Poisson Distribution of sum of two random independent variables $X$, $Y$
$begingroup$
$X sim mathcal{P}( lambda) $ and $Y sim mathcal{P}( mu)$ meaning that $X$ and $Y$ are Poisson distributions. What is the probability distribution law of $X + Y$. I know it is $X+Y sim mathcal{P}( lambda + mu)$ but I don't understand how to derive it.
probability probability-theory probability-distributions
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$X sim mathcal{P}( lambda) $ and $Y sim mathcal{P}( mu)$ meaning that $X$ and $Y$ are Poisson distributions. What is the probability distribution law of $X + Y$. I know it is $X+Y sim mathcal{P}( lambda + mu)$ but I don't understand how to derive it.
probability probability-theory probability-distributions
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Try using the method of moment generating functions :)
$endgroup$
– Samuel Reid
Nov 25 '13 at 7:03
$begingroup$
All I've learned in the definition of a Poisson Random Variable, is there a simpler way?
$endgroup$
– user82004
Nov 25 '13 at 7:07
4
$begingroup$
If they areindependent
.
$endgroup$
– Did
Nov 25 '13 at 8:14
$begingroup$
Doesn’t it suffice that their covariance vanishes?
$endgroup$
– Michael Hoppe
Feb 1 '18 at 7:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
$X sim mathcal{P}( lambda) $ and $Y sim mathcal{P}( mu)$ meaning that $X$ and $Y$ are Poisson distributions. What is the probability distribution law of $X + Y$. I know it is $X+Y sim mathcal{P}( lambda + mu)$ but I don't understand how to derive it.
probability probability-theory probability-distributions
$endgroup$
$X sim mathcal{P}( lambda) $ and $Y sim mathcal{P}( mu)$ meaning that $X$ and $Y$ are Poisson distributions. What is the probability distribution law of $X + Y$. I know it is $X+Y sim mathcal{P}( lambda + mu)$ but I don't understand how to derive it.
probability probability-theory probability-distributions
probability probability-theory probability-distributions
edited Feb 13 '13 at 6:18
Stefan Hansen
20.8k73764
20.8k73764
asked Oct 25 '12 at 20:00
user31280
$begingroup$
Try using the method of moment generating functions :)
$endgroup$
– Samuel Reid
Nov 25 '13 at 7:03
$begingroup$
All I've learned in the definition of a Poisson Random Variable, is there a simpler way?
$endgroup$
– user82004
Nov 25 '13 at 7:07
4
$begingroup$
If they areindependent
.
$endgroup$
– Did
Nov 25 '13 at 8:14
$begingroup$
Doesn’t it suffice that their covariance vanishes?
$endgroup$
– Michael Hoppe
Feb 1 '18 at 7:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Try using the method of moment generating functions :)
$endgroup$
– Samuel Reid
Nov 25 '13 at 7:03
$begingroup$
All I've learned in the definition of a Poisson Random Variable, is there a simpler way?
$endgroup$
– user82004
Nov 25 '13 at 7:07
4
$begingroup$
If they areindependent
.
$endgroup$
– Did
Nov 25 '13 at 8:14
$begingroup$
Doesn’t it suffice that their covariance vanishes?
$endgroup$
– Michael Hoppe
Feb 1 '18 at 7:09
$begingroup$
Try using the method of moment generating functions :)
$endgroup$
– Samuel Reid
Nov 25 '13 at 7:03
$begingroup$
Try using the method of moment generating functions :)
$endgroup$
– Samuel Reid
Nov 25 '13 at 7:03
$begingroup$
All I've learned in the definition of a Poisson Random Variable, is there a simpler way?
$endgroup$
– user82004
Nov 25 '13 at 7:07
$begingroup$
All I've learned in the definition of a Poisson Random Variable, is there a simpler way?
$endgroup$
– user82004
Nov 25 '13 at 7:07
4
4
$begingroup$
If they are
independent
.$endgroup$
– Did
Nov 25 '13 at 8:14
$begingroup$
If they are
independent
.$endgroup$
– Did
Nov 25 '13 at 8:14
$begingroup$
Doesn’t it suffice that their covariance vanishes?
$endgroup$
– Michael Hoppe
Feb 1 '18 at 7:09
$begingroup$
Doesn’t it suffice that their covariance vanishes?
$endgroup$
– Michael Hoppe
Feb 1 '18 at 7:09
add a comment |
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This only holds if $X$ and $Y$ are independent, so we suppose this from now on. We have for $k ge 0$:
begin{align*}
P(X+ Y =k) &= sum_{i = 0}^k P(X+ Y = k, X = i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i , X =i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i)P(X=i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k e^{-mu}frac{mu^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}e^{-lambda}frac{lambda^i}{i!}\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k frac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}mu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k binom kimu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= frac{(mu + lambda)^k}{k!} cdot e^{-(mu + lambda)}
end{align*}
Hence, $X+ Y sim mathcal P(mu + lambda)$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! but what happens if they are not independent?
