What does the integral of a function times a function of a random variable represent, conceptually?





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







1












$begingroup$


I am trying to understand conceptually what does the following give me or tell me:



$$int f(x) cdot g(x) , dx$$



where $f(x)$ is any continuous function of $x$ and $g(x)$ is the probability density function for a random variable, for example a normal distribution's PDF is:



$$ g(x) = frac1 {2 pi sigma^2} expleft(frac{- (x - mu)^2 }{ 2 sigma ^2}right) $$



I understand the integral of a PDF gives me the CDF. So:



$$int_{-infty}^0 g(x) , dx$$



Gives me the probability of $x$ being less than $0$. However, what happens when you multiply $g(x)$ by another function $f(x)$ and take the integral? I heard it gives you the expected payoff assuming $f(x)$ is a function of payoffs and you take an integral from -infinity to +infinity. This, if true, I conceptually understand. sum of payoffs times the probabilities is the expected value of whatever game you are playing.



I start getting confused when the boundaries of the integral are not $pm infty$. I'm not sure in that case what integral conceptually means. For example:



$$int_{-infty}^0 f(x) g(x) , dx$$



What does that tell me?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$



















    1












    $begingroup$


    I am trying to understand conceptually what does the following give me or tell me:



    $$int f(x) cdot g(x) , dx$$



    where $f(x)$ is any continuous function of $x$ and $g(x)$ is the probability density function for a random variable, for example a normal distribution's PDF is:



    $$ g(x) = frac1 {2 pi sigma^2} expleft(frac{- (x - mu)^2 }{ 2 sigma ^2}right) $$



    I understand the integral of a PDF gives me the CDF. So:



    $$int_{-infty}^0 g(x) , dx$$



    Gives me the probability of $x$ being less than $0$. However, what happens when you multiply $g(x)$ by another function $f(x)$ and take the integral? I heard it gives you the expected payoff assuming $f(x)$ is a function of payoffs and you take an integral from -infinity to +infinity. This, if true, I conceptually understand. sum of payoffs times the probabilities is the expected value of whatever game you are playing.



    I start getting confused when the boundaries of the integral are not $pm infty$. I'm not sure in that case what integral conceptually means. For example:



    $$int_{-infty}^0 f(x) g(x) , dx$$



    What does that tell me?










    share|cite|improve this question









    New contributor




    vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.







    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1


      1



      $begingroup$


      I am trying to understand conceptually what does the following give me or tell me:



      $$int f(x) cdot g(x) , dx$$



      where $f(x)$ is any continuous function of $x$ and $g(x)$ is the probability density function for a random variable, for example a normal distribution's PDF is:



      $$ g(x) = frac1 {2 pi sigma^2} expleft(frac{- (x - mu)^2 }{ 2 sigma ^2}right) $$



      I understand the integral of a PDF gives me the CDF. So:



      $$int_{-infty}^0 g(x) , dx$$



      Gives me the probability of $x$ being less than $0$. However, what happens when you multiply $g(x)$ by another function $f(x)$ and take the integral? I heard it gives you the expected payoff assuming $f(x)$ is a function of payoffs and you take an integral from -infinity to +infinity. This, if true, I conceptually understand. sum of payoffs times the probabilities is the expected value of whatever game you are playing.



      I start getting confused when the boundaries of the integral are not $pm infty$. I'm not sure in that case what integral conceptually means. For example:



      $$int_{-infty}^0 f(x) g(x) , dx$$



      What does that tell me?










      share|cite|improve this question









      New contributor




      vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      $endgroup$




      I am trying to understand conceptually what does the following give me or tell me:



      $$int f(x) cdot g(x) , dx$$



      where $f(x)$ is any continuous function of $x$ and $g(x)$ is the probability density function for a random variable, for example a normal distribution's PDF is:



      $$ g(x) = frac1 {2 pi sigma^2} expleft(frac{- (x - mu)^2 }{ 2 sigma ^2}right) $$



      I understand the integral of a PDF gives me the CDF. So:



      $$int_{-infty}^0 g(x) , dx$$



      Gives me the probability of $x$ being less than $0$. However, what happens when you multiply $g(x)$ by another function $f(x)$ and take the integral? I heard it gives you the expected payoff assuming $f(x)$ is a function of payoffs and you take an integral from -infinity to +infinity. This, if true, I conceptually understand. sum of payoffs times the probabilities is the expected value of whatever game you are playing.



