Given that $X_1,\dots, X_n$ are independent random variables. Suppose $M = \min(X_1, X_2,\dots, X_n)$ and $X_i$ are exponential random variables with parameter $λ_i$, compute $E[M X_j | M = X_i]$ where $i \ne j$.

I have got the pdf and pmf of $M$. But I still don't know how to solve. Anyone can help?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Assuming that $M=X_i$, $M\not =X_j$. ($i\not = j$) Let alone that $E[M=X_j|...]$ is an undefined notation. $\endgroup$ – zoli Apr 18 '15 at 12:29
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry.. That is a typo. I've revised it. $\endgroup$ – Euclid Ye Apr 18 '15 at 12:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ > OP writes: "I have got the pdf and pmf of M". /// What is the "pdf AND pmf of M"?? $\endgroup$ – wolfies Apr 18 '15 at 17:46
  • $\begingroup$ What is the intent of the conditioning that the sample minimum $M = X_i$, and what do you intend it to mean? Because as it stands, I suspect this is a question that some well-meaning person is going to go to a lot of trouble to solve, only to find out that you intended something quite different. $\endgroup$ – wolfies Apr 18 '15 at 18:06

We have $$\mathbb{E}\left[MX_j\mid M=X_i\right] =\frac{\mathbb{E}\left[MX_j:M=X_i\right]}{\mathbb{P}\left[M=X_i\right]}$$ since $\mathbb{P}\left[M=X_i\right]>0$.

We note $\Lambda=\prod_{k\neq i}\lambda_k$, $\lambda=\sum_{1\leq k\leq n}\lambda_k$ and $\alpha=\sum_{k\neq i,j}\lambda_k$ ; we have $$\mathbb{E}\left[MX_j:M=X_i\right] =\mathbb{E}\left[X_iX_j\mathfrak{1}_{M=X_i}\right] =\mathbb{E}\left[\mathbb{E}\left[X_iX_j\mathfrak{1}_{M=X_i}\mid X_i\right]\right]$$ with $$\mathbb{E}\left[X_iX_j\mathfrak{1}_{M=X_i}\mid X_i\right] =\Lambda\int_{\left(\mathbb{R}_+\right)^{n-1}}X_ix_j \mathfrak{1}_{M=X_i} e^{-\lambda_{1}x_1}\ldots e^{-\lambda_{i-1}x_{i-1}}e^{-\lambda_{i+1}x_{i+1}}\ldots e^{-\lambda_{n}x_n}\mathrm{d}x_{1}\ldots \mathrm{d}x_{i-1}\mathrm{d}x_{i+1}\ldots \mathrm{d}x_{n}$$ $$=\lambda_jX_i e^{-\alpha X_i}\int_{X_i\leq x_j}x_je^{-\lambda_j x_j}{d}x_{j} =\lambda_jX_i e^{-\alpha X_i}\frac{e^{-\lambda_j X_i}}{\lambda_j^2}\left(1+\lambda_jX_i\right) =\frac{1}{\lambda_j}X_i\left(1+\lambda_jX_i\right)e^{-\left(\alpha+\lambda_j\right) X_i}$$

so that

$$\mathbb{E}\left[MX_j:M=X_i\right] =\frac{1}{\lambda_j}\mathbb{E}\left[X_i\left(1+\lambda_jX_i\right)e^{-\left(\alpha+\lambda_j\right) X_i}\right] =\frac{1}{\lambda_j}\int_{x_i\geq0}x_i\left(1+\lambda_jx_i\right)e^{-\left(\alpha+\lambda_j\right) x_i}\lambda_i e^{-\lambda_i x_i}\mathrm{d}x_i$$ $$=\frac{\lambda_i}{\lambda_j}\int_{x_i\geq0}x_i\left(1+\lambda_jx_i\right)e^{-\lambda x_i} \mathrm{d}x_i =\frac{\lambda_i}{\lambda_j}\frac{\lambda+2\lambda_j}{\lambda^3}.$$

Next, we work on the term $\mathbb{P}\left[M=X_i\right]$. We have :

$$\mathbb{P}\left[M=X_i\right] =\mathbb{P}\left[X_i\leq X_1,\ldots X_i\leq X_n\right] = \mathbb{E}\left[\mathbb{P}\left[X_i\leq X_1,\ldots X_i\leq X_n\mid X_1,\ldots,X_{i-1},X_{i+1},\ldots,X_n\right]\right]$$ $$=\mathbb{E}\left[\mathbb{P}\left[X_i\leq\min_{\substack{1\leq k\leq n\\k\neq i}}X_k\right]\right] =1-\mathbb{E}\left[e^{-\lambda_i\min_{k\neq i}X_k}\right]$$

where we used the fact that $X_i$ is independant of $\sigma\left(X_k;k\neq i\right)$. Then, we compute

$$\mathbb{E}\left[e^{-\lambda_i\min_{k\neq i}X_k}\right] =\int_{\left(\mathbb{R_+}\right)^{n-1}}e^{-\lambda_i\min_{k\neq i}x_k}\Lambda e^{-\lambda_1 x_1}\ldots e^{-\lambda_{i-1}x_{i-1}}e^{-\lambda_{i+1}x_{i+1}}\ldots e^{-\lambda_1 x_1} \mathrm{d}x_{1}\ldots \mathrm{d}x_{i-1}\mathrm{d}x_{i+1}\ldots \mathrm{d}x_{n}$$