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:20
8
$begingroup$
In general we can't say anything then. It depends on how they depend on another.
$endgroup$
– martini
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! it's very simple and I feel like a complete idiot.
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:40
1
$begingroup$
Nice derivation: specifically the transformation of (a) the i/k factorials and (b) the mu/lambda polynomials into the binomial form of the polynomial power expression.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Aug 30 '14 at 20:59
1
$begingroup$
@LiorA Yes. k! included to combine with the rest and simplify as intended, so 1/k! is included to compensate.
$endgroup$
– Rolazaro Azeveires
Jan 7 '18 at 14:23
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Another approach is to use characteristic functions. If $Xsim mathrm{po}(lambda)$, then the characteristic function of $X$ is (if this is unknown, just calculate it)
$$
varphi_X(t)=E[e^{itX}]=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
Now suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are independent Poisson distributed random variables with parameters $lambda$ and $mu$ respectively. Then due to the independence we have that
$$
varphi_{X+Y}(t)=varphi_X(t)varphi_Y(t)=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)}e^{mu(e^{it}-1)}=e^{(mu+lambda)(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
As the characteristic function completely determines the distribution, we conclude that $X+Ysimmathrm{po}(lambda+mu)$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can use Probability Generating Function(P.G.F). As poisson distribution is a discrete probability distribution, P.G.F. fits better in this case.For independent X and Y random variable which follows distribution Po($lambda$) and Po($mu$).
P.G.F of X is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_X[t] = E[t^X]&= sum_{x=0}^{infty}t^xe^{-lambda}frac{lambda^x}{x!}\
&=sum_{x=0}^{infty}e^{-lambda}frac{(lambda t)^x}{x!}\
&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda t}\
&=e^{-lambda (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
P.G.F of Y is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_Y[t] = E[t^Y]&= sum_{y=0}^{infty}t^ye^{-mu}frac{mu^y}{y!}\
&=sum_{y=0}^{infty}e^{-mu}frac{(mu t)^y}{y!}\
&=e^{-mu}e^{mu t}\
&=e^{-mu (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now think about P.G.F of U = X+Y.
As X and Y are independent,
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_U(t)=P_{X+Y}(t)=P_X(t)P_Y(t)=E[t^{X+Y}]=E[t^X t^Y]&= E[t^X]E[t^Y]\
&= e^{-lambda (1-t)}e^{-mu (1-t)}\
&= e^{-(lambda+mu) (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now this is the P.G.F of $Po(lambda + mu)$ distribution. Therefore,we can say U=X+Y follows Po($lambda+mu$)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In short, you can show this by using the fact that $$Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(X+Y=k, X=i).$$
If $X$ and $Y$ are independent, this is equal to
$$
Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(Y=k-i)Pr(X=i)
$$
which is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=sum_{i=0}^kfrac{e^{-lambda_y}lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{e^{-lambda_x}lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=e^{-lambda_y}e^{-lambda_x}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i
end{align}
$$
The sum part is just
$$
sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i=(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
$$
by the binomial theorem.
So the end result is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
end{align}
$$
which is the pmf of $Po(lambda_y+lambda_x)$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Moderator notice: This answer was moved here as a consequence of merging two questions. This explains the small differences in notation. The OP's $lambda$ is $lambda_x$ here, and OP's $mu$ is $lambda_y$. Otherwise there is no difference.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 23 '15 at 6:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Using Moment Generating Function.
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, $Y sim mathcal{P}(mu)$ and S=X+Y.
We know that MGF(Moment Generating Function) of $mathcal{P}(lambda)=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}$(See the end if you need proof)
MGF of S would be
$$begin{align}
M_S(t)&=E[e^{tS}]\&=E[e^{t(X+Y)}]\&=E[e^{tX}e^{tY}]\&=E[e^{tX}]E[e^{tY}]quad text{given }X,Ytext{ are independent}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}e^{mu(e^t-1)}\&=e^{(lambda+mu)(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
Thus S is a Poisson Distribution with parameter $lambda+mu$.
MGF of Poisson Distribution
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, then by definition Probability Mass Function is
$$begin{align}
f_X(k)=frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda},quad k in 0,1,2....
end{align}$$
It's MGF is
$$begin{align}
M_X(t)&=E[e^{tX}]\&=sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda}e^{tk}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^ke^{tk}}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{(lambda e^t)^k}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda e^t}\&=e^{lambda e^t-lambda}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
hint: $sum_{k=0}^{n} P(X = k)P(Y = n-k)$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
why this hint, why the sum? This is what I don't understand
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables. That's why.
$endgroup$
– jay-sun
Oct 25 '12 at 20:24
$begingroup$
gotcha! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:31
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables... Sorry but no.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:28
1
$begingroup$
There is nousual sense
for convolution of random variables. Either convolution of distributions or addition of random variables.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:51
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Here's a much cleaner solution:
Consider a two Poisson processes occuring with rates $lambda$ and $mu$, where a Poisson process of rate $r$ is viewed as the limit of $n$ consecutive Bernoulli trials each with probability $frac{r}{n}$, as $ntoinfty$.
