2
$\begingroup$

My problem is to calculate $E[\max(S-5000, 0)]$ where $$S = \sum_{i=1}^{N} X_i,$$ $N$ is a random variable with geometric distribution, parametrized as follows: $$P(N=n) = \frac{\beta^n}{(1+\beta)^{n+1}}, ~~~~~ n=\{0,1,2, ...\}$$ and ${X_1, X_2...}$ are all independent and exponentially distibuted with density: $$f_X(x) = \lambda e^{-\lambda x}.$$

I came up with an idea that I can find the density function of $S$ which is (according to my knowledge): $$f_S(s) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} f_{X_1 + X_2 + ... +X_n}(s) \cdot P(N=n).$$

However, I encountered a problem - $N$ may have values $\{0,1,2,...\}$ (natural numbers WITH zero) but I can't calculate the density of the sum of zero random variables (the number of random variables to be sumed is zero when $n=0$).

Is it possible to calculate such density? It is there any other way to calculate $E[\max(S-5000, 0)]$?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wald's_equation Note that your question about $N=0$ is basically answered by the convention for the empty sum: when $N=0$ you have $S=0$. Wald's equation is consistent with this convention. $\endgroup$ – Ian Jun 2 '16 at 17:53
  • $\begingroup$ Though Wald's equation itself won't actually help you with the maximum part of the problem, hmm... $\endgroup$ – Ian Jun 2 '16 at 18:14
  • $\begingroup$ But if I consider that $f_S(s) = 0$ for $n=0$ and calculate the rest of the series and after that I calculate the integral $$\int_{0}^{\infty}f_S(s)ds$$ it turns out that it doesn't equal 1... $\endgroup$ – Jerry Jun 2 '16 at 18:15
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, I managed to write $1-\beta$ instead of $1+\beta$. My apologies. $\endgroup$ – Math1000 Jun 2 '16 at 20:15
1
$\begingroup$

First note that the sum of $n$ i.i.d. exponential random variables has an Erlang distribution, that is, for any $n\geqslant1$, the sum $\sum_{i=1}^n X_i$ has probability density

$$\frac{(\lambda t)^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}\lambda e^{-\lambda t}\mathsf 1_{(0,\infty)}(t). $$ (How sum of exponential variables is a gamma variable) It follows then that the distribution of $S$ is given by $\nu_S = \nu_S^d + \nu_S^c$, where for each Borel set $B$, $$\nu_S^d(B) =\mu(B\cap\{0\})\mathbb P(N=0) $$ where $\mu$ is counting measure, and $$\nu_S^c(B)=\int_B f_S\ \mathsf d\lambda$$ where $\lambda$ is Lebesgue measure. We compute $$\nu_S^d(B) =\mu(B\cap\{0\})(1+\beta)^{-1} $$ and \begin{align} f_S(t) &= \sum_{n=0}^\infty f_{S\mid N=n}(t)\mathbb P(N=n)\\ &= \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{(\lambda t)^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}\lambda e^{-\lambda t}\frac{\beta^n}{(1+\beta)^{n+1}}\\ &= \frac{\beta \lambda e^{-\lambda t}}{(1+\beta)^2}\sum_{n=0}^\infty\frac{\left(\frac{\beta\lambda t}{1+\beta}\right)^n}{n!}\\ &=\frac{\beta\lambda}{(1+\beta)^2} \exp\left(-\frac{\lambda t}{1+\beta}\right)\mathsf 1_{(0,\infty)}(t). \end{align} It follows that \begin{align} \mathbb E[(S-5000)^+] &= \int_{5000}^\infty (t-5000)\frac{\beta\lambda}{(1+\beta)^2} e^{-\frac{\lambda t}{1+\beta}}\ \mathsf dt\\ &= \frac\beta\lambda \exp\left(-\frac{5000\beta\lambda}{1+\beta}\right). \end{align}

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ That is exactly the form of $f_S(t)$ that I managed to derive on my own. But notice that it is not a valid probability density function, since $$\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\beta\lambda}{(1+\beta)^2} \exp\left(-\frac{\lambda t}{1+\beta}\right) dt = \\ \frac{\beta}{1+\beta} \int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\lambda}{1+\beta} \exp\left(-\frac{\lambda t}{1+\beta}\right) dt = \\ = \frac{\beta}{1+\beta} $$ I used the fact that $f(t) = \frac{\lambda}{1+\beta} \exp\left(-\frac{\lambda t}{1+\beta}\right)$ is the density of exponential distribution, so it's integral from $0$ to $\infty$ equals 1. $\endgroup$ – Jerry Jun 2 '16 at 21:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Jerry You are forgetting to add the probability that $S=0$. $\endgroup$ – Math1000 Jun 3 '16 at 11:28

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.