$$=\sum_{\substack{\ell=1\\\ell\neq i}}^{n}\Lambda\int_{\left(\mathbb{R_+}\right)^{n-1}}e^{-\lambda_ix_{\ell}} e^{-\lambda_1 x_1}\ldots e^{-\lambda_{i-1}x_{i-1}}e^{-\lambda_{i+1}x_{i+1}}\ldots e^{-\lambda_1 x_1} \mathfrak{1}_{x_{\ell}\leq x_1,\ldots x_n}\mathrm{d}x_{1}\ldots \mathrm{d}x_{i-1}\mathrm{d}x_{i+1}\ldots \mathrm{d}x_{n}$$

$$=\sum_{\substack{\ell=1\\\ell\neq i}}^{n}\lambda_{\ell}\int_{x_{\ell}\geq0}e^{-\left(\lambda_1+\ldots+\lambda_n\right)x_{\ell}}\mathrm{d}x_{\ell} =\frac{1}{\lambda}\sum_{\substack{\ell=1\\\ell\neq i}}^{n}\lambda_{\ell} =\frac{\lambda-\lambda_{i}}{\lambda} =1-\frac{\lambda_{i}}{\lambda}.$$

Finally, we obtain

$$\mathbb{E}\left[MX_j\mid M=X_i\right] =\frac{\lambda_i}{\lambda_j}\frac{\lambda+2\lambda_j}{\lambda^3}\frac{\lambda}{\lambda_i} =\frac{\lambda+2\lambda_j}{\lambda_j\lambda^2}.$$

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ "Now by independ(e)nce, we have $\mathbb{E}\left[MX_j:M=X_i\right] =\mathbb{E}\left[X_iX_j\right]$" Hmmm... Why exactly? $\endgroup$ – Did Apr 18 '15 at 17:30
  • $\begingroup$ The independance was used here to write $\mathbb{E}\left[X_iX_j\right] =\mathbb{E}\left[X_i\right]\mathbb{E}\left[X_j\right]$. EDIT: but there is a problem indeed : I wrote that $MX_j\mathfrak{1}_{M=X_i} =X_iX_j$, and it is not true... $\endgroup$ – Nicolas Apr 18 '15 at 17:34
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, $MX_j1_{M=X_i}=X_iX_j1_{M=X_i}$, not $X_iX_j$. $\endgroup$ – Did Apr 18 '15 at 17:37
  • $\begingroup$ Agree! I am working on the numerator :-) $\endgroup$ – Nicolas Apr 18 '15 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ Edited. Hope there is no problem in the calculus. I think all is ok now... $\endgroup$ – Nicolas Apr 18 '15 at 18:22

This is not an answer!

This is just a long comment to Nicolas' answer.

I doubt that the following is true

$$\mathbb{P}\left[M=X_i\right] =\mathbb{P}\left[X_i\leq X_1,\ldots X_i\leq X_n\right]=$$

$$\frac{\lambda_1+\ldots+\lambda_{i-1}+\lambda_{i+1}+\ldots+\lambda_n}{\lambda_1+\ldots+\lambda_n}.$$ The expression above says that if $\lambda_i=0$ then $$\mathbb{P}\left[M=X_i\right]=1.$$ In words: the smaller $\lambda_i$, the higher the probability is that $X_i$ is the minimum.

If we consider,$X_{\lambda}$, an exponentially distributed random variable with parameter $\lambda$ then

$$\lim_{\lambda \rightarrow 0}\mathbb P(X_{\lambda}>t)=\lim_{\lambda \rightarrow 0}e^{-\lambda t}=1,$$ and this is true independendently of the size of $t$. To me, this tells that the smaller the $\lambda$ the smaller the probability is that $X_{\lambda}$ is small. This contradicts intuitively to the result quoted above.

So I did my own calculation for $\mathbb{P}\left[M=X_i\right].$

Here it is: $$\mathbb P(X_i\le X_1,X_i\le X_2, \cdots X_i\le X_n)=$$ $$=\prod_{k=1}^n \lambda_k\iint \cdots \int_{\{x_i\le x_1,x_i\le x_2, \cdots, x_i\le x_n\}}e^{-\sum_{k=1}^{n}\lambda_kx_k} \ \ dx_1dx_2 \cdots dx_n=$$ $$=\prod_{k=1}^n \lambda_k\int_0^{\infty}\left[\int_{x_i}^{\infty}\int_{x_i}^{\infty}\cdots \int_{x_i}^{\infty}e^{-\sum_{k=1}^{n}\lambda_kx_k}dx_1dx_2\cdots dx_{i-1}dx_{i+1}\cdots dx_{n}\right]dx_i=$$ $$=\prod_{k=2}^n\lambda_k\int_0^{\infty}e^{-\lambda_1x_i}\left[\int_{x_i}^{\infty}\int_{x_i}^{\infty}\cdots \int_{x_i}^{\infty}e^{-\sum_{k=2}^{n}\lambda_kx_k}dx_2\cdots dx_{i-1}dx_{i+1}\cdots dx_{n}\right]dx_i=$$ $$=\lambda_i\int_0^{\infty}e^{-x_i\sum_{k=1}^n\lambda_k}dx_i=\frac{\lambda_i}{\sum_{k=1}^n\lambda_k}.$$

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ I agree with your answer : I wrote the complementary probability in my former answer that explains that I got $1-$ "your result". $\endgroup$ – Nicolas Apr 19 '15 at 9:56

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.