Let $X$ and $Y$ be two random variables (say real numbers, or vectors in some vector space). It seems to me that the following is true:

E [ X | E [ X | Y ] ] = E [ X | Y]

Note that E [ X | Y ] is a random variable in it's own right. Also note that equality here is point-wise, for every point in the sample space of the joint distribution on on $(X,Y)$. My question, assuming I'm not missing something and the above is true, is whether this law has a name, or is written down / proved somewhere.

  • $\begingroup$ This is an extremely important result. I failed a course in probability because I couldn't correctly apply it. I think this is called Bayes' rule for expectation something but there is a name $\endgroup$ – Aåkon Jan 26 '15 at 7:02

Let $Z=E[X\ | \ Y]$. Your equation states: $E[X \ | \ Z]=Z$. This follows from the following fact.

Tower Property of Conditional Expectation:

$$E[E[X\ | \ \mathcal{F}]\ | \ \mathcal{G}]=E[X\ | \ \mathcal{G}],\text{ whenever }\mathcal{G}\subset \mathcal{F}.$$

Proof of your equation:

We apply the tower property with $\mathcal{G}=\sigma(Z)$ and $\mathcal{F}=\sigma(Y)$. Note that $\sigma(Z)\subset \sigma(Y)$ follows from the construction of $Z$ as a conditional expectation w.r.t. $Y$.

Plugging in to the tower property, $$ \begin{align*} E[E[X\ | \ \sigma(Y)]\ | \ \sigma(Z)]&=E[X\ | \ \sigma(Z)]\\ \implies E[Z\ | \ Z]&=E[X\ | \ Z]\\ \implies Z&=E[X\ | \ Z]. \end{align*}$$

  • $\begingroup$ What is $\sigma$ here? $\endgroup$ – srd Jan 26 '15 at 9:50
  • $\begingroup$ It's a technical formality that means "the $\sigma$-algebra generated by a random variable". In general, conditional expectation is defined w.r.t. a $\sigma$-algebra, like $\mathcal{F}$ or $\mathcal{G}$. See the formal definition on the wikipedia page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_expectation $\endgroup$ – pre-kidney Jan 26 '15 at 9:53
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, yes of course. That's an elegant proof, thanks! $\endgroup$ – srd Jan 26 '15 at 10:15

Essentially the law of iterated expectation, perhaps more commonly written like $$\operatorname{E_X} [X] = \operatorname{E}_Y [ \operatorname{E}_{X \mid Y} [ X \mid Y]].$$

For a discrete case, the essence of the proof is $$\operatorname{E}_Y [ \operatorname{E}_{X \mid Y} [ X \mid Y]] = \sum_y \sum_x x \cdot \operatorname{P}(X=x \mid Y=y) \cdot \operatorname{P}(Y=y) =\sum_x x \cdot \operatorname{P}(X=x) =\operatorname{E_X} [X].$$

  • $\begingroup$ Can you actually flesh out why the OP's equation is equivalent to the equation you have written down? $\endgroup$ – pre-kidney Jan 26 '15 at 7:15
  • $\begingroup$ Yea, I'm not sure I see the equivalence either... $\endgroup$ – srd Jan 26 '15 at 7:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What's with the subscripts? $\endgroup$ – Stefan Hansen Jan 26 '15 at 7:45
  • $\begingroup$ I have read the question's $E [ X | E [ X | Y ] ]$ as $E_Y [ X | E [ X | Y ] ]$. If you read it as $E_{X|Y} [ X | E [ X | Y ] ]$ then it is trivial. $\endgroup$ – Henry Jan 26 '15 at 8:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ But what's the significance of the subscript, i.e. why not just write $E[Z(Y)]$ as is commonly done? $\endgroup$ – Stefan Hansen Jan 26 '15 at 8:28

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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