      I start getting confused when the boundaries of the integral are not $pm infty$. I'm not sure in that case what integral conceptually means. For example:



      $$int_{-infty}^0 f(x) g(x) , dx$$



      What does that tell me?







      probability distributions normal-distribution random-variable expected-value






      share|cite|improve this question









      New contributor




      vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|cite|improve this question









      New contributor




      vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 11 hours ago









      Siong Thye Goh

      3,0842621




      3,0842621






      New contributor




      vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 11 hours ago









      vt_ogvt_og

      141




      141




      New contributor




      vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      vt_og is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$

          Suppose $g$ is the pdf of random variable $X$, then



          $$E[f(X)|X in A]= frac{int_A f(x)g(x) , dx}{int_A g(t) , dt}$$



          Hence $$int_A f(x) g(x) , dt = Pr(X in A) E[f(X)|X in A],$$



          it gives you the product of the conditional expectation of $f(X)$ given that $X in A$ and the probability that $X$ is in $A$.



          I think $E[f(X)|X in A]$ is a more interesting quantity, and I would divide your integral with $Pr(X in A)$ to recover it.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$





















            3












            $begingroup$

            The expected value of $X$ following distribution $g$ is



            $$
            E[X] = int x ,g(x) ,dx
            $$



            By the law of the unconscious statistician we know that the expected value of a function $f$ of random variable $X$ is



            $$
            E[f(X)] = int f(x) ,g(x) ,dx
            $$



            What does it tell you? It tells you what would be the expected value of your random variable if you transformed it somehow. For example, say that you have know what is the distribution of height for humans in centimetres, but are interested of distribution in meters, i.e. $f(x) = x/100$.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$





















              1












              $begingroup$

              Another way to look at this integral is through the random variable transformation point of view. You can think of $Y=f(x)$ as a new random variable, and your integral is the expectation (mean) $E[Y]$ of the new variable $Y$.



              Let's build the probability density function of the new variable $Y$. Unfortunately, we can't derive an analytical expression. We'll have to use a more complex, integral form of it.



              What is the probability that $Y$ will have values between $y$ and $y+dy$? We look at all $x$ where $y<f(x)<y+dy$ and add up their probabilities:
              $$g_y(y)dy=int_x mathbb1_{y<f(x)<y+dy} g(x)dx $$



              Next, we simply integrate over all values of $Y$:
              $$E[y]=int_yyg_y(y)dy$$
              Since $int_y$ runs through all possible $y$, it's the same as running the integral through all possible $x$.
              Just pause for a moment and agree with me...



              Now that you agreed with me you'll see that:
              $$E[Y]=int_xf(x)g(x)dx$$






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$









              • 1




                $begingroup$
                This could use some elaboration. Perhaps an example would help. If you would also bring into consideration the idea of truncation or conditioning (which seems to be the main stumbling block), I think your point would be an excellent answer.
                $endgroup$
                – whuber
                10 hours ago








              • 1




                $begingroup$
                @whuber, i did impossible: explained Lebesque integral without measure theory!
                $endgroup$
                – Aksakal
                10 hours ago












              Your Answer








              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "65"
              };
              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',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              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
              },
              onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });






              vt_og is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f405242%2fwhat-does-the-integral-of-a-function-times-a-function-of-a-random-variable-repre%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              3












              $begingroup$

              Suppose $g$ is the pdf of random variable $X$, then



              $$E[f(X)|X in A]= frac{int_A f(x)g(x) , dx}{int_A g(t) , dt}$$



              Hence $$int_A f(x) g(x) , dt = Pr(X in A) E[f(X)|X in A],$$



              it gives you the product of the conditional expectation of $f(X)$ given that $X in A$ and the probability that $X$ is in $A$.



