A ratio distribution (also known as a quotient distribution) is a probability distribution constructed as the distribution of the ratio of random variables having two other known distributions.Given two (usually independent) random variables X and Y, the distribution of the random variable Z that is formed as the ratio Z = X/Y is a ratio distribution.
An example is the Cauchy distribution (also called the normal ratio distribution), which comes about as the ratio of two normally distributed variables with zero mean.Two other distributions often used in test-statistics are also ratio distributions: the t-distribution arises from a Gaussian random variable divided by an independent chi-distributed random variable, while the F-distribution originates from the ratio of two independent chi-squared distributed random variables.More general ratio distributions have been considered in the literature.[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]
Often the ratio distributions are heavy-tailed, and it may be difficult to work with such distributions and develop an associated statistical test.A method based on the median has been suggested as a "work-around".[10]
See main article: Algebra of random variables. The ratio is one type of algebra for random variables:Related to the ratio distribution are the product distribution, sum distribution and difference distribution. More generally, one may talk of combinations of sums, differences, products and ratios.Many of these distributions are described in Melvin D. Springer's book from 1979 The Algebra of Random Variables.
The algebraic rules known with ordinary numbers do not apply for the algebra of random variables.For example, if a product is C = AB and a ratio is D=C/A it does not necessarily mean that the distributions of D and B are the same. Indeed, a peculiar effect is seen for the Cauchy distribution: The product and the ratio of two independent Cauchy distributions (with the same scale parameter and the location parameter set to zero) will give the same distribution.This becomes evident when regarding the Cauchy distribution as itself a ratio distribution of two Gaussian distributions of zero means: Consider two Cauchy random variables,
C1
C2
C1=G1/G2
C2=G3/G4
C1 | |
C2 |
=
{G1 | |
/{G |
2}}{{G3}/{G4}}=
G1G4 | |
G2G3 |
=
G1 | |
G2 |
x
G4 | |
G3 |
=C1 x C3,
where
C3=G4/G3
A way of deriving the ratio distribution of
Z=X/Y
pX,Y(x,y)
pZ(z)=
+infty | |
\int | |
-infty |
|y|pX,Y(zy,y)dy.
If the two variables are independent then
pXY(x,y)=pX(x)pY(y)
pZ(z)=
+infty | |
\int | |
-infty |
|y|pX(zy)pY(y)dy.
This may not be straightforward. By way of example take the classical problem of the ratio of two standard Gaussian samples. The joint pdf is
pX,Y(x,y)=
1 | \exp\left(- | |
2\pi |
x2 | |
2 |
\right)\exp\left(-
y2 | |
2 |
\right)
Defining
Z=X/Y
\begin{align} pZ(z)&=
1 | |
2\pi |
infty | |
\int | |
-infty |
|y|\exp\left(-
\left(zy\right)2 | |
2 |
\right)\exp\left(-
y2 | |
2 |
\right)dy\\ &=
1 | |
2\pi |
infty | |
\int | |
-infty |
|y|\exp\left(-
y2\left(z2+1\right) | |
2 |
\right)dy \end{align}
pZ(z)=
1 | |
\pi(z2+1) |
The Mellin transform has also been suggested for derivation of ratio distributions.
