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.

The formula for the expected value in a binomial distribution is:

$$E(X) = nP(s)$$ where $n$ is the number of trials and $P(s)$ is the probability of success.

The formula for the expected value in a hypergeometric distribution is:

$$E(X) = \frac{ns}{N}$$ where $N$ is the population size, $s$ is the number of successes available in the population and $n$ is the number of trials.

$$E(x) = \left( \frac{s}{N} \right)n $$ $$P(s) = \frac{s}{N}$$ $$\implies E(x) = nP(s)$$

Why do both the distributions have the same expected value? Why doesn't the independence of the events have any effect on expected value?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

For either one, let $X_i=1$ if there is a success on the $i$-th trial, and $X_i=0$ otherwise. Then $$X=X_1+X_2+\cdots+X_n,$$ and therefore by the linearity of expectation $$E(X)=E(X_1)+E(X_2)+\cdots +E(X_n)=nE(X_1). \tag{1}$$ Note that linearity of expectation does not require independence.

In the hypergeometric case, $\Pr(X_i=1)=\frac{s}{N}$, where $s$ is the number of "good" objects among the $N$. This is because any object is just as likely to be the $i$-th one chosen as any other. So $E(X_i)=1\cdot\frac{s}{N}+0\cdot \frac{N-s}{N}=\frac{s}{N}$. It follows that $E(X)=n\frac{s}{N}$.

Essentially the same proof works for the binomial distribution: both expectations follow from Formula $(1)$.

share|improve this answer
    
Sorry, but I am completely lost. Perhaps my question is vague, and an example could help. Consider two scenarios: In scenario A, you are given 13 cards from a deck. In scenario B, you pick one card, check its value and return it to the deck. You repeat this 13 times. Is the expected number of aces same for both cases? –  asdf Jan 5 '13 at 4:12
    
Yes, the expectation is the same. In each case it happens to be $1$. –  André Nicolas Jan 5 '13 at 4:14
    
Ah, that makes sense. Thank you for the help. –  asdf Jan 5 '13 at 4:16
    
@asdf: The method of indicator random variables that was used above is very handy. It often makes it possible to calculate $E(X)$ even when we do not have a neat formula for the probability distribution function of $X$. In the case of the hypergeometric, $p_k=\Pr(X=k)=\binom{s}{k}\binom{N-s}{n-k}/\binom{n}{k}$, and $E(X)=\sum_{k=0}^n kp_k$. By a slightly tricky, but not really hard, manipulation, we can simplify this to $\frac{ns}{N}$. But the method of indicator random variables is quite a bit easier to use in this case. –  André Nicolas Jan 5 '13 at 4:24

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.