5
$\begingroup$

This is a question that I'm sure has been investigated before, but I have found no good search terms for.

Let $X_i$ be a sequence of random variables, independent and uniformly distributed in $[0,1]$. Let $Y_n=\min(X_1,\dots,X_n)$.

Is there an asymptotic which $Y_n$ almost surely follows? More precisely, is there some function $f:\mathbb N\to\mathbb R_+$ such that, almost surely, $Y_n\sim f(n)$?

If we ignore the fact that $Y_i$ are not independent, a Borel-Cantelli argument suggests $f(n)=\frac{\log n}{n}$: for any $c$, $\mathbb P(Y_n>c)=(1-c)^n\sim e^{-cn}$ for small $c$. Letting $c=d\frac{\log n}{n}$, this is asymptotic to $n^{-d}$, which has finite sum for $d>1$ and infinite for $d<1$, so we get $\limsup_{n\to\infty}\frac{Y_n}{(\log n)/n}\leq 1$ almost surely, with equality if we pretend we have independence.

Is the $\limsup$ of $\frac{Y_n}{(\log n)/n}$ actually equal to $1$ almost surely? Is the limit equal to $1$ almost surely? If not, what is the "lower" asymptotic for $Y_n$? For instance, do we at least have $Y_n=\Theta(\frac{\log n}{n})$ almost surely?

Note: I am aware that $nY_n$ converges to an exponential distribution, but I don't think that really helps answer the question, as we are interested in the entire sequence of $Y_n$ rather than their individual terms.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ The expected value is $\frac{1}{n+1}$, so it can't be that $Y_n = \frac{\log n}{n}$ almost surely (even with probability at least $\frac{1.01}{\log n}$). $\endgroup$ Commented 15 hours ago
  • $\begingroup$ I believe we can show that almost surely $\limsup \frac{nY_n}{\log \log (n)} \le 10$, by defining $Z_k = \max(X_{2^{k-1}+1}, \ldots,x_{2^{k}})$ (they are now independent), bounding $Y_n$ for $2^{k}+1\le n \le 2^{k+1}$ from above by $Z_k$ and repeating your argument. $\endgroup$ Commented 14 hours ago
  • $\begingroup$ @AlekseiKulikov I think by "max" you mean "min" (and by "$x_{2^k}$" you mean "$X_{2^k}$"). $\endgroup$ Commented 13 hours ago

2 Answers 2

7
$\begingroup$

do we at least have $Y_n=\Theta(\frac{\log n}{n})$ almost surely?

The answer to this is no. It is not even true that $Y_n=\Theta(\frac{h(n)}{n})$ almost surely (a.s.) for any (deterministic or random) function $h$ such that $h(n)\to\infty$ a.s. (as $n\to\infty$). Indeed, suppose the contrary: that $\liminf_n nY_n=\infty$ a.s. Then, by the Fatou lemma, $$ \infty=E\infty\le\liminf_n EnY_n =\liminf_n n\frac1{n+1}=1, $$ a contradiction. $\quad\Box$


Let us now show that $Y_n\not\sim f(n)$ a.s. for any deterministic positive function $f$.

To prove this, suppose the contrary: that $Y_n\sim f(n)$ a.s. for some deterministic positive function $f$. Take any positive sequence $(a_n)$ such that $\sum_n a_n=\infty$. Then $$\sum_n P(X_n<a_n/2)=\sum_n a_n/2=\infty.$$ So, by the Borel--Cantelli lemma, events $\{X_n<a_n/2\}$ a.s. occur infinitely often (i.o.), that is, for infinitely many values of $n$. Therefore and because $\{X_n<a_n/2\}\subseteq\{Y_n<a_n/2\}$, we see that events $\{Y_n<a_n/2\}$ a.s. occur i.o. Recalling now the assumption that $Y_n\sim f(n)$ a.s., we conclude that $f(n)\le a_n$ i.o. In particular, $f(n)\le \frac1{n\ln n}=o(1/n)$ i.o.

So, $$Z_n:=nY_n\sim nf(n)=o(1) \tag{1}\label{1}$$ a.s. for $n=n_k$ and $k\to\infty$, where $(n_k)$ is a strictly increasing deterministic sequence of positive integers. Also, $EZ_n^2<2$. So, for $n$ as above, $$\begin{aligned} 1\leftarrow EZ_n&=EZ_n\,1(Z_n<4)+EZ_n\,1(Z_n\ge4) \\ &\le EZ_n\,1(Z_n<4)+EZ_n^2/4 \\ &<EZ_n\,1(Z_n<4)+1/2\to1/2 \end{aligned}$$ by \eqref{1} and dominated convergence. So, we have a contradiction. $\quad\Box$


In fact, $Y_n\not\sim f(n)$ even in probability for any positive deterministic function $f$.

