Is it possible to prove that the sum of two independent r.v.'s X and Y with convex support cannot be uniformly distributed on an interval [a,b], with a<b?
(Let us rule out the trivial case where X is degenerate and Y is uniform.) Note that X and Y need not be identically distributed.
I have a strong intuition supporting a negative answer because commutativity gets X+Y to "pile up" away from the tails, but I cannot find a way to pin this down to an impossibility proof.
Related questions on Math.SE:
1) Can the sum of two independent identical random variables be uniform? and Can the sum of two i.i.d. random variables be uniformly distributed? answer negatively under the additional assumption that X and Y are identically distributed.
2) in Can sum of two random variables be uniformly distributed @GEdgar answers positively under the assumption that the two independent r.v.'s X and Y have non-convex support.
Answer
Your intuition is correct : the answer is negative. Here is a proof.
Suppose, by contradiction, that X and Y are independent, non-degenerate variables with convex support, say [c,d] and [e,f], and X+Y is uniform on [c+e,d+f]. Replacing (X,Y) with (X−c,Y−e), we may assume without loss that c=e=0. Interchanging X and Y if necessary, we may further assume that d≤f. If $d
At this point, we then have X,Y independent with support exactly equal to [0,1], and X+Y distributed uniformly on [0,2]. Now, define the following events :
X1={X∈[0,13]},X2={X∈(13,23]},X3={X∈(23,1]},Y1={Y∈[0,13]},Y2={Y∈(13,23]},Y3={Y∈(23,1]},
Pk=∪i+j=kXi×Yj,Ql=∪lk=2Pk,L(x)={X+Y≤x}
We then have the inclusions :
L(l−13)⊆Ql⊆L(l3)
Putting ql=P(Ql), we deduce
l−16≤ql≤l6
Next, put xk=P(Xk),yk=P(Yk),pk=P(Pk). It follows from
(1) that the following number is nonnegative :
s=(1−x1)(q2−16)+x1(23−q4)+x1x2y2
Clearly q2=x1y1. And using x3=1−(x1+x2) and y3=1−(y1+y2), we find that
q4=x1y1+x2y1+x1y2+x1y3+x2y2+x3y1=x1+y1+x2y2−x1y1
Reinjecting this back into (2), we obtain
s=(x1−12)(13−x1)
It follows that x1∈[13,12]. Using natural symmetries of the problem, it follows that x3,y1 and y3 are also in [13,12].
Next, consider
t1=(x1x3−x22)(56−q5)+x3x2(23−q4)+x23(q3−13)t2=(x1x3−x22)(q2−16)+x1x2(q3−13)+x21(23−q4)t=t1+t2
Note that since x1x3≥19≥x22, the numbers t1,t2 and t are all nonnegative. Simplifying t as we did for s, we obtain :
t=−x24(1+x2)(13−x2)−3(x3−x1)24(49−x2)
In (5) above we have a nonnegative LHS and a nonpositive RHS. Note also that x2>0 because the support of X is [0,1]. This forces x2=13 and
(x3−x1)2=0, so that x1=x2=x3=13, and similarly y1=y2=y3=13. But then q2=19 contradicts (1). This finishes the proof.
UPDATE: Since (5) was questioned in the comments, I append a computer verification of it.
GP/PARI CALCULATOR Version 2.7.4 (released)
i386 running darwin (x86-64/GMP-6.0.0 kernel) 64-bit version
compiled: Sep 27 2015, Apple LLVM version 6.0 (clang-600.0.57) (based on LLVM 3.5svn)
threading engine: single
(readline v6.3 enabled, extended help enabled)
Copyright (C) 2000-2015 The PARI Group
PARI/GP is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and comes
WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY WHATSOEVER.
Type ? for help, \q to quit.
Type ?12 for how to get moral (and possibly technical) support.
parisize = 8000000, primelimit = 500000
? x3=1-(x1+x2)
%1 = -x1 + (-x2 + 1)
? y3=1-(y1+y2)
%2 = -y1 + (-y2 + 1)
?
? x(k)=if((1<=k)&&(k<=3),eval(Str("x",k)),0)
%3 = (k)->if((1<=k)&&(k<=3),eval(Str("x",k)),0)
? y(k)=if((1<=k)&&(k<=3),eval(Str("y",k)),0)
%4 = (k)->if((1<=k)&&(k<=3),eval(Str("y",k)),0)
?
? p(k)=sum(j=1,k,x(j)*y(k-j))
%5 = (k)->sum(j=1,k,x(j)*y(k-j))
?
? q(l)=sum(k=2,l,p(k))
%6 = (l)->sum(k=2,l,p(k))
?
? s_term=(1-x1)*(q(2)-(1/6))+x1*((2/3)-q(4))+x1*x2*y2
%7 = -x1^2 + 5/6*x1 - 1/6
?
? check1=s_term-(x1-(1/3))*((1/2)-x1)
%8 = 0
?
? t1_term=(x1*x3-(x2^2))*((5/6)-q(5))+x3*x2*((2/3)-q(4))+(x3^2)*(q(3)-(1/3))
%9 = x1^3 + (3*x2 - 13/6)*x1^2 + (3*x2^2 - 25/6*x2 + 3/2)*x1 + (x2^3 - 11/6*x2^2 + 4/3*x2 - 1/3)
? t2_term=(x1*x3-(x2^2))*(q(2)-(1/6))+x1*x2*(q(3)-(1/3))+(x1^2)*((2/3)-q(4))
%10 = -x1^3 + 5/6*x1^2 + (-1/6*x2 - 1/6)*x1 + 1/6*x2^2
? t_term=t1_term+t2_term
%11 = (3*x2 - 4/3)*x1^2 + (3*x2^2 - 13/3*x2 + 4/3)*x1 + (x2^3 - 5/3*x2^2 + 4/3*x2 - 1/3)
?
? easy_part=(x2/4)*(x2+1)*((1/3)-x2)
%12 = -1/4*x2^3 - 1/6*x2^2 + 1/12*x2
? hard_part=(3/4)*((x3-x1)^2)*((4/9)-x2)
%13 = (-3*x2 + 4/3)*x1^2 + (-3*x2^2 + 13/3*x2 - 4/3)*x1 + (-3/4*x2^3 + 11/6*x2^2 - 17/12*x2 + 1/3)
?
? check2=(t_term+(easy_part+hard_part))
%14 = 0
No comments:
Post a Comment