In the case of positive independent variables, proceed as follows. The diagram shows a separable bivariate distribution
fx,y(x,y)=fx(x)fy(y)
x,y>0
R=X/Y
y=x/R
fx,y(x,y)
X/Y\leR
FR(R)=
infty | |
\int | |
0 |
fy(y)
Ry | |
\left(\int | |
0 |
fx(x)dx\right)dy
FR(R)
R
fR(R)
fR(R)=
d | |
dR |
\left[
infty | |
\int | |
0 |
fy(y)
Ry | |
\left(\int | |
0 |
fx(x)dx\right)dy\right]
fR(R)=
infty | |
\int | |
0 |
fy(y)\left(
d | |
dR |
Ry | |
\int | |
0 |
fx(x)dx\right)dy
d | |
dR |
Ry | |
\int | |
0 |
fx(x)dx=yfx(Ry)
fR(R)=
infty | |
\int | |
0 |
fy(y) fx(Ry) y dy
fx(x)=\alphae-\alpha, fy(y)=\betae-\beta, x,y\ge0
Ry | |
\int | |
0 |
fx(x)dx=-e-\alpha
Ry | |
\vert | |
0 |
=1-e-\alpha
\begin{align}FR(R)&=
infty | |
\int | |
0 |
fy(y)\left(1-e-\alpha\right)dy
infty | |
=\int | |
0 |
\betae-\beta\left(1-e-\alpha\right)dy\\ &=1-
\alphaR | |
\beta+\alphaR |
\\ &=
R | |
\tfrac{\beta |
{\alpha}+R}\end{align}
fR(R)=
d | |
dR |
\left(
R | |
\tfrac{\beta |
{\alpha}+R}\right)=
\tfrac{\beta | |
\alpha |
From Mellin transform theory, for distributions existing only on the positive half-line
x\ge0
\operatorname{E}[(UV)p]=\operatorname{E}[Up] \operatorname{E}[Vp]
U, V
\operatorname{E}[(X/Y)p]
1/Y=Z
\operatorname{E}[(XZ)p]=\operatorname{E}[Xp] \operatorname{E}[Y-p]
Xp
Y-p
X/Y
Y-p
Y
To illustrate, let
X
x\alphae-x/\Gamma(\alpha)
p
\Gamma(\alpha+p)/\Gamma(\alpha)
Z=Y-1
\beta
\Gamma-1(\beta)z1+\betae-1/z
\operatorname{E}[Zp]=\operatorname{E}[Y-p]=
\Gamma(\beta-p) | |
\Gamma(\beta) |
, p<\beta.
Multiplying the corresponding moments gives
\operatorname{E}[(X/Y)p]=\operatorname{E}[Xp] \operatorname{E}[Y-p]=
\Gamma(\alpha+p) | |
\Gamma(\alpha) |
\Gamma(\beta-p) | |
\Gamma(\beta) |
, p<\beta.
Independently, it is known that the ratio of the two Gamma samples
R=X/Y
f\beta'(r,\alpha,\beta)=B(\alpha,\beta)-1r\alpha-1(1+r)-(\alpha
\operatorname{E}[Rp]=
\Beta(\alpha+p,\beta-p) | |
\Beta(\alpha,\beta) |
Substituting
\Beta(\alpha,\beta)=
\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(\beta) | |
\Gamma(\alpha+\beta) |
\operatorname{E}[Rp]=
\Gamma(\alpha+p)\Gamma(\beta-p) | |
\Gamma(\alpha+\beta) |
/
\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(\beta) | = | |
\Gamma(\alpha+\beta) |
\Gamma(\alpha+p)\Gamma(\beta-p) | |
\Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(\beta) |
In the Product distribution section, and derived from Mellin transform theory (see section above), it is found that the mean of a product of independent variables is equal to the product of their means. In the case of ratios, we have
\operatorname{E}(X/Y)=\operatorname{E}(X)\operatorname{E}(1/Y)
which, in terms of probability distributions, is equivalent to
\operatorname{E}(X/Y)=
infty | |
\int | |
-infty |
xfx(x)dx x
infty | |
\int | |
-infty |
y-1fy(y)dy
Note that
\operatorname{E}(1/Y) ≠
1 | |
\operatorname{E |
(Y)}
infty | |
\int | |
-infty |
y-1fy(y)dy\ne
1 | |||||||||
|
The variance of a ratio of independent variables is
\begin{align}\operatorname{Var}(X/Y)&=\operatorname{E}([X/Y]2)-\operatorname{E2}(X/Y) \ &=\operatorname{E}(X2)\operatorname{E}(1/Y2)-\operatorname{E}2(X)\operatorname{E}2(1/Y) \end{align}
When X and Y are independent and have a Gaussian distribution with zero mean, the form of their ratio distribution is a Cauchy distribution.This can be derived by setting
Z=X/Y=\tan\theta
\theta
\begin{align}p(x,y)&=\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}
| |||||
e |
x \tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}
| |||||
e |
\ &=\tfrac{1}{2\pi}
| |||||
e |
\ &=\tfrac{1}{2\pi}
| |||||
e |
withr2=x2+y2\end{align}
If
p(x,y)
\theta
[0,2\pi]
1/2\pi
Z=X/Y=\tan\theta
pz(z)|dz|=p\theta(\theta)|d\theta|
dz/d\theta=1/\cos2\theta
pz(z)=
p\theta(\theta) | |
|dz/d\theta| |
=\tfrac{1}{2\pi}{\cos2\theta}
pz(z)=
1/2\pi | |
1+z2 |
\theta
\pi
pz(z)=
1/\pi | |
1+z2 |
, -infty<z<infty
When either of the two Normal distributions is non-central then the result for the distribution of the ratio is much more complicated and is given below in the succinct form presented by David Hinkley. The trigonometric method for a ratio does however extend to radial distributions like bivariate normals or a bivariate Student t in which the density depends only on radius . It does not extend to the ratio of two independent Student t distributions which give the Cauchy ratio shown in a section below for one degree of freedom.
In the absence of correlation
(\operatorname{cor}(X,Y)=0)
pZ(z)=
b(z) ⋅ d(z) | |
a3(z) |
1 | |
\sqrt{2\pi |
\sigmax\sigmay}\left[\Phi\left(
b(z) | |
a(z) |
\right)-\Phi\left(-
b(z) | |
a(z) |
\right)\right]+
1 | |
a2(z) ⋅ \pi\sigmax\sigmay |
| ||||||
e |
where
a(z)=\sqrt{
1 | ||||||
|
z2+
1 | ||||||
|
b(z)=
\mux | ||||||
|
z+
\muy | ||||||
|
c=
| |||||||
|
+
| |||||||
|
d(z)=
| ||||
e |
\Phi
\Phi(t)=
t | |
\int | |
-infty |
1 | |
\sqrt{2\pi |
p= | \mux |
\sqrt{2 |
\sigmax}
q= | \muy |
\sqrt{2 |
\sigmay}
r= | \mux |
\muy |
\dagger(z) | |
p | |
Z |
| ||||
p | ||||
Z |
| |||||||||||||||||
\sigma | \left( | ||||||||||||||||
z |
| |||||||
|
+
| |||||||
|
\right)
The above expression becomes more complicated when the variables X and Y are correlated. If
\mux=\muy=0
\sigmaX ≠ \sigmaY
\rho ≠ 0
pZ(z)=
1 | |
\pi |
\beta | |
(z-\alpha)2+\beta2 |
,
where ρ is the correlation coefficient between X and Y and
\alpha=\rho
\sigmax | |
\sigmay |
,
\beta=
\sigmax | |
\sigmay |
\sqrt{1-\rho2}.
The complex distribution has also been expressed with Kummer's confluent hypergeometric function or the Hermite function.
This was shown in Springer 1979 problem 4.28.
A transformation to the log domain was suggested by Katz(1978) (see binomial section below). Let the ratio be
T\sim
| |||||||||||||
|
=
\mux+X | |
\muy+Y |
=
\mux | |
\muy |
| ||||||
|
Take logs to get
loge(T)=loge\left(
\mux | |
\muy |
\right) +loge\left(1+
X | |
\mux |
\right) -loge\left(1+
Y | |
\muy |
\right).
loge(1+\delta)=\delta-
\delta2 | |
2 |
+
\delta3 | |
3 |
+ …
loge(T) ≈ loge\left(
\mux | |
\muy |
\right)+
X | |
\mux |
-
Y | |
\muy |
\simloge\left(
\mux | |
\muy |
\right)+N\left(0,
| |||||||
|
+
| |||||||
|
\right).
Alternatively, Geary (1930) suggested that
t ≈
\muyT-\mux | |||||||||||||||
|
\muy>3\sigmay
This is developed by Dale (Springer 1979 problem 4.28) and Hinkley 1969. Geary showed how the correlated ratio
z
t
x+\mux<0
Let the ratio be:
z= | x+\mux |
y+\muy |
x,y
2, | |
\sigma | |
x |
2 | |
\sigma | |
y |
X,Y
\mux,\muy.
x'=x-\rhoy\sigmax/\sigmay
x',y
x'
\sigmax'=\sigmax\sqrt{1-\rho2}.