              I think $E[f(X)|X in A]$ is a more interesting quantity, and I would divide your integral with $Pr(X in A)$ to recover it.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                3












                $begingroup$

                Suppose $g$ is the pdf of random variable $X$, then



                $$E[f(X)|X in A]= frac{int_A f(x)g(x) , dx}{int_A g(t) , dt}$$



                Hence $$int_A f(x) g(x) , dt = Pr(X in A) E[f(X)|X in A],$$



                it gives you the product of the conditional expectation of $f(X)$ given that $X in A$ and the probability that $X$ is in $A$.



                I think $E[f(X)|X in A]$ is a more interesting quantity, and I would divide your integral with $Pr(X in A)$ to recover it.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  3












                  3








                  3





                  $begingroup$

                  Suppose $g$ is the pdf of random variable $X$, then



                  $$E[f(X)|X in A]= frac{int_A f(x)g(x) , dx}{int_A g(t) , dt}$$



                  Hence $$int_A f(x) g(x) , dt = Pr(X in A) E[f(X)|X in A],$$



                  it gives you the product of the conditional expectation of $f(X)$ given that $X in A$ and the probability that $X$ is in $A$.



                  I think $E[f(X)|X in A]$ is a more interesting quantity, and I would divide your integral with $Pr(X in A)$ to recover it.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Suppose $g$ is the pdf of random variable $X$, then



                  $$E[f(X)|X in A]= frac{int_A f(x)g(x) , dx}{int_A g(t) , dt}$$



                  Hence $$int_A f(x) g(x) , dt = Pr(X in A) E[f(X)|X in A],$$



                  it gives you the product of the conditional expectation of $f(X)$ given that $X in A$ and the probability that $X$ is in $A$.



                  I think $E[f(X)|X in A]$ is a more interesting quantity, and I would divide your integral with $Pr(X in A)$ to recover it.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered 11 hours ago









                  Siong Thye GohSiong Thye Goh

                  3,0842621




                  3,0842621

























                      3












                      $begingroup$

                      The expected value of $X$ following distribution $g$ is



                      $$
                      E[X] = int x ,g(x) ,dx
                      $$



                      By the law of the unconscious statistician we know that the expected value of a function $f$ of random variable $X$ is



                      $$
                      E[f(X)] = int f(x) ,g(x) ,dx
                      $$



                      What does it tell you? It tells you what would be the expected value of your random variable if you transformed it somehow. For example, say that you have know what is the distribution of height for humans in centimetres, but are interested of distribution in meters, i.e. $f(x) = x/100$.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$


















                        3












                        $begingroup$

                        The expected value of $X$ following distribution $g$ is



                        $$
                        E[X] = int x ,g(x) ,dx
                        $$



                        By the law of the unconscious statistician we know that the expected value of a function $f$ of random variable $X$ is



                        $$
                        E[f(X)] = int f(x) ,g(x) ,dx
                        $$



                        What does it tell you? It tells you what would be the expected value of your random variable if you transformed it somehow. For example, say that you have know what is the distribution of height for humans in centimetres, but are interested of distribution in meters, i.e. $f(x) = x/100$.






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$
















                          3












                          3








                          3





                          $begingroup$

                          The expected value of $X$ following distribution $g$ is



                          $$
                          E[X] = int x ,g(x) ,dx
                          $$



                          By the law of the unconscious statistician we know that the expected value of a function $f$ of random variable $X$ is



                          $$
                          E[f(X)] = int f(x) ,g(x) ,dx
                          $$



                          What does it tell you? It tells you what would be the expected value of your random variable if you transformed it somehow. For example, say that you have know what is the distribution of height for humans in centimetres, but are interested of distribution in meters, i.e. $f(x) = x/100$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$



