변수 λ 1 , λ 2 , … , λ n 으로 포아송 분포 된 랜덤 변수 있으면 Y = ⌊ ∑ n i = 1 X i 의 분포는 무엇입니까?(즉, 평균의 정수 층)?
Poissons의 합계도 Poisson이지만 위의 경우와 동일한 지 여부를 결정할 통계에 대해서는 확신이 없습니다.
변수 λ 1 , λ 2 , … , λ n 으로 포아송 분포 된 랜덤 변수 있으면 Y = ⌊ ∑ n i = 1 X i 의 분포는 무엇입니까?(즉, 평균의 정수 층)?
Poissons의 합계도 Poisson이지만 위의 경우와 동일한 지 여부를 결정할 통계에 대해서는 확신이 없습니다.
답변:
질문 일반화의 분배를 요청 분포 공지 자연수에지지된다. (문제에서 는 및 의 포아송 분포를 갖습니다 .)
분포 쉽게의 분포에 의해 결정되는 확률 생성 함수 (PGF)의 PGF의 관점에서 결정될 수있다, . 다음은 파생 개요입니다.
쓰기 의 PGF 대한 X , 여기서 (정의에 의해) P N = 잠 ( X = N ) . m Y 는 pgf q 가 다음 과 같은 방식으로 X 로 구성됩니다
이것은 절대적으로 수렴하기 때문에 , 우리는 항을 형태의 합으로 재 배열 할 수 있습니다
for . The power series of the functions consist of every term of the series of starting with the : this is sometimes called a decimation of . Google searches presently don't turn up much useful information on decimations, so for completeness, here's a derivation of a formula.
하자 어떤 원시적 m 일 통일의 루트; 예를 들어, ω = exp ( 2 i π / m )를 사용하십시오 . 그런 다음 ω m = 1 과 ∑ m - 1 j = 0에서 ω j = 0 을 따릅니다.
To see this, note that the operator is linear, so it suffices to check the formula on the basis . Applying the right hand side to gives
When and differ by a multiple of , each term in the sum equals and we obtain . Otherwise, the terms cycle through powers of and these sum to zero. Whence this operator preserves all powers of congruent to modulo and kills all the others: it is precisely the desired projection.
A formula for follows readily by changing the order of summation and recognizing one of the sums as geometric, thereby writing it in closed form:
For example, the pgf of a Poisson distribution of parameter is . With , and the pgf of will be
One use of this approach is to compute moments of and . The value of the derivative of the pgf evaluated at is the factorial moment. The moment is a linear combination of the first factorial moments. Using these observations we find, for instance, that for a Poisson distributed , its mean (which is the first factorial moment) equals , the mean of equals , and the mean of equals :
The means for are shown in blue, red, and yellow, respectively, as functions of : asymptotically, the mean drops by compared to the original Poisson mean.
Similar formulas for the variances can be obtained. (They get messy as rises and so are omitted. One thing they definitively establish is that when no multiple of is Poisson: it does not have the characteristic equality of mean and variance) Here is a plot of the variances as a function of for :
It is interesting that for larger values of the variances increase. Intuitively, this is due to two competing phenomena: the floor function is effectively binning groups of values that originally were distinct; this must cause the variance to decrease. At the same time, as we have seen, the means are changing, too (because each bin is represented by its smallest value); this must cause a term equal to the square of the difference of means to be added back. The increase in variance for large becomes larger with larger values of .
The behavior of the variance of with is surprisingly complex. Let's end with a quick simulation (in R
) showing what it can do. The plots show the difference between the variance of and the variance of for Poisson distributed with various values of ranging from through . In all cases the plots appear to have reached their asymptotic values at the right.
set.seed(17)
par(mfrow=c(3,4))
temp <- sapply(c(1,2,5,10,20,50,100,200,500,1000,2000,5000), function(lambda) {
x <- rpois(20000, lambda)
v <- sapply(1:floor(lambda + 4*sqrt(lambda)),
function(m) var(floor(x/m)*m) - var(x))
plot(v, type="l", xlab="", ylab="Increased variance",
main=toString(lambda), cex.main=.85, col="Blue", lwd=2)
})
sapply()
for simulation. Thanks.
As Michael Chernick says, if the individual random variables are independent then the the sum is Poisson with parameter (mean and variance) which you might call .
Dividing by reduces the mean to and variance so the variance will be less than the equivalent Poisson distribution. As Michael says, not all values will be integers.
Using the floor function reduces the mean slightly, by about , and affects the variance slightly too though in a more complicated manner. Although you have integer values, the variance will still be substantially less than the mean and so you will have a narrower distribution than the Poisson.
The probability mass function of the average of independent Poisson random variables can be written down explicitly, though the answer might not help you very much. As Michael Chernick noted in comments on his own answer, the sum of independent Poisson random variables with respective parameters is a Poisson random variable with parameter . Hence,
Y will not be Poisson. Note that Poisson random variables take on non negative integer values. Once you divide by a constant you create a random variable that can have non-integer values. It will still have the shape of the Poisson. It is just that the discrete probabilities may occur at non-integer points.