Then $X$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $lambda$ and $Y$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $mu$, so the total number of successes is the same as if we had each trial succeed with probability $frac{lambda + mu}{n}$, where we take $n$ to be large enough so that the event where the $i$th Bernoulli trial in both processes are successdul has a negligible probability.
Then we are done.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f221078%2fpoisson-distribution-of-sum-of-two-random-independent-variables-x-y%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
7 Answers
7
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This only holds if $X$ and $Y$ are independent, so we suppose this from now on. We have for $k ge 0$:
begin{align*}
P(X+ Y =k) &= sum_{i = 0}^k P(X+ Y = k, X = i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i , X =i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i)P(X=i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k e^{-mu}frac{mu^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}e^{-lambda}frac{lambda^i}{i!}\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k frac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}mu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k binom kimu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= frac{(mu + lambda)^k}{k!} cdot e^{-(mu + lambda)}
end{align*}
Hence, $X+ Y sim mathcal P(mu + lambda)$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! but what happens if they are not independent?
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:20
8
$begingroup$
In general we can't say anything then. It depends on how they depend on another.
$endgroup$
– martini
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! it's very simple and I feel like a complete idiot.
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:40
1
$begingroup$
Nice derivation: specifically the transformation of (a) the i/k factorials and (b) the mu/lambda polynomials into the binomial form of the polynomial power expression.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Aug 30 '14 at 20:59
1
$begingroup$
@LiorA Yes. k! included to combine with the rest and simplify as intended, so 1/k! is included to compensate.
$endgroup$
– Rolazaro Azeveires
Jan 7 '18 at 14:23
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
This only holds if $X$ and $Y$ are independent, so we suppose this from now on. We have for $k ge 0$:
begin{align*}
P(X+ Y =k) &= sum_{i = 0}^k P(X+ Y = k, X = i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i , X =i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i)P(X=i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k e^{-mu}frac{mu^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}e^{-lambda}frac{lambda^i}{i!}\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k frac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}mu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k binom kimu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= frac{(mu + lambda)^k}{k!} cdot e^{-(mu + lambda)}
end{align*}
Hence, $X+ Y sim mathcal P(mu + lambda)$.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! but what happens if they are not independent?
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:20
8
$begingroup$
In general we can't say anything then. It depends on how they depend on another.
$endgroup$
– martini
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! it's very simple and I feel like a complete idiot.
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:40
1
$begingroup$
Nice derivation: specifically the transformation of (a) the i/k factorials and (b) the mu/lambda polynomials into the binomial form of the polynomial power expression.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Aug 30 '14 at 20:59
1
$begingroup$
@LiorA Yes. k! included to combine with the rest and simplify as intended, so 1/k! is included to compensate.
$endgroup$
– Rolazaro Azeveires
Jan 7 '18 at 14:23
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
This only holds if $X$ and $Y$ are independent, so we suppose this from now on. We have for $k ge 0$:
begin{align*}
P(X+ Y =k) &= sum_{i = 0}^k P(X+ Y = k, X = i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i , X =i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i)P(X=i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k e^{-mu}frac{mu^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}e^{-lambda}frac{lambda^i}{i!}\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k frac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}mu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k binom kimu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= frac{(mu + lambda)^k}{k!} cdot e^{-(mu + lambda)}
end{align*}
Hence, $X+ Y sim mathcal P(mu + lambda)$.
$endgroup$
This only holds if $X$ and $Y$ are independent, so we suppose this from now on. We have for $k ge 0$:
begin{align*}
P(X+ Y =k) &= sum_{i = 0}^k P(X+ Y = k, X = i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i , X =i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k P(Y = k-i)P(X=i)\
&= sum_{i=0}^k e^{-mu}frac{mu^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}e^{-lambda}frac{lambda^i}{i!}\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k frac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}mu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= e^{-(mu + lambda)}frac 1{k!}sum_{i=0}^k binom kimu^{k-i}lambda^i\
&= frac{(mu + lambda)^k}{k!} cdot e^{-(mu + lambda)}
end{align*}
Hence, $X+ Y sim mathcal P(mu + lambda)$.
answered Oct 25 '12 at 20:19
martinimartini
70.5k45991
70.5k45991
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! but what happens if they are not independent?
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:20
8
$begingroup$
In general we can't say anything then. It depends on how they depend on another.
$endgroup$
– martini
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! it's very simple and I feel like a complete idiot.
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:40
1
$begingroup$
Nice derivation: specifically the transformation of (a) the i/k factorials and (b) the mu/lambda polynomials into the binomial form of the polynomial power expression.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Aug 30 '14 at 20:59
1
$begingroup$
@LiorA Yes. k! included to combine with the rest and simplify as intended, so 1/k! is included to compensate.
$endgroup$
– Rolazaro Azeveires
Jan 7 '18 at 14:23
|
show 2 more comments
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! but what happens if they are not independent?