Indeed, suppose that $Y_n\sim f(n)$ in probability for some positive deterministic function $f$. Then, by the Fatou lemma, $$1=E\lim_n\frac{Y_n}{f(n)}\le \liminf_n\frac{EY_n}{f(n)} =\liminf_n\frac{1}{(n+1)f(n)},$$ so that $f(n)\lesssim1/n$. So, $nf(n)\to c$ for some real $c\ge0$, $n=n_k$, and $k\to\infty$, where $(n_k)$ is some strictly increasing sequence of positive integers. So, for such $n$ and $Z_n$ as above, $$Z_n\to c$$ in probability. Also, $EZ_n\to1$, $EZ_n^2\to2$, and $EZ_n^4\to24$. Take now any real $A>0$. Then $$E(Z_n-c)^2=E(Z_n^2-2cZ_n+c^2)\to C:=2-2c+c^2,$$ whereas, for $n$ as above, $$\begin{aligned} E(Z_n-c)^2 &=E(Z_n-c)^2\,1((Z_n-c)^2\le A)+E(Z_n-c)^2\,1((Z_n-c)^2>A) \\ &\le E(Z_n-c)^2\,1((Z_n-c)^2\le A)+E(Z_n-c)^4/A \\ &\le E(Z_n-c)^2\,1((Z_n-c)^2\le A)+(EZ_n^4+c^4)/A \\ &\to 0+(24+c^4)/A \end{aligned}$$ by dominated convergence. We conclude that $0<C\le(24+c^4)/A$ for all real $A>0$, a contradiction. $\quad\Box$

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Why the downvote??? $\endgroup$ Commented 8 hours ago
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, I should have noticed the first part but thanks for spelling it out. Do you have any idea what the expected lower bound should be? A function $g(n)$ such that $\liminf Y_n/g(n)=1$ almost surely? $\endgroup$
    – Wojowu
    Commented 5 hours ago
  • $\begingroup$ @Wojowu : I don't know this at this point. Two of your questions posted here have now been answered (and more), even though, according to these guidelines, users should avoid trying to answer posts that "request answers to multiple questions". So, perhaps you can consider posting your remaining questions separately. $\endgroup$ Commented 4 hours ago
0
$\begingroup$

There is no positive deterministic sequence $(g_n)$ such that $g_n\to0$ (as $n\to\infty$) and $\liminf_n \frac{Y_n}{g_n}=1$ a.s.

More specifically, let $H$ denote the set of all positive deterministic sequences $h=(h_n)$ such that $h_n\to0$. Let us say that $h\in H$ is a lower bound for the $Y_n$'s if a.s. the events $\{Y_n<h_n\}$ occur only finitely often (f.o.), that is, only for finitely many values of $n$. Similarly, let us say that $h\in H$ is a lower bound for the $X_n$'s if a.s. the events $\{X_n<h_n\}$ occur only f.o.

The key observation is that $h$ is a lower bound for the $Y_n$'s if and only if $h$ is a lower bound for the $X_n$'s.

On the other hand, by the Borel--Cantelli lemma, $h\in H$ is a lower bound for the $X_n$'s if and only if $$\sum_n P(X_n<h_n)=\sum_n h_n<\infty.$$

Thus, $h\in H$ is a lower bound for the $Y_n$'s if and only if $$\sum_n h_n<\infty.$$

So, if $h\in H$ is a lower bound for the $Y_n$'s, then $ah\in H$ is a lower bound for the $Y_n$'s for any real $a>0$. Moreover, if $h\in H$ is a lower bound for the $Y_n$'s, then $h/b\in H$ is a lower bound for the $Y_n$'s for some sequence $b\in H$ (so that $b_n\to0$).

We conclude that, indeed, there is no positive deterministic sequence $(g_n)$ such that $g_n\to0$ and $\liminf_n \frac{Y_n}{g_n}=1$ a.s. Furthermore, there is no positive deterministic sequence $(g_n)$ such that $g_n\to0$ and $\liminf_n \frac{Y_n}{g_n}\asymp1$ a.s.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .