Suppose we want to estimate $\pi$. We adopt the following strategy. We generate $n$ iid observations $Z_1,Z_2,...,Z_n$ from the unit disk $D=\{(x,y):x^2+y^2<1\}$ and let $R=\{(x,y):-\dfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\leq x,y\leq \dfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\}$ be a square inside $D$. Let $T$ be the number of times a generated observation falls inside $R$. Let $I=\max\{1\leq i\leq n:Z_i\in R\}$ and define $I=0$ if no observation falls inside $R$.

I am supposed to find an unbiased estimator of $\pi$ using $T$ and $I$. I have made certain observations. It is clear that $T\sim Bin(n,\dfrac{2}{\pi})$. I have also found that $P(I=k)=P(Z_k\in R,Z_j\notin R,j>k)=\dfrac{2}{\pi}(1-\dfrac{2}{\pi})^{n-k}$ if $1\leq k\leq n$ and $P(I=0)=(1-\dfrac{2}{\pi})^n$.

$E(I)$ is turning out to be a pretty nasty thing to compute. How can we use $T$ and $I$ to compute a function $f(T,I)$ with $E(f(T,I))=\pi$?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Define $f(T,I) = \pi$ for all $T, I$. $\endgroup$ – Michael Sep 2 '18 at 5:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ A natural idea is to consider $\hat\pi=2n/T$... except that $P(T=0)\ne0$. Any idea to adapt this? $\endgroup$ – Did Sep 2 '18 at 5:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You need to define more clearly what we're allowed to use. I take it it's implied that we're not allowed to use $\pi$; otherwise @Michael's answer is clearly optimal. Are we allowed to use $n$? If so, you can drop $I$, since $T$ is a sufficient statistic. $\endgroup$ – joriki Sep 2 '18 at 6:16
  • $\begingroup$ You can get properly sized parentheses, braces etc. that adjust to their content by preceding them with \left and \right. $\endgroup$ – joriki Sep 2 '18 at 6:17
  • $\begingroup$ Of course we cannot use $\pi$, we are estimating it! We are allowed to use $n$. But I don't see why $T$ is sufficient. $\endgroup$ – Landon Carter Sep 2 '18 at 6:46

I assume $\{Z_i\}_{i=1}^{n}$ are i.i.d. vectors uniformly distributed over the unit disc in $\mathbb{R}^2$.

If you are seeking something more than my $f(T,I)=\pi$ answer, then I think you are on a wild goose chase. That is because you suggest an answer can be given for any positive integer $n$, which would include $n=1$.

In the case $n=1$ we have $T=I\sim \mbox{Bernoulli}$ with $P[T=1]=p=2/\pi$. If you want a function $f(T)$ such that $E[f(T)]=\pi$, you must find $f(0)$ and $f(1)$, such that $$ (1-2/\pi)f(0) + (2/\pi)f(1) = \pi$$ Thus $$ (\pi-2)f(0) + 2f(1)=\pi^2 $$ Now if both $f(0)$ and $f(1)$ are rational numbers, it would contradict the fact that $\pi$ is transcendental!

So we are forced to make irrational choices for $f(0)$ and/or $f(1)$, in which case why not just choose $f(0)=f(1)=\pi$?

More generally, for any positive integer $n$ we seek a rational-valued function $f(t,i)$ such that $$ \sum_{t=0}^n \sum_{i=0}^n f(t,i)(2/\pi)^t(1-2/\pi)^{n-t} c(t,i)=\pi$$ where $c(t,i)$ is the (integer) number of ways to have $t$ successes with the last success at index $i$. Multiplying this equation by $\pi^n$ gives $$ \sum_{t=0}^n \sum_{i=0}^n f(t,i) 2^t(\pi-2)^{n-t}c(t,i) = \pi^{n+1}$$ Hence the equation $$ \sum_{t=0}^n \sum_{i=0}^n f(t,i)2^t(x-2)^{n-t}c(t,i)=x^{n+1}$$ is a polynomial equation with rational coefficients for which $\pi$ is a root, again contradicting the fact that $\pi$ is transcendental!

On the other hand I observe:

i) With an infinite number of observations $\{Z_i\}_{i=1}^{\infty}$, the expected number of observations until the first one lands in the square is $1/p = \pi/2$.

ii) If we define a larger square $\{(x,y):-1\leq x,y\leq 1\}$ that contains the unit disc, and generate a random vector that is uniformly distributed over that square, then the probability this vector lies in the unit disc is $\pi/4$.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for the answer. I am aware of the last two alternatives you mentioned. This is actually an exam question. $\endgroup$ – Landon Carter Sep 2 '18 at 15:56

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.