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:20
8
$begingroup$
In general we can't say anything then. It depends on how they depend on another.
$endgroup$
– martini
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! it's very simple and I feel like a complete idiot.
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:40
1
$begingroup$
Nice derivation: specifically the transformation of (a) the i/k factorials and (b) the mu/lambda polynomials into the binomial form of the polynomial power expression.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Aug 30 '14 at 20:59
1
$begingroup$
@LiorA Yes. k! included to combine with the rest and simplify as intended, so 1/k! is included to compensate.
$endgroup$
– Rolazaro Azeveires
Jan 7 '18 at 14:23
1
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! but what happens if they are not independent?
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:20
$begingroup$
Thank you! but what happens if they are not independent?
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:20
8
8
$begingroup$
In general we can't say anything then. It depends on how they depend on another.
$endgroup$
– martini
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
$begingroup$
In general we can't say anything then. It depends on how they depend on another.
$endgroup$
– martini
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
1
1
$begingroup$
Thank you! it's very simple and I feel like a complete idiot.
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:40
$begingroup$
Thank you! it's very simple and I feel like a complete idiot.
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:40
1
1
$begingroup$
Nice derivation: specifically the transformation of (a) the i/k factorials and (b) the mu/lambda polynomials into the binomial form of the polynomial power expression.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Aug 30 '14 at 20:59
$begingroup$
Nice derivation: specifically the transformation of (a) the i/k factorials and (b) the mu/lambda polynomials into the binomial form of the polynomial power expression.
$endgroup$
– javadba
Aug 30 '14 at 20:59
1
1
$begingroup$
@LiorA Yes. k! included to combine with the rest and simplify as intended, so 1/k! is included to compensate.
$endgroup$
– Rolazaro Azeveires
Jan 7 '18 at 14:23
$begingroup$
@LiorA Yes. k! included to combine with the rest and simplify as intended, so 1/k! is included to compensate.
$endgroup$
– Rolazaro Azeveires
Jan 7 '18 at 14:23
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Another approach is to use characteristic functions. If $Xsim mathrm{po}(lambda)$, then the characteristic function of $X$ is (if this is unknown, just calculate it)
$$
varphi_X(t)=E[e^{itX}]=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
Now suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are independent Poisson distributed random variables with parameters $lambda$ and $mu$ respectively. Then due to the independence we have that
$$
varphi_{X+Y}(t)=varphi_X(t)varphi_Y(t)=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)}e^{mu(e^{it}-1)}=e^{(mu+lambda)(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
As the characteristic function completely determines the distribution, we conclude that $X+Ysimmathrm{po}(lambda+mu)$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Another approach is to use characteristic functions. If $Xsim mathrm{po}(lambda)$, then the characteristic function of $X$ is (if this is unknown, just calculate it)
$$
varphi_X(t)=E[e^{itX}]=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
Now suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are independent Poisson distributed random variables with parameters $lambda$ and $mu$ respectively. Then due to the independence we have that
$$
varphi_{X+Y}(t)=varphi_X(t)varphi_Y(t)=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)}e^{mu(e^{it}-1)}=e^{(mu+lambda)(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
As the characteristic function completely determines the distribution, we conclude that $X+Ysimmathrm{po}(lambda+mu)$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Another approach is to use characteristic functions. If $Xsim mathrm{po}(lambda)$, then the characteristic function of $X$ is (if this is unknown, just calculate it)
$$
varphi_X(t)=E[e^{itX}]=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
Now suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are independent Poisson distributed random variables with parameters $lambda$ and $mu$ respectively. Then due to the independence we have that
$$
varphi_{X+Y}(t)=varphi_X(t)varphi_Y(t)=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)}e^{mu(e^{it}-1)}=e^{(mu+lambda)(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
As the characteristic function completely determines the distribution, we conclude that $X+Ysimmathrm{po}(lambda+mu)$.
$endgroup$
Another approach is to use characteristic functions. If $Xsim mathrm{po}(lambda)$, then the characteristic function of $X$ is (if this is unknown, just calculate it)
$$
varphi_X(t)=E[e^{itX}]=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
Now suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are independent Poisson distributed random variables with parameters $lambda$ and $mu$ respectively. Then due to the independence we have that
$$
varphi_{X+Y}(t)=varphi_X(t)varphi_Y(t)=e^{lambda(e^{it}-1)}e^{mu(e^{it}-1)}=e^{(mu+lambda)(e^{it}-1)},quad tinmathbb{R}.
$$
As the characteristic function completely determines the distribution, we conclude that $X+Ysimmathrm{po}(lambda+mu)$.
answered Feb 13 '13 at 6:23
Stefan HansenStefan Hansen
20.8k73764
20.8k73764
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can use Probability Generating Function(P.G.F). As poisson distribution is a discrete probability distribution, P.G.F. fits better in this case.For independent X and Y random variable which follows distribution Po($lambda$) and Po($mu$).
