Timeline for Derivatives of conditional expectations
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mar 19, 2012 at 1:54 | vote | accept | Tom LaGatta | ||
Mar 18, 2012 at 8:35 | answer | added | Yves | timeline score: 3 | |
Dec 13, 2011 at 17:36 | history | edited | Tom LaGatta | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 266 characters in body
|
Dec 13, 2011 at 17:35 | comment | added | Tom LaGatta | Thanks, fedja. Bimodality seems like a reasonably robust way to construct counterexamples. Perhaps a natural assumption would be to assume that all the density functions are log-concave (i.e., $x \mapsto -\log f(x)$ is a convex function). This would include Gaussian density functions (though not power-law). | |
Dec 13, 2011 at 2:55 | comment | added | fedja | Imagine $X$ that is bimodal: it is about $0$ or $1$ with probability $1/2$ each (you can smear that to get continuous density). Imagine $Y=\pm 0.1$ with probability $1/2$ for each sign (again, smear a bit) and $Z$ smeared over a huge interval uniformly. Then the condition $B=b$ tells next to nothing about $X$ but when $A=0.1$, you know that $Y$ is $0.1$ (otherwise there is no chance to get there) and when $A=0.9$, you are pretty certain that $Y=-0.1$. Bad, isn't it? As to simple conditions, what terms are allowed? | |
Dec 13, 2011 at 1:35 | history | asked | Tom LaGatta | CC BY-SA 3.0 |