                          The expected value of $X$ following distribution $g$ is



                          $$
                          E[X] = int x ,g(x) ,dx
                          $$



                          By the law of the unconscious statistician we know that the expected value of a function $f$ of random variable $X$ is



                          $$
                          E[f(X)] = int f(x) ,g(x) ,dx
                          $$



                          What does it tell you? It tells you what would be the expected value of your random variable if you transformed it somehow. For example, say that you have know what is the distribution of height for humans in centimetres, but are interested of distribution in meters, i.e. $f(x) = x/100$.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered 10 hours ago









                          TimTim

                          60.8k9134230




                          60.8k9134230























                              1












                              $begingroup$

                              Another way to look at this integral is through the random variable transformation point of view. You can think of $Y=f(x)$ as a new random variable, and your integral is the expectation (mean) $E[Y]$ of the new variable $Y$.



                              Let's build the probability density function of the new variable $Y$. Unfortunately, we can't derive an analytical expression. We'll have to use a more complex, integral form of it.



                              What is the probability that $Y$ will have values between $y$ and $y+dy$? We look at all $x$ where $y<f(x)<y+dy$ and add up their probabilities:
                              $$g_y(y)dy=int_x mathbb1_{y<f(x)<y+dy} g(x)dx $$



                              Next, we simply integrate over all values of $Y$:
                              $$E[y]=int_yyg_y(y)dy$$
                              Since $int_y$ runs through all possible $y$, it's the same as running the integral through all possible $x$.
                              Just pause for a moment and agree with me...



                              Now that you agreed with me you'll see that:
                              $$E[Y]=int_xf(x)g(x)dx$$






                              share|cite|improve this answer











                              $endgroup$









                              • 1




                                $begingroup$
                                This could use some elaboration. Perhaps an example would help. If you would also bring into consideration the idea of truncation or conditioning (which seems to be the main stumbling block), I think your point would be an excellent answer.
                                $endgroup$
                                – whuber
                                10 hours ago








                              • 1




                                $begingroup$
                                @whuber, i did impossible: explained Lebesque integral without measure theory!
                                $endgroup$
                                – Aksakal
                                10 hours ago
















                              1












                              $begingroup$

                              Another way to look at this integral is through the random variable transformation point of view. You can think of $Y=f(x)$ as a new random variable, and your integral is the expectation (mean) $E[Y]$ of the new variable $Y$.



                              Let's build the probability density function of the new variable $Y$. Unfortunately, we can't derive an analytical expression. We'll have to use a more complex, integral form of it.



                              What is the probability that $Y$ will have values between $y$ and $y+dy$? We look at all $x$ where $y<f(x)<y+dy$ and add up their probabilities:
                              $$g_y(y)dy=int_x mathbb1_{y<f(x)<y+dy} g(x)dx $$



                              Next, we simply integrate over all values of $Y$:
                              $$E[y]=int_yyg_y(y)dy$$
                              Since $int_y$ runs through all possible $y$, it's the same as running the integral through all possible $x$.
                              Just pause for a moment and agree with me...



                              Now that you agreed with me you'll see that:
                              $$E[Y]=int_xf(x)g(x)dx$$






                              share|cite|improve this answer











                              $endgroup$









                              • 1




                                $begingroup$
                                This could use some elaboration. Perhaps an example would help. If you would also bring into consideration the idea of truncation or conditioning (which seems to be the main stumbling block), I think your point would be an excellent answer.
                                $endgroup$
                                – whuber
                                10 hours ago








                              • 1




                                $begingroup$
                                @whuber, i did impossible: explained Lebesque integral without measure theory!
                                $endgroup$
                                – Aksakal
                                10 hours ago














                              1












                              1








                              1





                              $begingroup$

                              Another way to look at this integral is through the random variable transformation point of view. You can think of $Y=f(x)$ as a new random variable, and your integral is the expectation (mean) $E[Y]$ of the new variable $Y$.



                              Let's build the probability density function of the new variable $Y$. Unfortunately, we can't derive an analytical expression. We'll have to use a more complex, integral form of it.



