Wednesday, 4 July 2018

probability - What is missing in my solution of "from PDF to CDF and P(X>0.5)"?




Task:




The continuous random variable X is described with the following
probability density function (pdf):



fX(x)={19(3+2xx2):0x30:x<0x>3



Find cumulative distribution function FX and probability P(X>0.5).





The task is started by verifying if the pdf is in fact correct pdf. I am checking two conditions:




  1. Is the pdf nonnegative on all of its domain? Yes, hence we can write:



xRfX(x)0





  1. The pdf has to be integrable and its total area under the curve has to be equal 1:



RfX=1fX(x)dx=1



(for now assume the condition is true)



PDF plot:
pdf







Computing CDF which is defined as:



FX(x)=xfX(t)dt



Therefore:



If x<0:




FX(x)=x0dt=0



If x0x3:



FX(x)=00dt+x019(3+2tt2)dt==0+19(3t+t213t3)|x0==19(3x+x213x3)



If x3:



FX(x)=00dt+3019(3+2tt2)dt+x30dt=0+19(3t+t213t3)|30+0==1




(this implicitly confirms the red condition)



Finally the CDF is defined as:



FX(x)={0:x<019(3x+x213x3):x0x31:x>3






The CDF result agrees with:




limxFX(x)=1limxFX(x)=0



Also the function is non-decreasing and continuous.



CDF plot:



cdf







Calculating P(X>0.5):



P(X>0.5)=0.5fX(x)dx==30.519(3+2xx2)dx+30dx==19(3x+x213x3)|30.5+0==1752160.81






This probability solution does not agree with the book's solution.



The book says P(X>0.5)=1FX(0.5)=412160.19, so it's my solution "complemented".







My questions:




  • Which final probability solution is correct?

  • Is this any special kind of probability distribution, e.g. Poisson or Chi Square (well, not these)?

  • Can you please point out all minor or major mistakes I have made along the way? (perhaps aside from plots that are not perfect). This is the most important for me.

  • What have I forget to mention or calculate for my solution to make more sense? Especially something theoretical, perhaps e.g. definition for X.



Answer




My questions:




  • Which final probability solution is correct?




Yours answer is right and the book's isn't. They presumably have mistakenly computed P(X<0.5) instead of P(X>0.5).






  • Is this any special kind of probability distribution, e.g. Poisson or Chi Square (well, not these)?




Not a common one, no. I found this page on "U-quadratic distributions" (a term I've never heard before), and this would be the vertical inverse of one of these described in the "related distributions" section, but I don't think this is a particularly common term or distribution.



EDIT: Whoops, this isn't even quite the vertical inverse of a U-quadratic distribution, is it? Such a distribution would apparently not truncate the left side of the parabola as this one does. The better answer to your question is: "No, this distribution is neither named nor important."






  • Can you please point out all minor or major mistakes I have made along the way? (perhaps aside from plots that are not perfect). This is the most important for me.




I'd love to, but I didn't find any!






  • What have I forget to mention or calculate for my solution to make more sense? Especially something theoretical, perhaps e.g. definition for X.




I didn't spot any holes or anything that needs to be improved.



EDIT: One thing you could do to clean this up a bit: when you compute P(X>0.5), you're redoing the integration you already did in your CDF. Instead, you could just use that result that you already obtained:
P(X>0.5)=1P(X0.5)=1FX(0.5)=3(0.5)+(0.5)213(0.5)3=


That said, your answer isn't wrong, it's just a bit inefficient.



No comments:

Post a Comment

real analysis - How to find limhrightarrow0fracsin(ha)h

How to find limh0sin(ha)h without lhopital rule? I know when I use lhopital I easy get $$ \lim_{h\rightarrow 0}...