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.

This question is based on the question which I asked before:

For which pair of probability density functions, $L=f_1(x)/f_0(x)$ is increasing?

however I didnt get any answer other than the Gaussian density and I have the conjecture that perhaps only the Gaussian density provides increasing likelihood ratio.

We know that $y\in(-\infty,\infty)$ for $f_0(y)$ and $f_1(y)$ and both densities are non zero on the domain where they are defined. $L(x)=\frac{f_1(x)}{f_0(x)}$ should be increasing.

I will be very happy to see that my conjecture is incorrect.

Thank you very much in advance.

EDIT: The densities should not be in a partial function. For example:

$$\frac{1}{\mu^+-\mu^-}e^{\frac{-x}{\mu^+}}\quad for\quad x\geq 0$$ $$\frac{1}{\mu^+-\mu^-}e^{\frac{-x}{\mu^-}}\quad for\quad x< 0$$

for $\mu^+>0$ and $\mu^-<0$ is a valid density with increasing $L(x)$

share|improve this question
    
When you say "Not a partial function", do you mean "the pdf should be differentiable everywhere"? –  Gautam Shenoy Oct 29 '12 at 13:32
    
@GautamShenoy: I need to make some experiments with the densities that I obtain. After the likelihood ratio is inverted it should be inserted into some complicated equations and I search some solutions for them. The example which I gave has two step functions and when I finally invert the likelihood from that partial function mathematica can not solve the complicated equations. However I guess it means differentiability, althouhgh i didnt check. –  Seyhmus Güngören Oct 29 '12 at 14:21

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

Here is a family of solutions:

Fix any density function $f_0$. For any positive increasing function $g$ integrable with respect to the measure $f_0(x)\,\mathrm dx$, consider the density function $$ f_1:x\mapsto f_0(x)g(x)/\mathbb E(g(X_0)), $$ where $X_0$ denotes any random variable with density $f_0$. In other words, $\mathbb E(g(X_0))$ is the integral of $f_0g$ and $f_1$ is the density of any random variable $X_1$ such that, for every bounded measurable test function $\varphi$, $$ \mathbb E(\varphi(X_1))=\frac{\mathbb E(\varphi(X_0)g(X_0))}{\mathbb E(g(X_0))}. $$ Then, the pair $(f_0,f_1)$ is a solution.

Naturally, this is barely more than a reformulation of the question, however it shows the diversity of the solutions $f_1$, for any given density function $f_0$.

Assume for concreteness that $f_0:x\mapsto\mathrm e^{-x^2/2}/\sqrt{2\pi}$ is the standard normal density. Then, as already noted, for every $\mu\geqslant0$, the function $g:x\mapsto\mathrm e^{\mu x}$ is admissible. This yields for $f_1$ the normal density with mean $\mu$ and variance $1$.

But many more examples exist, for example $g$ might be $x\mapsto\mathrm e^{cx\cdot|x|^a}$ for some $c\gt0$ and $|a|\lt1$, or the logistic $x\mapsto1/(1+a\mathrm e^{-cx})$ for some $c\gt0$ and $a\gt0$, or the trigonometric inverse $g=\frac\pi2+\arctan$, or the error function $\Phi$, or some shifted versions of these, or, more generally, any positive power of any cumulative distribution function, or...

share|improve this answer
    
Thank you very much did. Would you mind suggest one couple for my problem. I only want simplest possible such that my non-linear equations will possibly find some solutions in mathematica. The only constraint is that the densities should not be symmetric as in the mean shifted Gaussian case. –  Seyhmus Güngören Oct 29 '12 at 14:32
    
I do not understand what you are asking. Surely you saw that the last paragraph of my answer enumerates a host of examples? (A minor point: of course $f_0$ and $f_1$ cannot both be even, otherwise $f_1/f_0$ would be even as well, which is an odd (if I may say) property for an increasing function.) –  Did Oct 29 '12 at 14:38
    
yes I saw. They are for the function $g$ which is supposed to be multiplied by $f_0$ and then should be normalized to unit area. Did I understand correctly? –  Seyhmus Güngören Oct 29 '12 at 14:45
    
You did. $ $ $ $ –  Did Oct 29 '12 at 15:05
    
I am sorry perhaps I was not clear. In my comment I was asking for a probable simple case such that my equations would not explode in mathematica. If I get one of your example, I am very much afraid that $\mathbb{E}(g(X_0))$ would look like horrible. –  Seyhmus Güngören Oct 29 '12 at 15:55

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.