P.G.F of X is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_X[t] = E[t^X]&= sum_{x=0}^{infty}t^xe^{-lambda}frac{lambda^x}{x!}\
&=sum_{x=0}^{infty}e^{-lambda}frac{(lambda t)^x}{x!}\
&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda t}\
&=e^{-lambda (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
P.G.F of Y is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_Y[t] = E[t^Y]&= sum_{y=0}^{infty}t^ye^{-mu}frac{mu^y}{y!}\
&=sum_{y=0}^{infty}e^{-mu}frac{(mu t)^y}{y!}\
&=e^{-mu}e^{mu t}\
&=e^{-mu (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now think about P.G.F of U = X+Y.
As X and Y are independent,
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_U(t)=P_{X+Y}(t)=P_X(t)P_Y(t)=E[t^{X+Y}]=E[t^X t^Y]&= E[t^X]E[t^Y]\
&= e^{-lambda (1-t)}e^{-mu (1-t)}\
&= e^{-(lambda+mu) (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now this is the P.G.F of $Po(lambda + mu)$ distribution. Therefore,we can say U=X+Y follows Po($lambda+mu$)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can use Probability Generating Function(P.G.F). As poisson distribution is a discrete probability distribution, P.G.F. fits better in this case.For independent X and Y random variable which follows distribution Po($lambda$) and Po($mu$).
P.G.F of X is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_X[t] = E[t^X]&= sum_{x=0}^{infty}t^xe^{-lambda}frac{lambda^x}{x!}\
&=sum_{x=0}^{infty}e^{-lambda}frac{(lambda t)^x}{x!}\
&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda t}\
&=e^{-lambda (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
P.G.F of Y is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_Y[t] = E[t^Y]&= sum_{y=0}^{infty}t^ye^{-mu}frac{mu^y}{y!}\
&=sum_{y=0}^{infty}e^{-mu}frac{(mu t)^y}{y!}\
&=e^{-mu}e^{mu t}\
&=e^{-mu (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now think about P.G.F of U = X+Y.
As X and Y are independent,
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_U(t)=P_{X+Y}(t)=P_X(t)P_Y(t)=E[t^{X+Y}]=E[t^X t^Y]&= E[t^X]E[t^Y]\
&= e^{-lambda (1-t)}e^{-mu (1-t)}\
&= e^{-(lambda+mu) (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now this is the P.G.F of $Po(lambda + mu)$ distribution. Therefore,we can say U=X+Y follows Po($lambda+mu$)
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You can use Probability Generating Function(P.G.F). As poisson distribution is a discrete probability distribution, P.G.F. fits better in this case.For independent X and Y random variable which follows distribution Po($lambda$) and Po($mu$).
P.G.F of X is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_X[t] = E[t^X]&= sum_{x=0}^{infty}t^xe^{-lambda}frac{lambda^x}{x!}\
&=sum_{x=0}^{infty}e^{-lambda}frac{(lambda t)^x}{x!}\
&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda t}\
&=e^{-lambda (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
P.G.F of Y is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_Y[t] = E[t^Y]&= sum_{y=0}^{infty}t^ye^{-mu}frac{mu^y}{y!}\
&=sum_{y=0}^{infty}e^{-mu}frac{(mu t)^y}{y!}\
&=e^{-mu}e^{mu t}\
&=e^{-mu (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now think about P.G.F of U = X+Y.
As X and Y are independent,
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_U(t)=P_{X+Y}(t)=P_X(t)P_Y(t)=E[t^{X+Y}]=E[t^X t^Y]&= E[t^X]E[t^Y]\
&= e^{-lambda (1-t)}e^{-mu (1-t)}\
&= e^{-(lambda+mu) (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now this is the P.G.F of $Po(lambda + mu)$ distribution. Therefore,we can say U=X+Y follows Po($lambda+mu$)
$endgroup$
You can use Probability Generating Function(P.G.F). As poisson distribution is a discrete probability distribution, P.G.F. fits better in this case.For independent X and Y random variable which follows distribution Po($lambda$) and Po($mu$).
P.G.F of X is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_X[t] = E[t^X]&= sum_{x=0}^{infty}t^xe^{-lambda}frac{lambda^x}{x!}\
&=sum_{x=0}^{infty}e^{-lambda}frac{(lambda t)^x}{x!}\
&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda t}\
&=e^{-lambda (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
P.G.F of Y is
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_Y[t] = E[t^Y]&= sum_{y=0}^{infty}t^ye^{-mu}frac{mu^y}{y!}\
&=sum_{y=0}^{infty}e^{-mu}frac{(mu t)^y}{y!}\
&=e^{-mu}e^{mu t}\
&=e^{-mu (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now think about P.G.F of U = X+Y.
