Math 2.0

statement theorem

Convergence in probability implies convergence in distribution

Statement

Let X,X1,X2,…X, X_1, X_2, \dots be real random variables on one probability space. If Xn→XX_n \to X in probability, then Xn→XX_n \to X in distribution.

Remarks

Proof: for ε>0\varepsilon > 0, Fn(x)≤F(x+ε)+P(∣Xn−X∣>ε)F_n(x) \le F(x + \varepsilon) + P(|X_n - X| > \varepsilon) and F(x−ε)≤Fn(x)+P(∣Xn−X∣>ε)F(x - \varepsilon) \le F_n(x) + P(|X_n - X| > \varepsilon). Let n→∞n \to \infty and then ε→0\varepsilon \to 0. At a continuity point xx of FF, this gives Fn(x)→F(x)F_n(x) \to F(x). The converse is false. Let X∼N(0,1)X \sim \mathcal{N}(0, 1) and Xn=−XX_n = -X for all nn. Then Xn→XX_n \to X in distribution, but P(∣Xn−X∣>1)=P(∣X∣>1/2)P(|X_n - X| > 1) = P(|X| > 1/2) does not tend to 00. The converse holds when the limit is a constant: if Xn→cX_n \to c in distribution for a real cc, then Xn→cX_n \to c in probability.

Explanations

L1 human

If XnX_n is very likely to be close to XX, then the probabilities for XnX_n are close to those for XX. But two variables can have the same law and still be far apart, so the converse fails.

What this node needs for W1
  • an inventory row: the row of the inventory that the node accounts for (0 of 1)

The writing levels say how complete the text of a node is. They do not measure its truth.

Sources

  1. Web https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergence_of_random_variables, Properties