Assume $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_n$ are $n$ positive numbers such that $$\theta_1+\dots+\theta_n=1$$ Define $y_{ij}=\frac{\theta_i}{\theta_j}$ for all $i,j \in \{1,\dots,n\}$. Is there a way to transform the above equation in terms of $y_{ij}$.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The fact that the left-hand side is of degree $1$ (in the $\theta$) while both the right-hand side and $y_{ij}$ are of degree $0$ might make this very difficult. $\endgroup$ – Arthur Sep 18 '15 at 9:15
  • $\begingroup$ May I ask why this was downvoted? $\endgroup$ – dineshdileep Sep 22 '15 at 4:00

Yes. Use $\theta_i = \theta_j y_{ij}$ to write $\theta_1+\theta_2\dots+\theta_n=1$ as $\theta_j y_{1j}+\theta_j y_{2j}+\dots+ \theta_j y_{nj}= 1$

Collect $\theta_j$ s.t. $\theta_j(y_{1j}+y_{2j}+\dots+y_{nj})= 1$ so $\theta_j = \displaystyle \frac{1}{y_{1j}+y_{2j}+\dots+y_{nj}}=\frac{1}{\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{n}y_{kj}}$

$\theta_1+\theta_2\dots+\theta_n=1 = \displaystyle \frac{1}{\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{n}y_{k1}} + \frac{1}{\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{n}y_{k2}} + \dots+\frac{1}{\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{n}y_{kn}} = \displaystyle \sum_{j=1}^{n}\frac{1}{\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{n}y_{kj}}$

Edit 2

More simply:

Given $$\theta_1 + \theta_2 + \dots+ \theta_‌​n= 1$$ $$\theta_j > 0$$ $$y_{ij} = \frac{\theta_i}{\theta_j}$$ then $$ \theta_j = \displaystyle \frac{\theta_j}{\theta_1 + \theta_2 + \dots+ \theta_‌​n} = \displaystyle \frac{1}{\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_j}+\frac{\theta_2}{\theta_j}+\dots+\frac{\theta_‌​‌​n}{\theta_j}} = \displaystyle \frac{1}{y_{1j}+y_{2j}+\dots+y_{nj}}$$ Or $$ y_{1j}+y_{2j}+\dots+y_{nj} = \displaystyle \frac{1}{\theta_j}$$ So each $\theta_j$ is reduced to a $y_{kj}$ expression.

So any expression written in $\theta_j$ variables can be transformed into an expression in $y_{kj}$ variables.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This condition ($\sum\limits_j(1/\sum\limits_k y_{kj}) =1$) is satisfied for ARBITRARY non-zero $\theta_i$: $\sum\limits_j(1/\sum\limits_k y_{kj}) = \sum\limits_j (\sum\limits_k \frac{\theta_k}{\theta_j})^{-1} = \sum\limits_j (\frac{\sum\limits_k \theta_k}{\theta_j})^{-1} = \sum\limits_j \frac{\theta_j}{\sum\limits_k \theta_k} = \frac{\sum\limits_j \theta_j}{\sum\limits_k \theta_k} = 1$ $\endgroup$ – Litho Sep 24 '15 at 7:27
  • $\begingroup$ Yes I agree. That's interesting. The key relationship is: $$\theta_j = \displaystyle \frac{1}{y_{1j}+y_{2j}+\dots+y_{nj}} = \displaystyle \frac{1}{\frac{\theta_1}{\theta_j}+\frac{\theta_2}{\theta_j}+\dots+\frac{\theta_‌​n}{\theta_j}}=\displaystyle \frac{\theta_j}{\theta_1 + \theta_2 + \dots+ \theta_‌​n} = \theta_j$$ This only holds for $\theta_1+\theta_2\dots+\theta_n=1$ $\endgroup$ – arthur Sep 24 '15 at 8:43
  • $\begingroup$ @arthur Isn't the additional conditions , $y_{ij}\geq 0 $ and $y_{ij}y_{ji}=1$ also needed? $\endgroup$ – dineshdileep Sep 25 '15 at 7:30
  • $\begingroup$ @dineshdileep Yes. $\theta_j \gt 0$ (positive numbers) so $y_{ij} \gt 0$. $y_{ij}y_{ji}=1$ follows from the definition of $y_{ij} $ $\endgroup$ – arthur Sep 25 '15 at 8:16

No. If you multiply all $\theta_i$ by the same positive number $c\neq 1$, then all $y_{ij}$ stay the same, but $\theta_1+\dots+\theta_n$ changes.

In more details: assume that you have a condition or a set of conditions on $y_{ij}=\frac{\theta_i}{\theta_j}$ which is satisfied if and only if $\theta_1+\dots+\theta_n=1$. Let $\overline{\theta}_i$ be positive numbers such that $\overline{\theta}_1+\dots+\overline{\theta}_n=1$. Then, by assumption, the numbers $\overline{y}_{ij}=\frac{\overline{\theta}_i}{\overline{\theta}_j}$ satisfy that condition(s). Now choose a positive number $c\neq 1$ and set $\theta'_i = c\overline{\theta}_i$. Then $y'_{ij} = \frac{\theta'_i}{\theta'_j} = \overline{y}_{ij}$, so the numbers $y'_{ij}$ satisfy the condition(s) as well, but $\theta'_1+\dots+\theta'_n = c(\overline{\theta}_1+\dots+\overline{\theta}_n) = c\neq 1$.

  • $\begingroup$ but $\sum_{i=1}^{n}\theta_i'\neq 1$?? $\endgroup$ – dineshdileep Sep 24 '15 at 6:40
  • $\begingroup$ @dineshdileep Yes? That's the whole point: you cannot find condition(s) on $y_{ij}$ that would be satisfied ONLY if $\sum\theta_i = 1$. $\endgroup$ – Litho Sep 24 '15 at 7:19
  • $\begingroup$ No, I meant why should $\sum_{i=1}^{n}\theta_i'\,=\,1$?. You didn't pick them like that. So there is nothing contradicting. You just defined $\theta_i'=c\bar{\theta_i}$. That doesn't imply they should sum to 1. $\endgroup$ – dineshdileep Sep 25 '15 at 4:41
  • $\begingroup$ @dineshdileep Yes, I intentionally defined them in such a way that $\sum\theta'_i\neq 1$. Maybe I misunderstand your original question: when you write "Is there a way to transform the above equation in terms of $y_{ij}$", what equation do you mean? That $\sum\theta_i = 1$? $\endgroup$ – Litho Sep 25 '15 at 7:17
  • $\begingroup$ yes. Like the other answer tries to do. $\endgroup$ – dineshdileep Sep 25 '15 at 7:27

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.