z= | x'+\rhoy\sigmax/\sigmay+\mux |
y+\muy |
y
{x'+\rhoy\sigmax/\sigmay+\mux}=x'+\mux-\rho\muy
\sigmax | |
\sigmay |
+\rho
(y+\mu | ||||
|
z= | x'+\mux' |
y+\muy |
+\rho
\sigmax | |
\sigmay |
Finally, to be explicit, the pdf of the ratio
z
\sigmax',\mux',\sigmay,\muy
\rho'=0
-\rho
\sigmax | |
\sigmay |
z
The figures above show an example of a positively correlated ratio with
\sigmax=\sigmay=1,\mux=0,\muy=0.5,\rho=0.975
x/y\in[r,r+\delta]
z=x/y ≈ 1
pZ(x/y)
x/y
The ratio of correlated zero-mean circularly symmetric complex normal distributed variables was determined by Baxley et al.[13] and has since been extended to the nonzero-mean and nonsymmetric case.[14] In the correlated zero-mean case, the joint distribution of x, y is
fx,y(x,y)=
1 | |
\pi2|\Sigma| |
\exp\left(-\begin{bmatrix}x\ y\end{bmatrix}H\Sigma-1\begin{bmatrix}x\ y\end{bmatrix}\right)
\Sigma=\begin{bmatrix}
2 | |
\sigma | |
x |
&\rho\sigmax\sigmay\\ \rho*\sigmax\sigmay&
2 | |
\sigma | |
y |
\end{bmatrix}, x=xr+ixi, y=yr+iyi
( ⋅ )H
\rho=\rhor+i\rhoi=\operatorname{E}(
xy* | |
\sigmax\sigmay |
) \in \left|C\right|\le1
The PDF of
Z=X/Y
\begin{align}fz(zr,zi)&=
1-|\rho|2 | ||||||||||||||
|
r(
|z|2 | ||||||
|
+
1 | -2 | |||||
|
\rhorzr-\rhoizi | |
\sigmax\sigmay |
r)-2\\ &=
1-|\rho|2 | ||||||||||||||
|
r( r|
z | |
\sigmax |
-
\rho* | |
\sigmay |
r|2+
1-|\rho|2 | ||||||
|
r)-2\end{align}
\sigmax=\sigmay
fz(zr,zi)=
1-|\rho|2 | |
\pi\left( |z-\rho*|2+1-|\rho|2\right)2 |
Further closed-form results for the CDF are also given.
The graph shows the pdf of the ratio of two complex normal variables with a correlation coefficient of
\rho=0.7\exp(i\pi/4)
\rho
The ratio of independent or correlated log-normals is log-normal. This follows, because if
X1
X2
ln(X1)
ln(X2)
This is important for many applications requiring the ratio of random variables that must be positive, where joint distribution of
X1
X2
Xi
With two independent random variables following a uniform distribution, e.g.,
pX(x)=\begin{cases} 1&0<x<1\\ 0&otherwise \end{cases}
pZ(z)=\begin{cases} 1/2 &0<z<1\
1 | |
2z2 |
&z\geq1\\ 0 &otherwise \end{cases}
If two independent random variables, X and Y each follow a Cauchy distribution with median equal to zero and shape factor
a
pX(x|a)=
a | |
\pi(a2+x2) |
Z=X/Y
pZ(z|a)=
1 | |
\pi2(z2-1) |
ln(z2).
a
W=XY
pW(w|a)=
a2 | |
\pi2(w2-a4) |
ln\left(
w2 | |
a4 |
\right).
a
b
Z=X/Y
W=XY
b
1 | |
b |
.