As X and Y are independent,
begin{equation*}
begin{split}
P_U(t)=P_{X+Y}(t)=P_X(t)P_Y(t)=E[t^{X+Y}]=E[t^X t^Y]&= E[t^X]E[t^Y]\
&= e^{-lambda (1-t)}e^{-mu (1-t)}\
&= e^{-(lambda+mu) (1-t)}\
end{split}
end{equation*}
Now this is the P.G.F of $Po(lambda + mu)$ distribution. Therefore,we can say U=X+Y follows Po($lambda+mu$)
edited Sep 2 '14 at 5:34
answered Jul 25 '13 at 15:52
AnandaAnanda
7315
7315
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In short, you can show this by using the fact that $$Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(X+Y=k, X=i).$$
If $X$ and $Y$ are independent, this is equal to
$$
Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(Y=k-i)Pr(X=i)
$$
which is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=sum_{i=0}^kfrac{e^{-lambda_y}lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{e^{-lambda_x}lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=e^{-lambda_y}e^{-lambda_x}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i
end{align}
$$
The sum part is just
$$
sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i=(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
$$
by the binomial theorem.
So the end result is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
end{align}
$$
which is the pmf of $Po(lambda_y+lambda_x)$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Moderator notice: This answer was moved here as a consequence of merging two questions. This explains the small differences in notation. The OP's $lambda$ is $lambda_x$ here, and OP's $mu$ is $lambda_y$. Otherwise there is no difference.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 23 '15 at 6:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In short, you can show this by using the fact that $$Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(X+Y=k, X=i).$$
If $X$ and $Y$ are independent, this is equal to
$$
Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(Y=k-i)Pr(X=i)
$$
which is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=sum_{i=0}^kfrac{e^{-lambda_y}lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{e^{-lambda_x}lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=e^{-lambda_y}e^{-lambda_x}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i
end{align}
$$
The sum part is just
$$
sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i=(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
$$
by the binomial theorem.
So the end result is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
end{align}
$$
which is the pmf of $Po(lambda_y+lambda_x)$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Moderator notice: This answer was moved here as a consequence of merging two questions. This explains the small differences in notation. The OP's $lambda$ is $lambda_x$ here, and OP's $mu$ is $lambda_y$. Otherwise there is no difference.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 23 '15 at 6:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In short, you can show this by using the fact that $$Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(X+Y=k, X=i).$$
If $X$ and $Y$ are independent, this is equal to
$$
Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(Y=k-i)Pr(X=i)
$$
which is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=sum_{i=0}^kfrac{e^{-lambda_y}lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{e^{-lambda_x}lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=e^{-lambda_y}e^{-lambda_x}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i
end{align}
$$
The sum part is just
$$
sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i=(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
$$
by the binomial theorem.
So the end result is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
end{align}
$$
which is the pmf of $Po(lambda_y+lambda_x)$.
$endgroup$
In short, you can show this by using the fact that $$Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(X+Y=k, X=i).$$
If $X$ and $Y$ are independent, this is equal to
$$
Pr(X+Y=k)=sum_{i=0}^kPr(Y=k-i)Pr(X=i)
$$
which is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=sum_{i=0}^kfrac{e^{-lambda_y}lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{e^{-lambda_x}lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=e^{-lambda_y}e^{-lambda_x}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{lambda_y^{k-i}}{(k-i)!}frac{lambda_x^i}{i!}\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^kfrac{k!}{i!(k-i)!}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i\
&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i
end{align}
$$
The sum part is just
$$
sum_{i=0}^k{kchoose i}lambda_y^{k-i}lambda_x^i=(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
$$
by the binomial theorem.
So the end result is
$$
begin{align}
Pr(X+Y=k)&=frac{e^{-(lambda_y+lambda_x)}}{k!}(lambda_y+lambda_x)^k
end{align}
$$
which is the pmf of $Po(lambda_y+lambda_x)$.
answered Nov 25 '13 at 7:54
hejsebhejseb
3,8071930
3,8071930
$begingroup$
Moderator notice: This answer was moved here as a consequence of merging two questions. This explains the small differences in notation. The OP's $lambda$ is $lambda_x$ here, and OP's $mu$ is $lambda_y$. Otherwise there is no difference.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 23 '15 at 6:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Moderator notice: This answer was moved here as a consequence of merging two questions. This explains the small differences in notation. The OP's $lambda$ is $lambda_x$ here, and OP's $mu$ is $lambda_y$. Otherwise there is no difference.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 23 '15 at 6:55
$begingroup$
Moderator notice: This answer was moved here as a consequence of merging two questions. This explains the small differences in notation. The OP's $lambda$ is $lambda_x$ here, and OP's $mu$ is $lambda_y$. Otherwise there is no difference.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 23 '15 at 6:55
$begingroup$
Moderator notice: This answer was moved here as a consequence of merging two questions. This explains the small differences in notation. The OP's $lambda$ is $lambda_x$ here, and OP's $mu$ is $lambda_y$. Otherwise there is no difference.
$endgroup$
– Jyrki Lahtonen
Apr 23 '15 at 6:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Using Moment Generating Function.
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, $Y sim mathcal{P}(mu)$ and S=X+Y.
