Skip to main content
16 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 11, 2017 at 21:33 comment added Mateusz Kwaśnicki @Boby: Arguing in as in Christian's answer, the convolution $F(x)$ of $\exp(-|x|)$ and the minimising distribution $\mu$ must be constant on $[-a,a]$. (By the way, this is a fundamental result in potential theory). Therefore, $F(x)=c$ for $x\in[-a,a]$, $F(x)=c\exp(a+x)$ for $x<-a$ and $F(x)=c\exp(a-x)$ for $x>a$. Now you can either guess the measure $\mu$, or evaluate it as $\mu=\tfrac{1}{2}(-\Delta+1)F$ in the sense of distributions ($\tfrac{1}{2}(\Delta-1)$ is the inverse of the convolution operator with kernel $\exp(-|x|)$). The constant $c$ is now determined by $\mu([-a,a])=1$.
Sep 11, 2017 at 21:20 comment added Boby @MateuszKwaśnicki Yes, I would love to get the explicit answer. Should I post a new question?
Sep 11, 2017 at 20:02 history edited Christian Remling CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 110 characters in body
Sep 11, 2017 at 20:01 comment added Christian Remling @MateuszKwaśnicki: You're right, $(1/2)(\delta_{-a}+\delta_a)$ is optimal for small $a$. I miscalculated originally (I thought $F(0)<F(\pm a)$ always, but that's not true). The scenario you describe sounds plausible to me.
Sep 11, 2017 at 19:48 comment added Mateusz Kwaśnicki @Boby: On the other hand, minimisers of $\mathbb{E}\exp(-|X-X'|)$ can be found explicitly, as this corresponds to the energy functional of the Brownian motion killed at a uniform rate. The minimising measure can be evaluated to be $(2+a)^{-1}(\delta_{-a}(dx)+\delta_a(dx)+dx)$, a mixture of uniform and two-point distributions. I can provide the details if you are interested.
Sep 11, 2017 at 19:40 comment added Mateusz Kwaśnicki @Boby: For $\exp(-(X-X')^2)$ and $a$ small enough, so that $\exp(-x^2)$ is concave on $[-2a,2a]$, the minimiser is a two-point distribution: this is true for any cost function which is a concave and decreasing function of $|X-X'|$. I expect that for large $a$ the minimiser will again be in some sense close to the uniform distribution.
Sep 11, 2017 at 19:37 comment added Mateusz Kwaśnicki @ChristianRemling: Out of curiosity, I did some experiments: apparently the minimiser is a two-point distribution for $a \in [0, \sqrt{2}/2]$; then a third atom at zero appears for $a$ between $\sqrt{2}/2$ and roughly $1.2$; and then further atoms emerge. I believe this behaviour can be proved rigorously, but I did not attempt to do that.
Sep 11, 2017 at 19:25 comment added Christian Remling @Boby: I don't know really off the top of my head, right now my feeling is this is going to have the same general features as the question you asked.
Sep 11, 2017 at 19:06 comment added Boby Do you think $E[ e^{-(X-X^\prime)^2}]$ has an easier solution? Should I ask a new question on this?
Sep 11, 2017 at 17:36 comment added Mateusz Kwaśnicki Oh, that is of course correct, sorry!
Sep 11, 2017 at 15:48 comment added Christian Remling @MateuszKwaśnicki: The two terms are equal to one another, they are both double integrals $\int d\sigma(x)\int d\mu(t)\, 1/(1+(x-t)^2)$ with just the variables swapped in the second term.
Sep 9, 2017 at 21:09 comment added Mateusz Kwaśnicki I think there is an error in your evaluation of the first variation: if $F_\mu(x) = \int (1+x^2)^{-1} \mu(dx)$, then $\int F_{\mu+h\sigma}(x) (\mu+\sigma)(dx) \approx \int F_\mu(x) \mu(dx) + h(\int F_\mu(x)\sigma(dx)+\int F_\sigma(x)\mu(dx)) + o(h^2)$, so apparently you are missing $\int F_\sigma(x)\mu(dx)$. I am not sure, though, if it changes the result.
Sep 9, 2017 at 18:50 history edited Christian Remling CC BY-SA 3.0
added 562 characters in body
Sep 9, 2017 at 17:32 history edited Christian Remling CC BY-SA 3.0
edited body
Sep 9, 2017 at 17:25 history edited Christian Remling CC BY-SA 3.0
added 178 characters in body
Sep 9, 2017 at 17:15 history answered Christian Remling CC BY-SA 3.0