Variance of Binomial Distribution $E[X^2]$











up vote
4
down vote

favorite
2












so I'm trying to use the equation:
$Var(X) = E[X^2] - (E[x])^2$,
And for the $E[X^2]$ part, I'm trying to use the method of indicators...
However, when I do that, I get the same value as with $E[X]$...
Is it wrong to try to use the method of indicators for this case?
Basically, I end up with
$Var(X) = np(1-np)$,
when it should be $Var(X) = np(1-p)$.










share|cite|improve this question




























    up vote
    4
    down vote

    favorite
    2












    so I'm trying to use the equation:
    $Var(X) = E[X^2] - (E[x])^2$,
    And for the $E[X^2]$ part, I'm trying to use the method of indicators...
    However, when I do that, I get the same value as with $E[X]$...
    Is it wrong to try to use the method of indicators for this case?
    Basically, I end up with
    $Var(X) = np(1-np)$,
    when it should be $Var(X) = np(1-p)$.










    share|cite|improve this question


























      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      2









      up vote
      4
      down vote

      favorite
      2






      2





      so I'm trying to use the equation:
      $Var(X) = E[X^2] - (E[x])^2$,
      And for the $E[X^2]$ part, I'm trying to use the method of indicators...
      However, when I do that, I get the same value as with $E[X]$...
      Is it wrong to try to use the method of indicators for this case?
      Basically, I end up with
      $Var(X) = np(1-np)$,
      when it should be $Var(X) = np(1-p)$.










      share|cite|improve this question















      so I'm trying to use the equation:
      $Var(X) = E[X^2] - (E[x])^2$,
      And for the $E[X^2]$ part, I'm trying to use the method of indicators...
      However, when I do that, I get the same value as with $E[X]$...
      Is it wrong to try to use the method of indicators for this case?
      Basically, I end up with
      $Var(X) = np(1-np)$,
      when it should be $Var(X) = np(1-p)$.







      probability






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Mar 6 '13 at 5:49









      Amzoti

      50.8k125397




      50.8k125397










      asked Mar 6 '13 at 5:48









      Joy

      23113




      23113






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted










          The method of indicators works well here. Let $X_i=1$ if we have a success on the $i$-th trial, and $0$ otherwise.



          Then $X=X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n$. Expand $(X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n)^2$. We find that
          $$X^2=sum_1^n X_i^2+2sum_{ilt j}X_iX_j.$$



          Calculate the expectation, using linearity. Each $X_i^2$ has expectation $p$, since $X_i^2=X_i$. Thus $E(sum_1^n X_i^2)=np$.



          By independence, if $ine j$, $E(X_i X_j)=E(X_i)E(X_j)=p^2$.



          Now count. The number of pairs $(i,j)$ with $ilt j$ is $binom{n}{2}$. So we get
          $$E(X^2)=np +n(n-1)p^2.$$

          But $(E(X))^2=n^2p^2$. Thus $E(X^2)-(E(X))^2=np-np^2$. This simplifies to $np(1-p)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • You are welcome. The evaluation of $E(X_iX_j)$ comes up fairly often when we use the method of indicator functions. In this case, things were simple, because of independence. However, there are plenty of situations (a simple example is the hypergeometric) where independence fails, but $E(X_iX_j)$ is accessible.
            – André Nicolas
            Mar 6 '13 at 6:57











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f322232%2fvariance-of-binomial-distribution-ex2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted










          The method of indicators works well here. Let $X_i=1$ if we have a success on the $i$-th trial, and $0$ otherwise.



          Then $X=X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n$. Expand $(X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n)^2$. We find that
          $$X^2=sum_1^n X_i^2+2sum_{ilt j}X_iX_j.$$



          Calculate the expectation, using linearity. Each $X_i^2$ has expectation $p$, since $X_i^2=X_i$. Thus $E(sum_1^n X_i^2)=np$.



          By independence, if $ine j$, $E(X_i X_j)=E(X_i)E(X_j)=p^2$.



          Now count. The number of pairs $(i,j)$ with $ilt j$ is $binom{n}{2}$. So we get
          $$E(X^2)=np +n(n-1)p^2.$$

          But $(E(X))^2=n^2p^2$. Thus $E(X^2)-(E(X))^2=np-np^2$. This simplifies to $np(1-p)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • You are welcome. The evaluation of $E(X_iX_j)$ comes up fairly often when we use the method of indicator functions. In this case, things were simple, because of independence. However, there are plenty of situations (a simple example is the hypergeometric) where independence fails, but $E(X_iX_j)$ is accessible.
            – André Nicolas
            Mar 6 '13 at 6:57















          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted










          The method of indicators works well here. Let $X_i=1$ if we have a success on the $i$-th trial, and $0$ otherwise.



