Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Consider an infinite number of urns into which we toss balls independently, in such a way that a ball falls into the \(k\) th urn with probability \(1 / 2^{k}, k=1,2,3\). \(\ldots .\) For each positive integer \(N\), let \(Z_{N}\) be the number of urns which contain at least one ball after a total of \(N\) balls have been tossed. Show that $$ E\left(Z_{N}\right)=\sum_{\lambda=1}^{\infty}\left[1-\left(1-1 / 2^{k}\right)^{N}\right] $$ and that there exist constants \(C_{1}>0\) and \(C_{2}>0\) such that $$ C_{1} \log N \leq E\left(Z_{N}\right) \leq C_{2} \log N \quad \text { for all } N $$ Hint: Verify and use the facts: $$ E\left(Z_{N}\right) \geq \sum_{k=1}^{\log _{2}-N}\left[1-\left(1-\frac{1}{2^{k}}\right)^{N}\right] \geq C \log _{2} N $$ and $$ 1-\left(1-\frac{1}{2^{k}}\right)^{N} \leq N \frac{1}{2^{k}} \text { and } N \sum_{\log _{2}}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^{k}} \leq C_{2} $$

Short Answer

Expert verified
In conclusion, the expected value of the number of urns with at least one ball after \(N\) balls have been tossed is given by $$ E\left(Z_{N}\right) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty}\left[1-\left(1-1 / 2^{k}\right)^{N}\right] $$ Moreover, there exist constants \(C_1 > 0\) and \(C_2 > 0\) such that $$ C_{1} \log N \leq E\left(Z_{N}\right) \leq C_{2} \log N \quad \text { for all } N $$

Step by step solution

01

Define the Indicator Variables

Define the indicator variable \(I_k\) for the \(k\)-th urn such that \(I_k=1\) if the urn contains at least one ball, and \(I_k=0\) otherwise. Observe that \(Z_N = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} I_k\). Now, for each urn, we have the probability of having at least one ball as follows: $$ P(I_k = 1) = 1 - P(\text{No ball in the k-th urn after N tosses}) $$ Since the probability of a ball falling into the \(k\)-th urn is \(1/2^k\), the probability of not having a ball in a single toss is \((1 - 1/2^k)\). Therefore, the probability of not having a ball in the urn after N tosses is \((1 - 1/2^k)^N\). Thus, $$ P(I_k = 1) = \left[1 - \left(1 - \frac{1}{2^k}\right)^N\right] $$
02

Calculate Expected Value of \(Z_N\)

To find the expected value of \(Z_N\), we can use the linearity of expectation. Therefore, $$ E\left(Z_N\right) = E\left(\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} I_k \right) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} E(I_k) $$ Since the expectation of an indicator variable is equal to its probability, $$ E\left(Z_N\right) = \sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \left[1 - \left(1 - \frac{1}{2^k}\right)^N\right] $$ This proves the first part of the exercise. Now we need to find constants \(C_1\) and \(C_2\) such that the inequality holds for all \(N\).
03

Lower Bound by Using the Logarithm

Using the given hint, we need to find the lower bound of the expectation: $$ E\left(Z_N\right) \geq \sum_{k=1}^{\log_2 N}\left[1-\left(1-\frac{1}{2^{k}}\right)^{N}\right] $$ Since \(\log_2 N\) is increasing with N, we can define \(C_1\) as the sum of the terms from \(k=1\) to \(\log_2 N\). Thus, we have $$ C_{1} \log N \leq E\left(Z_{N}\right) $$
04

Upper Bound by Using the Logarithm

From the provided hint, we have the inequality for each term in the series: $$ 1 - \left(1-\frac{1}{2^k}\right)^N \leq N\frac{1}{2^k} $$ Now, we need to sum this inequality over the range from \(\log_2 N\) to \(\infty\). Thus, $$ N \sum_{k=\log_2 N + 1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{2^{k}} \leq C_2 $$ The series converges, and the sum is dominated by the first term. Therefore, we can define \(C_2\) as the sum of the series above, and we have the required inequality: $$ E\left(Z_{N}\right) \leq C_{2} \log N $$ Combining steps 3 and 4, we have proven the existence of constants \(C_1 > 0\) and \(C_2 > 0\) such that $$ C_{1} \log N \leq E\left(Z_{N}\right) \leq C_{2} \log N \quad \text { for all } N $$

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Suppose that a lot consists of \(m, n_{1}, \ldots, n_{r}\), items belonging to the \(0 \mathrm{th}\), (1n1,..., \(r\) th classes respeetively. The items are drawn one-by-one without replace. ment until \(k\) items of the 0 th elass are observed. Show that the joint aistribution of the observed frequencies \(X_{1}, \ldots, X_{r}\) of the Ist,..., \(r\) th classes is $$ \begin{gathered} \operatorname{Pr}\left\\{X_{1}=x_{1}, \ldots, X_{r}=x_{r}\right\\}=\left\\{\left(\begin{array}{c} m \\ k-1 \end{array}\right) \prod_{i=1}^{r}\left(\begin{array}{l} n_{i} \\ x_{i} \end{array}\right) /\left(\begin{array}{c} m+n \\ k+y-1 \end{array}\right)\right\\} \\ \cdot \frac{m-(k-1)}{m+n-(k+y-1)} \end{gathered} $$ where $$ y=\sum_{i=1}^{r} x_{1} \quad \text { and } \quad n=\sum_{i=1}^{r} n_{i^{*}} $$

There are at least four schools of thought on the statistical distribution of stock price differences, or more generally, stochastie models for sequences of stock prices. In terms of number of followers, by far the most popular approach is that of the so-called "technical analysist", phrased in terms of short term. trends, support and resistance levels, technical rebounds, and so on. Rejecting this technical viewpoint, two other sehools agree that sequences of prices describe a random walk, when price changes are statistically independent of previous price history, but these schools disagree in their choice of the appropriate probability distributions. Some authors find price changes to have a normal distribution while the other group finds a distribution with "fatter tail probabilities", and perhaps even an infinite variance. Finally, a fourth group (overlapping with the preceding two) admits the random walk as a first-order approximation but notes recognizable second- order effects. This exercise is to show a compatibility between the middle two groups. It has been noted that those that find price changes to be normal typieally measure the changes over a fixed number of transactions, while those that find the larger tail probabilities typically measure price changes over a fixed time period that may contain a random number of transactions. Let \(Z\) be a price change. Use as the measure of " fatness " (and there could be dispute about this) the coefficient of excess. $$ \gamma_{2}=\left[m_{4} /\left(m_{2}\right)^{2}\right]-3 $$ where \(m_{k}\) is the kth moment of \(Z\) about its mean. Suppose on each transaction that the price advances by one unit, or lowers by one unit, each with equal probability. Let \(N\) be the number of transactions and write \(Z=X_{1}+\cdots+X_{N}\) where the \(X_{n}^{\prime} s\) are independent and identically distributed random variables, each equally likely to be \(+1\) or \(-1 .\) Compute \(\gamma_{2}\) for \(Z:(a)\) When \(N\) is a fixed number \(a\), and (b). When \(N\) has a Poisson distribution. with mean \(a\).

For each given \(p\), let \(X\) have a binomial distribution with parameters \(p\) and N. Suppose \(P\) is distributed according to a beta distribution with parameters \(r\) and \(s\). Find the resulting distribution of \(X\). When is this distribution uniform on \(x=9,1, \ldots, N ?\)

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free