                              What is the probability that $Y$ will have values between $y$ and $y+dy$? We look at all $x$ where $y<f(x)<y+dy$ and add up their probabilities:
                              $$g_y(y)dy=int_x mathbb1_{y<f(x)<y+dy} g(x)dx $$



                              Next, we simply integrate over all values of $Y$:
                              $$E[y]=int_yyg_y(y)dy$$
                              Since $int_y$ runs through all possible $y$, it's the same as running the integral through all possible $x$.
                              Just pause for a moment and agree with me...



                              Now that you agreed with me you'll see that:
                              $$E[Y]=int_xf(x)g(x)dx$$






                              share|cite|improve this answer











                              $endgroup$



                              Another way to look at this integral is through the random variable transformation point of view. You can think of $Y=f(x)$ as a new random variable, and your integral is the expectation (mean) $E[Y]$ of the new variable $Y$.



                              Let's build the probability density function of the new variable $Y$. Unfortunately, we can't derive an analytical expression. We'll have to use a more complex, integral form of it.



                              What is the probability that $Y$ will have values between $y$ and $y+dy$? We look at all $x$ where $y<f(x)<y+dy$ and add up their probabilities:
                              $$g_y(y)dy=int_x mathbb1_{y<f(x)<y+dy} g(x)dx $$



                              Next, we simply integrate over all values of $Y$:
                              $$E[y]=int_yyg_y(y)dy$$
                              Since $int_y$ runs through all possible $y$, it's the same as running the integral through all possible $x$.
                              Just pause for a moment and agree with me...



                              Now that you agreed with me you'll see that:
                              $$E[Y]=int_xf(x)g(x)dx$$







                              share|cite|improve this answer














                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer








                              edited 10 hours ago

























                              answered 11 hours ago









                              AksakalAksakal

                              39.5k452120




                              39.5k452120








                              • 1




                                $begingroup$
                                This could use some elaboration. Perhaps an example would help. If you would also bring into consideration the idea of truncation or conditioning (which seems to be the main stumbling block), I think your point would be an excellent answer.
                                $endgroup$
                                – whuber
                                10 hours ago








                              • 1




                                $begingroup$
                                @whuber, i did impossible: explained Lebesque integral without measure theory!
                                $endgroup$
                                – Aksakal
                                10 hours ago














                              • 1




                                $begingroup$
                                This could use some elaboration. Perhaps an example would help. If you would also bring into consideration the idea of truncation or conditioning (which seems to be the main stumbling block), I think your point would be an excellent answer.
                                $endgroup$
                                – whuber
                                10 hours ago








                              • 1




                                $begingroup$
                                @whuber, i did impossible: explained Lebesque integral without measure theory!
                                $endgroup$
                                – Aksakal
                                10 hours ago








                              1




                              1




                              $begingroup$
                              This could use some elaboration. Perhaps an example would help. If you would also bring into consideration the idea of truncation or conditioning (which seems to be the main stumbling block), I think your point would be an excellent answer.
                              $endgroup$
                              – whuber
                              10 hours ago






                              $begingroup$
                              This could use some elaboration. Perhaps an example would help. If you would also bring into consideration the idea of truncation or conditioning (which seems to be the main stumbling block), I think your point would be an excellent answer.
                              $endgroup$
                              – whuber
                              10 hours ago






                              1




                              1




                              $begingroup$
                              @whuber, i did impossible: explained Lebesque integral without measure theory!
                              $endgroup$
                              – Aksakal
                              10 hours ago




                              $begingroup$
                              @whuber, i did impossible: explained Lebesque integral without measure theory!
                              $endgroup$
                              – Aksakal
                              10 hours ago










                              vt_og is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                              draft saved

                              draft discarded


















                              vt_og is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                              vt_og is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                              vt_og is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Cross Validated!


                              • 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.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstats.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f405242%2fwhat-does-the-integral-of-a-function-times-a-function-of-a-random-variable-repre%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