We know that MGF(Moment Generating Function) of $mathcal{P}(lambda)=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}$(See the end if you need proof)
MGF of S would be
$$begin{align}
M_S(t)&=E[e^{tS}]\&=E[e^{t(X+Y)}]\&=E[e^{tX}e^{tY}]\&=E[e^{tX}]E[e^{tY}]quad text{given }X,Ytext{ are independent}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}e^{mu(e^t-1)}\&=e^{(lambda+mu)(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
Thus S is a Poisson Distribution with parameter $lambda+mu$.
MGF of Poisson Distribution
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, then by definition Probability Mass Function is
$$begin{align}
f_X(k)=frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda},quad k in 0,1,2....
end{align}$$
It's MGF is
$$begin{align}
M_X(t)&=E[e^{tX}]\&=sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda}e^{tk}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^ke^{tk}}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{(lambda e^t)^k}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda e^t}\&=e^{lambda e^t-lambda}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Using Moment Generating Function.
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, $Y sim mathcal{P}(mu)$ and S=X+Y.
We know that MGF(Moment Generating Function) of $mathcal{P}(lambda)=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}$(See the end if you need proof)
MGF of S would be
$$begin{align}
M_S(t)&=E[e^{tS}]\&=E[e^{t(X+Y)}]\&=E[e^{tX}e^{tY}]\&=E[e^{tX}]E[e^{tY}]quad text{given }X,Ytext{ are independent}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}e^{mu(e^t-1)}\&=e^{(lambda+mu)(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
Thus S is a Poisson Distribution with parameter $lambda+mu$.
MGF of Poisson Distribution
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, then by definition Probability Mass Function is
$$begin{align}
f_X(k)=frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda},quad k in 0,1,2....
end{align}$$
It's MGF is
$$begin{align}
M_X(t)&=E[e^{tX}]\&=sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda}e^{tk}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^ke^{tk}}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{(lambda e^t)^k}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda e^t}\&=e^{lambda e^t-lambda}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Using Moment Generating Function.
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, $Y sim mathcal{P}(mu)$ and S=X+Y.
We know that MGF(Moment Generating Function) of $mathcal{P}(lambda)=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}$(See the end if you need proof)
MGF of S would be
$$begin{align}
M_S(t)&=E[e^{tS}]\&=E[e^{t(X+Y)}]\&=E[e^{tX}e^{tY}]\&=E[e^{tX}]E[e^{tY}]quad text{given }X,Ytext{ are independent}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}e^{mu(e^t-1)}\&=e^{(lambda+mu)(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
Thus S is a Poisson Distribution with parameter $lambda+mu$.
MGF of Poisson Distribution
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, then by definition Probability Mass Function is
$$begin{align}
f_X(k)=frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda},quad k in 0,1,2....
end{align}$$
It's MGF is
$$begin{align}
M_X(t)&=E[e^{tX}]\&=sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda}e^{tk}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^ke^{tk}}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{(lambda e^t)^k}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda e^t}\&=e^{lambda e^t-lambda}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
$endgroup$
Using Moment Generating Function.
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, $Y sim mathcal{P}(mu)$ and S=X+Y.
We know that MGF(Moment Generating Function) of $mathcal{P}(lambda)=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}$(See the end if you need proof)
MGF of S would be
$$begin{align}
M_S(t)&=E[e^{tS}]\&=E[e^{t(X+Y)}]\&=E[e^{tX}e^{tY}]\&=E[e^{tX}]E[e^{tY}]quad text{given }X,Ytext{ are independent}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}e^{mu(e^t-1)}\&=e^{(lambda+mu)(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
Thus S is a Poisson Distribution with parameter $lambda+mu$.
MGF of Poisson Distribution
If $X sim mathcal{P}(lambda)$, then by definition Probability Mass Function is
$$begin{align}
f_X(k)=frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda},quad k in 0,1,2....
end{align}$$
It's MGF is
$$begin{align}
M_X(t)&=E[e^{tX}]\&=sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^k}{k!}e^{-lambda}e^{tk}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{lambda^ke^{tk}}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}sum_{k=0}^{infty}frac{(lambda e^t)^k}{k!}\&=e^{-lambda}e^{lambda e^t}\&=e^{lambda e^t-lambda}\&=e^{lambda(e^t-1)}
end{align}$$
edited Apr 5 '18 at 20:46
answered Apr 5 '18 at 20:21
kazakaza
1388
1388
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
hint: $sum_{k=0}^{n} P(X = k)P(Y = n-k)$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
why this hint, why the sum? This is what I don't understand
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables. That's why.
$endgroup$
– jay-sun
Oct 25 '12 at 20:24
$begingroup$
gotcha! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:31
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables... Sorry but no.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:28
1
$begingroup$
There is nousual sense
for convolution of random variables. Either convolution of distributions or addition of random variables.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:51
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
hint: $sum_{k=0}^{n} P(X = k)P(Y = n-k)$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
why this hint, why the sum? This is what I don't understand
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables. That's why.
$endgroup$
– jay-sun
Oct 25 '12 at 20:24
$begingroup$
gotcha! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:31
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables... Sorry but no.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:28
1
$begingroup$
There is nousual sense
for convolution of random variables. Either convolution of distributions or addition of random variables.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:51
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
hint: $sum_{k=0}^{n} P(X = k)P(Y = n-k)$
$endgroup$
hint: $sum_{k=0}^{n} P(X = k)P(Y = n-k)$
answered Oct 25 '12 at 20:20
jay-sunjay-sun
736513
736513
$begingroup$
why this hint, why the sum? This is what I don't understand
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables. That's why.
$endgroup$
– jay-sun
Oct 25 '12 at 20:24
$begingroup$
gotcha! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:31
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables... Sorry but no.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:28
1
$begingroup$
There is nousual sense
for convolution of random variables. Either convolution of distributions or addition of random variables.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:51
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
why this hint, why the sum? This is what I don't understand
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables. That's why.
$endgroup$
– jay-sun
Oct 25 '12 at 20:24
$begingroup$
gotcha! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:31
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables... Sorry but no.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:28
1
$begingroup$
There is nousual sense
for convolution of random variables. Either convolution of distributions or addition of random variables.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:51
$begingroup$
why this hint, why the sum? This is what I don't understand
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
$begingroup$
why this hint, why the sum? This is what I don't understand
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:22
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables. That's why.
$endgroup$
– jay-sun
Oct 25 '12 at 20:24
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables. That's why.
$endgroup$
– jay-sun
Oct 25 '12 at 20:24
$begingroup$
gotcha! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:31
$begingroup$
gotcha! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– user31280
Oct 25 '12 at 20:31
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables... Sorry but no.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:28
$begingroup$
adding two random variables is simply convolution of those random variables... Sorry but no.
$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:28
1
1
$begingroup$
There is no
usual sense
for convolution of random variables. Either convolution of distributions or addition of random variables.$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:51
$begingroup$
There is no
usual sense
for convolution of random variables. Either convolution of distributions or addition of random variables.$endgroup$
– Did
Feb 13 '13 at 6:51
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Here's a much cleaner solution:
Consider a two Poisson processes occuring with rates $lambda$ and $mu$, where a Poisson process of rate $r$ is viewed as the limit of $n$ consecutive Bernoulli trials each with probability $frac{r}{n}$, as $ntoinfty$.
Then $X$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $lambda$ and $Y$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $mu$, so the total number of successes is the same as if we had each trial succeed with probability $frac{lambda + mu}{n}$, where we take $n$ to be large enough so that the event where the $i$th Bernoulli trial in both processes are successdul has a negligible probability.
Then we are done.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Here's a much cleaner solution:
Consider a two Poisson processes occuring with rates $lambda$ and $mu$, where a Poisson process of rate $r$ is viewed as the limit of $n$ consecutive Bernoulli trials each with probability $frac{r}{n}$, as $ntoinfty$.
Then $X$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $lambda$ and $Y$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $mu$, so the total number of successes is the same as if we had each trial succeed with probability $frac{lambda + mu}{n}$, where we take $n$ to be large enough so that the event where the $i$th Bernoulli trial in both processes are successdul has a negligible probability.
Then we are done.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Here's a much cleaner solution:
Consider a two Poisson processes occuring with rates $lambda$ and $mu$, where a Poisson process of rate $r$ is viewed as the limit of $n$ consecutive Bernoulli trials each with probability $frac{r}{n}$, as $ntoinfty$.
Then $X$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $lambda$ and $Y$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $mu$, so the total number of successes is the same as if we had each trial succeed with probability $frac{lambda + mu}{n}$, where we take $n$ to be large enough so that the event where the $i$th Bernoulli trial in both processes are successdul has a negligible probability.
Then we are done.
$endgroup$
Here's a much cleaner solution:
Consider a two Poisson processes occuring with rates $lambda$ and $mu$, where a Poisson process of rate $r$ is viewed as the limit of $n$ consecutive Bernoulli trials each with probability $frac{r}{n}$, as $ntoinfty$.
Then $X$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $lambda$ and $Y$ counts the number of successes in the trials of rate $mu$, so the total number of successes is the same as if we had each trial succeed with probability $frac{lambda + mu}{n}$, where we take $n$ to be large enough so that the event where the $i$th Bernoulli trial in both processes are successdul has a negligible probability.
Then we are done.
answered Dec 15 '18 at 4:00
AnonAnon
376313
376313
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f221078%2fpoisson-distribution-of-sum-of-two-random-independent-variables-x-y%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Try using the method of moment generating functions :)
$endgroup$
– Samuel Reid
Nov 25 '13 at 7:03
$begingroup$
All I've learned in the definition of a Poisson Random Variable, is there a simpler way?
$endgroup$
– user82004
Nov 25 '13 at 7:07
4
$begingroup$
If they are
independent
.$endgroup$
– Did
Nov 25 '13 at 8:14
$begingroup$
Doesn’t it suffice that their covariance vanishes?
$endgroup$
– Michael Hoppe
Feb 1 '18 at 7:09