3
$\begingroup$

Assume $\mathbf{x}$ is a random vector with mean $\mathbf{\mu}$ and covariance matrix $\mathbf{\Sigma}$. Symmetric matrices $\mathbf{A}$ and $\mathbf{B}$ are given.

Without assuming normality, how to prove that the covariance matrix of the quadratic form is the following?

$$ \mbox{Cov} \left( \mathbf{x'Ax,x'Bx} \right) = 2 \mbox{Tr} \left( \mathbf{A\Sigma B\Sigma} \right) + 4 \mathbf{\mu^T A\Sigma B \mu} $$

I found a proof but assuming normality. Can anyone please give me some hint or reference to prove this? Thanks a lot!

I found Robert's suggestion pretty reasonable. I found this question is taken from the book 《Modern multivariate analysis》, Casella. enter image description here

It's right to assume normality.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Do you agree with my edits? $\endgroup$
    – Rodrigo de Azevedo
    Mar 25, 2021 at 15:30
  • $\begingroup$ Yes! Thanks for your editing. This is my first time to ask questions here. You made this more formally and tidy. $\endgroup$
    – Regan
    Mar 25, 2021 at 15:34

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

Why would you think normality is not needed? Consider the $1$-dimensional case: the left side is a constant times the variance of $x^2$, which depends on the $4$'th moment; it is not just a function of the mean and variance of $x$.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ @Regan, when you get a moment you might follow up on Robert's suggestion as a counterexample. Work through the simple situation of a single dimension with $X$ being exponentially distributed with mean 1. $\endgroup$
    – A rural reader
    Mar 25, 2021 at 18:17
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks a lot! I found the normality assumption is definitely needed. $\endgroup$
    – Regan
    Mar 26, 2021 at 2:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.