See main article: Slash distribution. If X has a standard normal distribution and Y has a standard uniform distribution, then Z = X / Y has a distribution known as the slash distribution, with probability density function
pZ(z)=\begin{cases} \left[\varphi(0)-\varphi(z)\right]/z2 &z\ne0\\ \varphi(0)/2 &z=0,\\ \end{cases}
Let G be a normal(0,1) distribution, Y and Z be chi-squared distributions with m and n degrees of freedom respectively, all independent, with
f\chi(x,k) =
| |||||||||||
2k/2\Gamma(k/2) |
G | |
\sqrt{Y/m |
}\simtm
Y/m | |
Z/n |
=F
Y | |
Y+Z |
\sim\beta(\tfrac{m}{2},\tfrac{n}{2})
Y | |
Z |
\sim\beta'(\tfrac{m}{2},\tfrac{n}{2})
If
V1\sim
2(λ) | |
{\chi'} | |
k1 |
V2\sim
2(0) | |
{\chi'} | |
k2 |
V1
V2
V1/k1 | |
V2/k2 |
\sim
F' | |
k1,k2 |
(λ)
m | |
n |
F'm,n=\beta'(\tfrac{m}{2},\tfrac{n}{2})orF'm,n=\beta'(\tfrac{m}{2},\tfrac{n}{2},1,\tfrac{n}{m})
F'm,n
The CDF of the Fisher density, found in F-tables is defined in the beta prime distribution article. If we enter an F-test table with m = 3, n = 4 and 5% probability in the right tail, the critical value is found to be 6.59. This coincides with the integral
F3,4(6.59)=
infty | |
\int | |
6.59 |
\beta'(x;\tfrac{m}{2},\tfrac{n}{2},1,\tfrac{n}{m})dx=0.05
For gamma distributions U and V with arbitrary shape parameters α1 and α2 and their scale parameters both set to unity, that is,
U\sim\Gamma(\alpha1,1),V\sim\Gamma(\alpha2,1)
\Gamma(x;\alpha,1)=
x\alpha-1e-x | |
\Gamma(\alpha) |
U | |
U+V |
\sim\beta(\alpha1,\alpha2), expectation=
\alpha1 | |
\alpha1+\alpha2 |
U | |
V |
\sim\beta'(\alpha1,\alpha2), expectation=
\alpha1 | |
\alpha2-1 |
, \alpha2>1
V | |
U |
\sim\beta'(\alpha2,\alpha1), expectation=
\alpha2 | |
\alpha1-1 |
, \alpha1>1
If
U\sim\Gamma(x;\alpha,1)
\thetaU\sim\Gamma(x;\alpha,\theta)=
| ||||||||||||
\thetak\Gamma(\alpha) |
If
U\sim\Gamma(\alpha1,\theta1), V\sim\Gamma(\alpha2,\theta2)
\theta
| ||||||||
|
=
\theta2U | |
\theta2U+\theta1V |
\sim\beta(\alpha1,\alpha2)
| |||||
|
=
\theta2 | |
\theta1 |
U | |
V |
\sim\beta'(\alpha1,\alpha2)
U | |
V |
\sim\beta'(\alpha1,\alpha2,1,
\theta1 | |
\theta2 |
) and\operatorname{E}\left[
U | |
V |
\right]=
\theta1 | |
\theta2 |
\alpha1 | |
\alpha2-1 |
\beta'(\alpha,\beta,p,q)
In the foregoing it is apparent that if
X\sim\beta'(\alpha1,\alpha2,1,1)\equiv\beta'(\alpha1,\alpha2)
\thetaX\sim\beta'(\alpha1,\alpha2,1,\theta)
\beta'(x;\alpha1,\alpha2,1,R)=
1 | |
R |
\beta'(
x | |
R |
;\alpha1,\alpha2)
U\sim\Gamma(\alpha1,\theta1),V\sim\Gamma(\alpha2,\theta2)
U | |
V |
\sim
1 | |
R |
\beta'(
x | |
R |
;\alpha1,\alpha2)=
| ||||||||||
|
⋅
1 | |
R B(\alpha1,\alpha2) |
, x\ge0
R=
\theta1 | |
\theta2 |
, B(\alpha1,\alpha2)=
\Gamma(\alpha1)\Gamma(\alpha2) | |
\Gamma(\alpha1+\alpha2) |
fr(r)=(r/\sigma2)
-r2/2\sigma2 | |
e |
, r\ge0
fz(z)=
2z | |
(1+z2)2 |
, z\ge0
Fz(z)=1-
1 | |
1+z2 |
=
z2 | |
1+z2 |
, z\ge0
Z=\alphaX/Y
fz(z,\alpha)=
2\alphaz | |
(\alpha+z2)2 |
, z>0
Fz(z,\alpha)=
z2 | |
\alpha+z2 |
, z\ge0
The generalized gamma distribution is
f(x;a,d,r)= | r |
\Gamma(d/r)ad |
xd-1
-(x/a)r | |
e |
x\ge0; a, d, r>0
which includes the regular gamma, chi, chi-squared, exponential, Rayleigh, Nakagami and Weibull distributions involving fractional powers. Note that here a is a scale parameter, rather than a rate parameter; d is a shape parameter.
