1
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $\{N_1(t)\,t \ge 0\}$ and $\{N_1(t)\,t \ge 0\}$ are two independent Poisson processes with rates of $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ respectively, then prove the sum process where $N(t) = N_1(t)+N_2(t)$ for all $t \ge 0$ is a Poisson process with rate of $\lambda_1+\lambda_2$.

The proof on my textbook includes the step of proving that $N(t)$ has independent increments, of which the reason is that $N_1(t)$ and $N_2(t)$ are independent and both possess stationary and independent increments properties. But I couldn't understand such an obvious step.

Let $I_1$ and $I_2$ be two disjoint intervals, then our goal is to show that $N_1(I_1)+N_2(I_1)$ and $N_1(I_1)+N_2(I_1)$ are independent. Obviously, we have:

  • $N_1(I_1)$, $N_1(I_2)$, $N_2(I_1)$, $N_2(I_1)$ are independent of each other;
  • $(N_1(I_1),N_1(I_2))$ and $(N_2(I_1),N_2(I_2))$ are independent random vectors since $\{N_1(t)\,t \ge 0\}$ and $\{N_1(t)\,t \ge 0\}$ are two independent processes.

Next, I only need to prove that $(N_1(I_1),N_2(I_1))$ and $(N_1(I_2),N_2(I_2))$ are two independent vectors to achieve our goal. But I was stuck here. It seems that I'm complicating the question. Does someone have a better idea? Please help me out here.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Take a look at youtube.com/watch?v=0J5acxn3y5c $\endgroup$ – John Douma Mar 28 '18 at 14:03
  • $\begingroup$ @JohnDouma Main problem of OP is independence of increments of summation of processes. Not so much the fact that the sum of independent Poissons is again Poisson. $\endgroup$ – drhab Mar 28 '18 at 14:34
  • $\begingroup$ @drhab Yeah, I’ve updated the title. $\endgroup$ – Mark Mar 28 '18 at 14:42
3
$\begingroup$

$$\begin{aligned} & P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{1}\right)+N_{2}\left(I_{1}\right)=r\wedge N_{1}\left(I_{2}\right)+N_{2}\left(I_{2}\right)=s\right)\\ & =\sum_{r_{1}+r_{2}=r}\sum_{s_{1}+s_{2}=s}P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{1}\right)=r_{1}\wedge N_{2}\left(I_{1}\right)=r_{2}\wedge N_{1}\left(I_{2}\right)=s_{1}\wedge N_{2}\left(I_{2}\right)=s_{2}\right)\\ & =\sum_{r_{1}+r_{2}=r}\sum_{s_{1}+s_{2}=s}P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{1}\right)=r_{1}\right)P\left(N_{2}\left(I_{1}\right)=r_{2}\right)P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{2}\right)=s_{1}\right)P\left(N_{2}\left(I_{2}\right)=s_{2}\right)\\ & =\sum_{r_{1}+r_{2}=r}\left[P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{1}\right)=r_{1}\right)P\left(N_{2}\left(I_{1}\right)=r_{2}\right)\sum_{s_{1}+s_{2}=s}P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{2}\right)=s_{1}\right)P\left(N_{2}\left(I_{2}\right)=s_{2}\right)\right]\\ & =\left[\sum_{s_{1}+s_{2}=s}P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{2}\right)=s_{1}\right)P\left(N_{2}\left(I_{2}\right)=s_{2}\right)\right]\times\left[\sum_{r_{1}+r_{2}=r}P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{1}\right)=r_{1}\right)P\left(N_{2}\left(I_{1}\right)=r_{2}\right)\right]\\ & =P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{2}\right)+N_{2}\left(I_{2}\right)=s\right)\times P\left(N_{1}\left(I_{1}\right)+N_{2}\left(I_{1}\right)=r\right) \end{aligned} $$ showing that $N_{1}\left(I_{1}\right)+N_{2}\left(I_{1}\right)$ and $N_{1}\left(I_{2}\right)+N_{2}\left(I_{2}\right)$ are independent.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I guess it’s not as obvious as in the textbook? $\endgroup$ – Mark Mar 28 '18 at 14:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Essential is that the $N_i(I_j)$ are $4$ independent random variables. From that then you can immediately conclude that $N_1(I_1)+N_2(I_1)$ and $N_1(I_2)+N_2(I_2)$ are also independent. In my answer that conclusion is justified. $\endgroup$ – drhab Mar 28 '18 at 14:55
  • $\begingroup$ Can we extend that to any $n$ independent processes? $\endgroup$ – Mark Mar 28 '18 at 14:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sure, I don't see why not. You can use induction on $n$ for a proof. $\endgroup$ – drhab Mar 28 '18 at 14:58
  • $\begingroup$ I was still wondering if $(N_1(I_1),N_2(I_1))$ and $(N_1(I_2),N_2(I_2))$ are two independent vectors. Could you shed more light on it? :) $\endgroup$ – Mark Mar 30 '18 at 1:25

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.