variables with shared variance:

X <- rnorm(1000,0,sigma)
Y <- rnorm(1000,0,sigma)
R <- sqrt(X^2+Y^2)
hist(R, freq=F)

This seems to be failing to account for the fact that distant annuli would have a greater circumference and it seems intuitive to me that the greatest probability density of r would be equal to the shared standard deviation of X and Y. I'm sure I'm overlooking something obvious but I would appreciate any help in deriving the correct density function.

  • 1
    The distance from the origin $(0,0)$ is $r = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2}$, not $r = \sqrt{(x-\mu_x)^2 + (y-\mu_y)^2}$. Transforming to polar coordinates is the usual way of handling distance problems. – wolfies May 8 '14 at 6:23
  • 1
    Also, you cannot just achieve the transformation $$r^2 = x^2 + y^2$$ by making that substitution into the density function ... it is more complicated than that ... you need to calculate the Jacobian of the transformation too. – wolfies May 8 '14 at 6:35
  • Okay, thanks! This is new stuff for me but I think I've tracked down some examples. So in substituting the coordinates of the origin for $\mu_x$ and $\mu_y$ and converting $x$ and $y$ to polar coordinates, the density becomes: $$P(r,\theta)={1 \over 2 \pi \sigma^2}e^{{-(r^2cos^2{\theta} + r^2sin^2{\theta}) \over 2\sigma^2} } * J(r,\theta)$$ where $$J(r,\theta) = {d(x) \over d(r)}{d(y) \over d(\theta)} - {d(x) \over d(\theta)}{d(y) \over d(r)} = cos{\theta}*rcos{\theta} - (-rsin{\theta})*sin{\theta} = r$$ This all simplifies to $$P(r)={r \over 2 \pi \sigma^2}e^{{-r^2 \over 2\sigma^2} }$$ – CGM57 May 8 '14 at 15:45
  • @CGM57 The solution you have derived in your comment is actually the joint pdf of $(r, \theta)$ in the special case where ${\mu_x=0, \mu_y=0}$. To then obtain the marginal pdf of $r$, you just need to integrate out $\theta$ over $(0,2 \pi)$. ----------For the more general solution with ${\mu_x, \mu_y}$ NOT 0, clearly the solution pdf must depend on ${\mu_x, \mu_y}$ --- which is an easy way to tell that the posted solution cannot be the general solution you seek. – wolfies May 8 '14 at 17:28

Your Answer


By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.