Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I keep getting a result I can't interpret.

X is a Geometric RV with distribution ($0<\rho<1$) $$ \pi_k = \rho^k(1- \rho) $$ so directly applying Geometric series the tail bound is $$ B_1 = P(X>\theta) = \sum_{k = \theta+1}^{\infty} \pi_k =\rho^{\theta+1} $$ Obviously this is an exact result. My confusion comes from the result I get using Chernoff bound and MGF of Geometric RV: $$ P(X> \theta) = P(e^{t X} > e^{t \theta})<\frac{\mathbf{E}e^{tX}}{e^{t (\theta+1)}} = \frac{e^{\log (1-\rho) - t(\theta+1)}}{1-e^t \rho} \ = h(t) $$
Optimizing this for $t$, the optimal value is ($b=\theta+1, \ c= \rho$) $$ t^{\ast} = \log \frac{b}{c(b+1)} $$ Plugging this result into the inequality above, I get Chernoff bound: $$ B_2 = P(X> \theta) < (\theta+2)(1-\rho)\rho^{\theta+1}\bigg(\frac{b+1}{b}\bigg)^b \approx e (\theta+2)(1-\rho)\rho^{\theta+1} $$ Comparing $B_2$ to $B_1$it turns out that $B_2 < B_1$ for $$ \rho>1-\frac{1}{e(\theta+2)} $$ That is, asymptotically in $\theta$ they are the the same, since $\rho<1$, but, e.g. if $\theta=10$, then for $\rho > 0.965 \ B_2$ is sharper.

Bar algebraic typos, where is the mistake in my logic?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 2 down vote accepted

If $\rho>{\theta+1\over \theta+2}$, then $t^*<0$ and the equation $P(X> \theta) = P(e^{t^* X} > e^{t^* \theta})$ fails.

share|improve this answer
    
great, thanks, I missed this point –  Alex Sep 22 '12 at 2:01
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.