          Then $X=X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n$. Expand $(X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n)^2$. We find that
          $$X^2=sum_1^n X_i^2+2sum_{ilt j}X_iX_j.$$



          Calculate the expectation, using linearity. Each $X_i^2$ has expectation $p$, since $X_i^2=X_i$. Thus $E(sum_1^n X_i^2)=np$.



          By independence, if $ine j$, $E(X_i X_j)=E(X_i)E(X_j)=p^2$.



          Now count. The number of pairs $(i,j)$ with $ilt j$ is $binom{n}{2}$. So we get
          $$E(X^2)=np +n(n-1)p^2.$$

          But $(E(X))^2=n^2p^2$. Thus $E(X^2)-(E(X))^2=np-np^2$. This simplifies to $np(1-p)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer























          • You are welcome. The evaluation of $E(X_iX_j)$ comes up fairly often when we use the method of indicator functions. In this case, things were simple, because of independence. However, there are plenty of situations (a simple example is the hypergeometric) where independence fails, but $E(X_iX_j)$ is accessible.
            – André Nicolas
            Mar 6 '13 at 6:57













          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          9
          down vote



          accepted






          The method of indicators works well here. Let $X_i=1$ if we have a success on the $i$-th trial, and $0$ otherwise.



          Then $X=X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n$. Expand $(X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n)^2$. We find that
          $$X^2=sum_1^n X_i^2+2sum_{ilt j}X_iX_j.$$



          Calculate the expectation, using linearity. Each $X_i^2$ has expectation $p$, since $X_i^2=X_i$. Thus $E(sum_1^n X_i^2)=np$.



          By independence, if $ine j$, $E(X_i X_j)=E(X_i)E(X_j)=p^2$.



          Now count. The number of pairs $(i,j)$ with $ilt j$ is $binom{n}{2}$. So we get
          $$E(X^2)=np +n(n-1)p^2.$$

          But $(E(X))^2=n^2p^2$. Thus $E(X^2)-(E(X))^2=np-np^2$. This simplifies to $np(1-p)$.






          share|cite|improve this answer














          The method of indicators works well here. Let $X_i=1$ if we have a success on the $i$-th trial, and $0$ otherwise.



          Then $X=X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n$. Expand $(X_1+X_2+cdots+X_n)^2$. We find that
          $$X^2=sum_1^n X_i^2+2sum_{ilt j}X_iX_j.$$



          Calculate the expectation, using linearity. Each $X_i^2$ has expectation $p$, since $X_i^2=X_i$. Thus $E(sum_1^n X_i^2)=np$.



          By independence, if $ine j$, $E(X_i X_j)=E(X_i)E(X_j)=p^2$.



          Now count. The number of pairs $(i,j)$ with $ilt j$ is $binom{n}{2}$. So we get
          $$E(X^2)=np +n(n-1)p^2.$$

          But $(E(X))^2=n^2p^2$. Thus $E(X^2)-(E(X))^2=np-np^2$. This simplifies to $np(1-p)$.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Mar 6 '13 at 6:12

























          answered Mar 6 '13 at 6:05









          André Nicolas

          450k36421805




          450k36421805












          • You are welcome. The evaluation of $E(X_iX_j)$ comes up fairly often when we use the method of indicator functions. In this case, things were simple, because of independence. However, there are plenty of situations (a simple example is the hypergeometric) where independence fails, but $E(X_iX_j)$ is accessible.
            – André Nicolas
            Mar 6 '13 at 6:57


















          • You are welcome. The evaluation of $E(X_iX_j)$ comes up fairly often when we use the method of indicator functions. In this case, things were simple, because of independence. However, there are plenty of situations (a simple example is the hypergeometric) where independence fails, but $E(X_iX_j)$ is accessible.
            – André Nicolas
            Mar 6 '13 at 6:57
















          You are welcome. The evaluation of $E(X_iX_j)$ comes up fairly often when we use the method of indicator functions. In this case, things were simple, because of independence. However, there are plenty of situations (a simple example is the hypergeometric) where independence fails, but $E(X_iX_j)$ is accessible.
          – André Nicolas
          Mar 6 '13 at 6:57




          You are welcome. The evaluation of $E(X_iX_j)$ comes up fairly often when we use the method of indicator functions. In this case, things were simple, because of independence. However, there are plenty of situations (a simple example is the hypergeometric) where independence fails, but $E(X_iX_j)$ is accessible.
          – André Nicolas
          Mar 6 '13 at 6:57


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f322232%2fvariance-of-binomial-distribution-ex2%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Bundesstraße 106

          Verónica Boquete

          Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten