0
$\begingroup$

This is taken from a stochastic processes text.

Consider $N$ a Poisson process (number of arrivals at time $t$) with rate $\lambda$. Let $T_n$ denote an arrival time ($n$ a natural number). The probability that there are no arrivals in $(t, t+s]$ is $e^{-\lambda s}$, independent of the history of arrivals before $t$. This can be applied to arrival times: $$P(N_{T_{n+s}}-N_{T_n} = 0 | N_u; u \leq T_n) = e^{-\lambda s}$$

The following proposition is provided:

For any $n$ a natural number,

$$P(T_{n+1}-T_n \leq t | T_0, ..., T_n) = 1 - e^{-\lambda t}, t \geq 0$$

My question is about the proposition. It appears that the probability is the complement of no arrivals. So why is the interval $\leq t$? I'm getting confused about the exponential expression appearing at first with number of arrivals whereas it is appearing again as a complement with times of arrivals.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

You are right about the fact that the event $\{T_{n+1}-T_n \leq t\}$ is the complement of the event $\{N_{T_n+t}-N_{T_n}=0\}$.

The way to understand the proposition, therefore, is to consider the probability, $P(N_{T_n+t}-N_{T_n}=0|T_0,T_1,\ldots,T_n)$, which is nothing but $P(N_{T_n+t}-N_{T_n}=0|\{N_u:u\leq T_n\})$. This is because the collection of random variables $T_0,\ldots,T_n$ describes precisely the arrival process $\{N_u:u\leq T_n\}$.

Now, we know from the Strong Markov property that $P(N_{T_n+t}-N_{T_n}=0|\{N_u:u\leq T_n\})=e^{-\lambda t}$, like you've mentioned. The required probability, $P(T_{n+1}-T_n \leq t|\{N_u:u\leq T_n\}) = 1-e^{-\lambda t}$, by the complement property.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ But I don't understand why $T_{n+1} - T_n \leq t$. It seems like it should be $> 0$, as it is the complement of $0$ arrivals. $\endgroup$ – Vahan May 21 at 17:15
  • $\begingroup$ Could it be stated as follows: $P(T_{n+1}-T_n > t) = e^{-\lambda t}$, which would mean the probability of no arrivals between the two given arrival times within time $t$? $\endgroup$ – Vahan May 21 at 19:02
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that is correct. The event $\{T_{n+1}-T_n>t\}$ means that the next arrival, after the $n^{\text{th}}$, would occur only after a duration of $t$. Or in other words, there are no arrivals between $T_n$ and $T_n + t$. $\endgroup$ – arvram96 May 23 at 4:59

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.