Consider the following first order linear difference equation for $y$:

$$y_{t+1} = \alpha * y_{t} + \beta * x_{t-n+1} ~~\forall t \ge n$$

For initial conditions, one could assume that $x_{i} \in \mathbb{R} ~~\forall t = 1, \ldots n$. (except that they cannot all be zero).

The other constraint is that $$y_{n} = \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} x_{n-i}$$ so that the $n$th value of $y$ in the sequence always sums to the previous $n$ values of $x_{i}$.

For example:

$y_{n} = x_{n} + x_{n-1} \ldots + x_{1}$ and process starts at time t = n because y needs to have a value for it to start.

So, for example, if $n=30$, then $y_{30}$ is the first observation for $y$ so the process starts at time t = n = 30. Note that the $x_{t}$ process starts at time $t = 1$ so we need the $x_{i} \forall i= 1,\ldots 30$ before the y process can start.

Similarly, once t is greater than or equal to n, we have

$y_{n+1} = x_{n+1} + x_{n} + \ldots x_{2}$

$y_{n+2} = x_{n+2} + x_{n+1} + \ldots x_{3}$


Given the assumptions and the constraint, is there a relation between $\lambda$ and $\beta$ which meets the requirements?

I have no background in difference equations (I do have the book by Mann which talks about such a difference equation but not with that constraint) so if someone knows where an explanation for this type of thing is explained, it would be appreciated.

Essentially, once $t = n$, then, starting from there, the sum constraint needs to hold and the difference equation has to hold also. I'm pretty sure that the answer is that $\beta = -\alpha$ so that the equation reduces to

$$ y_{t+1} = \alpha * (y_{t} - x_{t-n+1}) ~~\forall t \ge n$$

and then, in order to satisfy the sum constraint, $\alpha = (\frac{1}{2})^{1/n}$. But how to prove this is a different story.

  • $\begingroup$ @ GCab. Is there a way to delete this question because you've made me realize that I'm not explaining it correctly. Thanks for any help with that and I apologize for wasting your time. But it wasn't totally wasted because you made me realize some things. So thank you very much. $\endgroup$ – mark leeds Jun 19 '16 at 1:38

If I understood correctly, the terms in your post can be summarized as $$ \left\{ \matrix{ y_{\,t} - y_{\,t - 1} = \left( {1 - \lambda } \right)\left( {x_{\,t - 1} - y_{\,t - 1} } \right)\quad \left| {\;n \le \forall t} \right. \hfill \cr y_{\,t} = \sum\limits_{1\, \le \,k\, \le \,t} {x_{\,k} } \hfill \cr} \right. $$ Now, the starting point for $t$ is not clear. Supposing it is $0$ then: $$ \left\{ \matrix{ y_{\,0} = 0 \hfill \cr y_{\,1} = x_{\,1} \hfill \cr \quad \vdots \hfill \cr y_{\,n - 1} = \sum\limits_{1\, \le \,k\, \le \,n - 1} {x_{\,k} } \hfill \cr \left\{ \matrix{ y_n - y_{\,n - 1} = \left( {1 - \lambda } \right)\left( {x_{\,n - 1} - y_{\,n - 1} } \right) \hfill \cr y_{\,n} = \sum\limits_{1\, \le \,k\, \le \,n} {x_{\,k} } \hfill \cr} \right. \hfill \cr \left\{ \matrix{ y_{\,t} - y_{\,t - 1} = \left( {1 - \lambda } \right)\left( {x_{\,t - 1} - y_{\,t - 1} } \right)\quad \hfill \cr y_{\,t} = \sum\limits_{1\, \le \,k\, \le \,t} {x_{\,k} } \hfill \cr} \right.\left| {\;n < t} \right. \hfill \cr} \right. $$ that is

$$ \left\{ \matrix{ y_{\,0} = 0 \hfill \cr y_{\,1} = x_{\,1} \hfill \cr \quad \vdots \hfill \cr y_{\,n - 1} = \sum\limits_{1\, \le \,k\, \le \,n - 1} {x_{\,k} } \hfill \cr \left\{ \matrix{ y_n - y_{\,n - 1} = x_{\,n} = \left( {1 - \lambda } \right)\left( {x_{\,n - 1} - y_{\,n - 1} } \right) = - \left( {1 - \lambda } \right)\left( {\sum\limits_{1\, \le \,k\, \le \,n - 2} {x_{\,k} } } \right) \hfill \cr y_{\,n} = \sum\limits_{1\, \le \,k\, \le \,n} {x_{\,k} } \hfill \cr} \right. \hfill \cr \left\{ \matrix{ x_{\,t} = - \left( {1 - \lambda } \right)\left( {\sum\limits_{1\, \le \,k\, \le \,t - 2} {x_{\,k} } } \right) \hfill \cr y_t - y_{\,t - 1} = - \left( {1 - \lambda } \right)y_{\,t - 2} \hfill \cr} \right.\quad \left| {\;n < t} \right. \hfill \cr} \right. $$ At this point, if $n=2$, we shall put $x_{\,2} = 0,\;y_2 = y_1 = x_{\,1} $, is that compatible with your problem ? In any case for $3 \le n$ we get separated equations for $x$ and $y$, and I do not see any bound related with $\lambda$: so probably I did not catch some point about your problem.

  • $\begingroup$ Hi Gab: The $y_{n}$ value is the first value and it is, by definition the sum of the first n $X_i$ values. The process starts there at time t = n. I am going to edit the question though slightly because I think I can write it in a different way that may make it clearer. Thanks for your efforts and I'm sorry for my lack of clarity. $\endgroup$ – mark leeds Jun 18 '16 at 23:22
  • $\begingroup$ Unfortunately your edit made the problem even less clear to me. I mean, apart from $n$, which use is just to give an initial value to $y$, is all the problem reducing to plug the summation into the first equation ? thereby you get an equation in $x$, so ... ? $\endgroup$ – G Cab Jun 19 '16 at 0:30
  • $\begingroup$ I'm sorry @G Cab for not being clear. Basically, forget about the sum constraint for a moment. Then, that is just a first order linear difference in equation for y. But, with the sum constraint, it means that the sum of every n $x_{t}$'s is equal to the value of $y_n$. So, I think the approach is to figure out what $\beta$ has to be for both the sum constraint to hold and the difference equation to hold also. $\endgroup$ – mark leeds Jun 19 '16 at 1:23
  • $\begingroup$ @G Cab. I added some stuff on the bottom of the question that might help clarify things. Thanks. $\endgroup$ – mark leeds Jun 19 '16 at 1:32
  • $\begingroup$ Do you know if there is a way for me to delete this question because I realize now that I'm still confused and this is not the way to express the question. thanks for any help and I do apologize for wasting your time. you actually helped me realize that I was thinking about it incorrectly and need to re-think about it. $\endgroup$ – mark leeds Jun 20 '16 at 3:37

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.