Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function

In summary, the homework statement states that an exponential random variable, X, has a pdf with rate parameter λ>0. X has a ceiling function, which is [x] for small integers. Y is the smallest integer greater than or equal to X, and its pmf is f(y) = e^(-λy)(e-1) for 1≤y<∞. E(Y) is found by integrating P(Y = n) = \int_{n-1}^n \lambda e^{-\lambda x}\,\mathrm{d}x and solving for Y. Y is memoryless if and only if Pr(Y>
  • #1
Aaron10
4
0

Homework Statement



Let X be an exponential random variable with rate parameter λ>0. Let [x] denote the smallest integer greater than or equal to x (called the ceiling function). For example, [0.12]=1 and [2]=2. Let Y=[X].
a) Find the pmf of Y=[X]
b) Does Y have the memoryless property? Justify.
c) Evaluate E(Y).

Homework Equations


The pdf of exponential variable X is λe^-λx

The Attempt at a Solution


I found the pmf using Pr{Y=y} = ∫(λe^-λx)dx from y-1 to y. This gave me a pmf of
f(y) = e^(-λy)(e-1) for 1≤y<∞. I got E(Y) by using ∫y*f(y)dy from 1 to ∞, resulting in
E(Y) = ((-e^-λ)/λ)(e-1)(1/λ - 1). I am not sure how to show if Y is memoryless though, particularly because I am not really sure what the memoryless property is...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I looked at this again, and think if I set it up so that if Pr(Y>a+b|Y>a) = Pr(Y>b), then Y is memoryless. I would then have Pr(Y>a+b)/Pr(Y>a) = Pr(Y>b). I solved this using
(∫λe^(-λx)dx from (a+b) to ∞)/(∫λe^(-λx)dx from (a) to ∞). This equals e^(-λb) which is equal to Pr(Y>b). Thus, Y is memoryless. I am still not totally clear on the concept of memorylessness, though, so I may have set it up incorrectly...if someone could explain what it means to be memoryless, that would be great. From the formula, it seems like it involves one trial not being based on previous, but how would that translate to a ceiling function?
 
  • #3
Yes, that's the correct definition of memorylessness for a discrete random variable that's non-negative. The term refers to the property that the probability of 'n more' is unrelated to how many you have already. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorylessness
 
  • #4
Aaron10 said:

Homework Statement



Let X be an exponential random variable with rate parameter λ>0. Let [x] denote the smallest integer greater than or equal to x (called the ceiling function). For example, [0.12]=1 and [2]=2. Let Y=[X].
a) Find the pmf of Y=[X]
b) Does Y have the memoryless property? Justify.
c) Evaluate E(Y).

Homework Equations


The pdf of exponential variable X is λe^-λx

The Attempt at a Solution


I found the pmf using Pr{Y=y} = ∫(λe^-λx)dx from y-1 to y. This gave me a pmf of
f(y) = e^(-λy)(e-1) for 1≤y<∞. I got E(Y) by using ∫y*f(y)dy from 1 to ∞, resulting in
E(Y) = ((-e^-λ)/λ)(e-1)(1/λ - 1). I am not sure how to show if Y is memoryless though, particularly because I am not really sure what the memoryless property is...

[itex]Y[/itex] is a discrete random variable (it only takes positive integer values) so it doesn't have a density function. Instead
[tex]
P(Y = n) = \int_{n-1}^n \lambda e^{-\lambda x}\,\mathrm{d}x
= e^{-\lambda n}(e^\lambda - 1)
[/tex]
and
[tex]
E(Y) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} nP(Y = n) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} ne^{-\lambda n}(e^\lambda - 1) = -(e^\lambda - 1)\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} e^{-\lambda n}
= -(e^\lambda - 1)\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \frac{1}{e^\lambda - 1}
= \frac{e^\lambda}{e^\lambda - 1}
[/tex]
 
  • #5
pasmith said:
[itex]Y[/itex] is a discrete random variable (it only takes positive integer values) so it doesn't have a density function. Instead
[tex]
P(Y = n) = \int_{n-1}^n \lambda e^{-\lambda x}\,\mathrm{d}x
= e^{-\lambda n}(e^\lambda - 1)
[/tex]
and
[tex]
E(Y) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} nP(Y = n) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} ne^{-\lambda n}(e^\lambda - 1) = -(e^\lambda - 1)\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} e^{-\lambda n}
= -(e^\lambda - 1)\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \frac{1}{e^\lambda - 1}
= \frac{e^\lambda}{e^\lambda - 1}
[/tex]

Wow, thank you, I made an integration error when finding the pmf, and you caught that. As for finding E(Y), I am a little confused about how you got from step 3 to 4 and onward...I'm not sure I've seen this method of solving a sum before. Can you explain it in a little more detail, please? It was bothering me that I was using an integral for Y when it seems to be discrete, so any input is wonderful. Thanks!
 
  • #6
By the way, I was referring to step 4 as the first step where d/dλ appears. Thanks again for your help!
 
  • #7
Aria1 said:
By the way, I was referring to step 4 as the first step where d/dλ appears. Thanks again for your help!

This is a standard trick for summing series of the form
[tex]\sum_n na^{-n} = \sum_n ne^{-n\ln a}[/tex]
where for an infinite series to converge one must have [itex]a > 1[/itex] so that [itex]\lambda = \ln a > 0[/itex].