If
U\simf(x;a1,d1,r), V\simf(x;a2,d2,r)areindependent,andW=U/V
then[20]
where
B(u,v)=
\Gamma(u)\Gamma(v) | |
\Gamma(u+v) |
In the ratios above, Gamma samples, U, V may have differing sample sizes
\alpha1,\alpha2
| ||||||||||||
\thetak\Gamma(\alpha) |
\theta
In situations where U and V are differently scaled, a variables transformation allows the modified random ratio pdf to be determined. Let
X=
U | |
U+V |
=
1 | |
1+B |
U\sim\Gamma(\alpha1,\theta),V\sim\Gamma(\alpha2,\theta),\theta
X\simBeta(\alpha1,\alpha2),B=V/U\simBeta'(\alpha2,\alpha1)
Rescale V arbitrarily, defining
Y\sim
U | |
U+\varphiV |
=
1 | |
1+\varphiB |
, 0\le\varphi\leinfty
We have
B=
1-X | |
X |
Y=
X | |
\varphi+(1-\varphi)X |
,dY/dX=
\varphi | |
(\varphi+(1-\varphi)X)2 |
Transforming X to Y gives
fY(Y)=
fX(X) | |
|dY/dX| |
=
\beta(X,\alpha1,\alpha2) | |
\varphi/[\varphi+(1-\varphi)X]2 |
Noting
X=
\varphiY | |
1-(1-\varphi)Y |
fY(Y,\varphi)=
\varphi | |
[1-(1-\varphi)Y]2 |
\beta\left(
\varphiY | |
1-(1-\varphi)Y |
,\alpha1,\alpha2\right), 0\leY\le1
Thus, if
U\sim\Gamma(\alpha1,\theta1)
V\sim\Gamma(\alpha2,\theta2)
Y=
U | |
U+V |
fY(Y,\varphi)
\varphi=
\theta2 | |
\theta1 |
The distribution of Y is limited here to the interval [0,1]. It can be generalized by scaling such that if
Y\simfY(Y,\varphi)
\ThetaY\simfY(Y,\varphi,\Theta)
where
fY(Y,\varphi,\Theta)=
\varphi/\Theta | |
[1-(1-\varphi)Y/\Theta]2 |
\beta\left(
\varphiY/\Theta | |
1-(1-\varphi)Y/\Theta |
,\alpha1,\alpha2\right), 0\leY\le\Theta
\ThetaY
\ThetaU | |
U+\varphiV |
Though not ratio distributions of two variables, the following identities for one variable are useful:
If
X\sim\beta(\alpha,\beta)
x=
X | |
1-X |
\sim\beta'(\alpha,\beta)
If
Y\sim\beta'(\alpha,\beta)
y=
1 | |
Y |
\sim\beta'(\beta,\alpha)
If
X\sim\beta(\alpha,\beta)
x=
1 | |
X |
-1\sim\beta'(\beta,\alpha)
If
Y\sim\beta'(\alpha,\beta)
y=
Y | |
1+Y |
\sim\beta(\alpha,\beta)
1 | |
1+Y |
=
Y-1 | |
Y-1+1 |
\sim\beta(\beta,\alpha)
1+Y\sim\{ \beta(\beta,\alpha) \}-1
\beta(\beta,\alpha)
U\sim\Gamma(\alpha,1),V\sim\Gamma(\beta,1)
U | |
V |
\sim\beta'(\alpha,\beta)
U/V | |
1+U/V |
=
U | |
V+U |
\sim\beta(\alpha,\beta)
Further results can be found in the Inverse distribution article.
X, Y
This result was derived by Katz et al.[21]
Suppose
X\simBinomial(n,p1)
Y\simBinomial(m,p2)
X
Y
T= | X/n |
Y/m |
Then
log(T)
log(p1/p2)
(1/p1)-1 | + | |
n |
(1/p2)-1 | |
m |
The binomial ratio distribution is of significance in clinical trials: if the distribution of T is known as above, the probability of a given ratio arising purely by chance can be estimated, i.e. a false positive trial. A number of papers compare the robustness of different approximations for the binomial ratio.
In the ratio of Poisson variables R = X/Y there is a problem that Y is zero with finite probability so R is undefined. To counter this, consider the truncated, or censored, ratio R' = X/Y where zero sample of Y are discounted. Moreover, in many medical-type surveys, there are systematic problems with the reliability of the zero samples of both X and Y and it may be good practice to ignore the zero samples anyway.
