Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

This is an exercise of the Central Limit Theorem:

Let $Y^{\lambda}$ be a Poisson random variable with parameter $\lambda>0$. Prove that $\frac{Y^{\lambda}-\lambda}{\sqrt{\lambda}}\to Z\sim N(0,1)$ in distribution as $\lambda\to\infty$.

I've done that $$ Z_n\to Z\sim N(0,1) $$ in distribution using the CLT, where $Z_n=(Y^n-n)/\sqrt{n}$. Some naive attempt to go is considering $$ Y^{n}\leq Y^{\lambda}\leq Y^{n+1}\tag{*} $$ where $n\leq\lambda\leq n+1$ and somehow use the squeeze theorem. But both (*) and the squeeze theorem in convergence in distribution are NOT justified. How can I go on? Or do I need an alternative direction?

share|cite|improve this question
Since only a narrow special case of the CLT would be needed, I wouldn't be surprised if it can be done directly without knowing the CLT is true in general. – Michael Hardy Nov 27 '12 at 2:12
Your proposition labeled $(*)$ is of course not true if it's an inequality on the values of the random variables. But if $\le$ means "is stochastically smaller than" then it's true. However, if you can show $\Pr(Y^\lambda=y)$ is between the corresponding probabilities with $n$ and $n+1$ in place of $\lambda$, then maybe it will work. – Michael Hardy Nov 27 '12 at 2:14
Proposition $(\ast)$ can be made fully rigorous using the natural coupling of a whole family of Poisson random variables. – Did Nov 28 '12 at 21:08
up vote 3 down vote accepted

The squeeze theorem in convergence in distribution can be made fully rigorous in the situation you describe--but the shortest proof here might be through characteristic functions.

Recall that if $Y^\lambda$ is Poisson with parameter $\lambda$, $\varphi_\lambda(t)=\mathbb E(\mathrm e^{\mathrm itY^\lambda})$ is simply $\varphi_\lambda(t)=\mathrm e^{-\lambda(1-\mathrm e^{\mathrm it})}$. Thus $\mathbb E(\mathrm e^{\mathrm itZ^\lambda})=\mathrm e^{-\mathrm it\sqrt{\lambda}}\varphi_\lambda(t/\sqrt{\lambda})=\mathrm e^{-g_\lambda(t)}$ with $$ g_\lambda(t)=\mathrm it\sqrt{\lambda}+\lambda-\lambda\mathrm e^{\mathrm it/\sqrt{\lambda}}. $$ Expanding the exponential up to second order yields $$ g_\lambda(t)=\mathrm it\sqrt{\lambda}+\lambda-\lambda\cdot(1+\mathrm it/\sqrt{\lambda}-t^2/2\lambda)+o(1)\to\tfrac12t^2. $$ Thus, for every $t$, $\mathbb E(\mathrm e^{\mathrm itZ^\lambda})\to\mathrm e^{-t^2/2}=\mathbb E(\mathrm e^{\mathrm itZ})$ where $Z$ is standard normal, hence $Z^\lambda\to Z$ in distribution.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks! Are you using Levy's Continuity Theorem to conclude that convergence of characteristic function here implies convergence in distribution? – Jack Nov 28 '12 at 22:04
Yes, since the pointwise limit itself is a characteristic function. – Did Nov 29 '12 at 6:02
How can we use taylor expansion with complex number? My main concern is how do we get $o(1)$ – strikal Nov 25 '14 at 22:39
@strikal "How can we use taylor expansion with complex number?" Sorry, I do not follow. What is the problem with Taylor expansions for complex valued functions? – Did Nov 25 '14 at 22:41
I didn't use Taylor expansions for complex values, therefore I don't get why there is $o(1)$ in the last line – strikal Nov 25 '14 at 22:44

Your Answer


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.