In these circumstances summation and differentiation with respect to [itex]\lambda[/itex] can be interchanged, so
[tex]\sum_{n} ne^{-n\lambda} = \sum_{n} - \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} e^{-n\lambda}
= - \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \sum_{n} e^{-n\lambda}[/tex]
where the series on the right is a geometric series, which is easily summed.
 
  • #8
pasmith said:
This is a standard trick for summing series of the form
[tex]\sum_n na^{-n} = \sum_n ne^{-n\ln a}[/tex]
where for an infinite series to converge one must have [itex]a > 1[/itex] so that [itex]\lambda = \ln a > 0[/itex].

In these circumstances summation and differentiation with respect to [itex]\lambda[/itex] can be interchanged, so
[tex]\sum_{n} ne^{-n\lambda} = \sum_{n} - \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} e^{-n\lambda}
= - \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \sum_{n} e^{-n\lambda}[/tex]
where the series on the right is a geometric series, which is easily summed.

That makes sense to me for the most part...I'm a little confused about where the negative went in the last step, actually. You have -(e^λ - 1)d/dλ *(1/(e^λ - 1)), but in the next step, the negative seems to disappear and I'm not sure why...am I missing something, or is that a typo? Also, I'm still just not sure about why the SUM(y) becomes -d/dλ...sorry, to keep pushing for more explanation, is there some site you know of I can maybe read about it instead of bothering you? Thanks, most of it is clearer now :)
 
  • #9
Aria1 said:
That makes sense to me for the most part...I'm a little confused about where the negative went in the last step, actually. You have -(e^λ - 1)d/dλ *(1/(e^λ - 1)), but in the next step, the negative seems to disappear and I'm not sure why...am I missing something, or is that a typo?

By the chain rule,
[tex]
\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \frac{1}{e^\lambda - 1} = \frac{-1}{(e^\lambda - 1)^2}\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda}e^\lambda
= \frac{-e^\lambda}{(e^\lambda - 1)^2}[/tex]
Hence
[tex]-(e^\lambda - 1) \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \frac{1}{e^\lambda - 1}
= \frac{e^\lambda}{e^\lambda - 1}[/tex]


Also, I'm still just not sure about why the SUM(y) becomes -d/dλ...sorry, to keep pushing for more explanation, is there some site you know of I can maybe read about it instead of bothering you? Thanks, most of it is clearer now :)

[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} nP(Y = n) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} ne^{-n\lambda}(e^\lambda - 1) = (e^\lambda - 1)\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} ne^{-n\lambda}[/tex]
since [itex]e^\lambda - 1[/itex] does not depend on [itex]n[/itex].

There is no easy way to calculate
[tex]
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} ne^{-n\lambda}
[/tex]
directly, but using the standard trick
[tex]
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} ne^{-n\lambda} = -\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} e^{-n\lambda}
= - \frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda} \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}e^{-n\lambda}
[/tex]
The sum on the right is a geometric series, for which there is a formula. Thus
[tex]\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} ne^{-n\lambda} = -\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\lambda}
\frac{1}{e^\lambda - 1} = \frac{e^{\lambda}}{(e^\lambda - 1)^2}[/tex]
 
  • #10
Aria1 said:
Wow, thank you, I made an integration error when finding the pmf, and you caught that. As for finding E(Y), I am a little confused about how you got from step 3 to 4 and onward...I'm not sure I've seen this method of solving a sum before. Can you explain it in a little more detail, please? It was bothering me that I was using an integral for Y when it seems to be discrete, so any input is wonderful. Thanks!

As you have already been told, it is a 100% standard method for doing some type of sums. For example, suppose you want
[tex]S = \sum_{n=0}^N n x^n.[/tex] By recognizing that ##n x^{n-1} = d x^n /dx, ## we see that ##n x^n = x \, dx^n /dx,## so
[tex] S = x \frac{d}{dx} \sum_{n=0}^N x^n = x \frac{d}{dx} \frac{x^{N+1}-1}{x-1}.[/tex]
Similarly, you can get
[tex] \sum_{n=0}^N n^2 x^n = x \frac{d}{dx} \left( x \frac{d}{dx} \sum_{n=0}^N x^n \right), [/tex]
etc.
 

FAQ: Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function

What is a Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function?

A Probability Mass Function (PMF) with a Ceiling Function is a mathematical expression that describes the probability distribution of a discrete random variable. The PMF calculates the probability of a specific outcome occurring, while the Ceiling Function rounds up the result to the nearest integer.

How is the Ceiling Function used in a Probability Mass Function?

The Ceiling Function is typically used to account for rounding errors when calculating probabilities in a discrete distribution. It ensures that the probabilities sum up to 1, as required in a PMF.

What types of variables are represented by a Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function?

A Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function is used for discrete random variables. These are variables that can only take on a finite or countably infinite number of values, such as the outcome of a dice roll or the number of heads in a coin toss.

How is a Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function different from a standard PMF?

The main difference between a Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function and a standard PMF is the inclusion of the Ceiling Function. This function ensures that the probabilities sum up to 1, while also accounting for rounding errors.

Why is the Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function important in probability theory?

The Probability Mass Function with a Ceiling Function is important in probability theory because it allows us to accurately calculate the probabilities of discrete random variables. It also helps us to account for potential errors in these calculations and ensure that the probabilities sum up to 1.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Back
Top