The probability of a null Poisson sample being
e-λ
\tildepx(x;λ)=
1 | |
1-e-λ |
{
e-λλx | |
x! |
}, x\in1,2,3, …
which sums to unity. Following Cohen,[22] for n independent trials, the multidimensional truncated pdf is
\tildep(x1,x2,...,xn;λ)=
1 | |
(1-e-λ)n |
n{ | |
\prod | |
i=1 |
| |||||||||||
xi! |
}, xi\in1,2,3, …
L=ln(\tildep)=-nln(1-e-λ)-nλ+ln(λ)
n | |
\sum | |
1 |
xi-ln
n | |
\prod | |
1 |
(xi!), xi\in1,2,3, …
dL/dλ=
-n | |
1-e-λ |
+
1 | |
λ |
n | |
\sum | |
i=1 |
xi
\hatλML
\hatλML | ||||||
|
=
1 | |
n |
n | |
\sum | |
i=1 |
xi=\barx
Note that as
\hatλ\to0
\barx\to1
λ
\barx
\barx
λ
\hatλML
\barx=
1 | |
n |
n | |
\sum | |
i=1 |
xi
Absent any closed form solutions, the following approximate reversion for truncated
λ
0\leλ\leinfty; 1\le\barx\leinfty
\hatλ=\barx-e-(-0.07(\barx-1)e-0.666(\bar+\epsilon, |\epsilon|<0.006
which compares with the non-truncated version which is simply
\hatλ=\barx
R=\hatλX/\hatλY
\hatλX
\hatλY
The asymptotic large-
nλvarianceof\hatλ
Var(\hatλ)\ge-\left(E\left[
\delta2L | |
\deltaλ2 |
\right]λ=\hat\right)-1
in which substituting L gives
\delta2L | |
\deltaλ2 |
=-n\left[
\barx | |
λ2 |
-
e-λ | |
(1-e-λ)2 |
\right]
\barx
Var(\hatλ)\ge
\hatλ | |
n |
(1-e-\hatλ)2 | |
1-(\hatλ+1)e-\hatλ |
The variance of the point estimate of the mean
λ
λ
Var(λ)=
λ/n | |
1-e-λ |
\left[1-
λe-λ | |
1-e-λ |
\right]
Var(\hatλ)/Var(λ)
λ
λ
These mean and variance parameter estimates, together with parallel estimates for X, can be applied to Normal or Binomial approximations for the Poisson ratio. Samples from trials may not be a good fit for the Poisson process; a further discussion of Poisson truncation is by Dietz and Bohning[24] and there is a Zero-truncated Poisson distribution Wikipedia entry.
This distribution is the ratio of two Laplace distributions.[25] Let X and Y be standard Laplace identically distributed random variables and let z = X / Y. Then the probability distribution of z is
f(x)=
1 | |
2(1+|z|)2 |
Let the mean of the X and Y be a. Then the standard double Lomax distribution is symmetric around a.
This distribution has an infinite mean and variance.
If Z has a standard double Lomax distribution, then 1/Z also has a standard double Lomax distribution.
The standard Lomax distribution is unimodal and has heavier tails than the Laplace distribution.
For 0 < a < 1, the a-th moment exists.
E(Za)=
\Gamma(1+a) | |
\Gamma(1-a) |
where Γ is the gamma function.
Ratio distributions also appear in multivariate analysis.[26] If the random matrices X and Y follow a Wishart distribution then the ratio of the determinants
\varphi=|X|/|Y|
is proportional to the product of independent F random variables. In the case where X and Y are from independent standardized Wishart distributions then the ratio
Λ={|X|/|X+Y|}
In relation to Wishart matrix distributions if
S\simWp(\Sigma,\nu+1)
V
VTSV | |
VT\SigmaV |
\sim
2 | |
\chi | |
\nu |
The discrepancy of one in the sample numbers arises from estimation of the sample mean when forming the sample covariance, a consequence of Cochran's theorem. Similarly
VT\Sigma-1V | |
VTS-1V |
\sim
2 | |
\chi | |
\nu-p+1 |
which is Theorem 3.2.12 of Muirhead [27]
X1
X2