MathIsimple

Probability Theory – Problem 37: Prove that a random variable is independent of itself if and only if is almost surely…

Question

Prove that a random variable XX is independent of itself if and only if XX is almost surely constant.

Step-by-step solution

Proof: Step 1. If XX is almost surely constant Suppose P(X=c)=1P(X = c) = 1. To show that XX is independent of itself, we must verify that for all Borel sets A,BRA, B \subseteq \mathbb{R}, P(XA,XB)=P(XA)P(XB).P(X \in A, X \in B) = P(X \in A) \cdot P(X \in B). Case 1: cABc \in A \cap B Then P(XA)=1, P(XB)=1, P(XA, XB)=1P(X \in A) = 1,\ P(X \in B) = 1,\ P(X \in A,\ X \in B) = 1, so 1=1×11 = 1 \times 1. The identity holds. Case 2: cAc \in A but cBc \notin B Then P(XA)=1, P(XB)=0, P(XA, XB)=0P(X \in A) = 1,\ P(X \in B) = 0,\ P(X \in A,\ X \in B) = 0. The identity holds. Case 3: cAc \notin A but cBc \in B. The argument is analogous. Case 4: cAc \notin A and cBc \notin B Then P(XA)=0, P(XB)=0, P(XA, XB)=0P(X \in A) = 0,\ P(X \in B) = 0,\ P(X \in A,\ X \in B) = 0. The identity holds. Therefore, "almost surely constant" implies that XX is independent of itself. Step 2. If XX is independent of itself Independence means that for all Borel sets A,BA, B: P(XA,XB)=P(XA)P(XB).P(X \in A, X \in B) = P(X \in A) P(X \in B). In particular, setting A=BA = B, we obtain P(XA)=[P(XA)]2.P(X \in A) = \big[P(X \in A)\big]^2. Hence for every Borel set AA, P(XA){0,1}.P(X \in A) \in \{0, 1\}. Step 3. {P(XA){0,1} AB(R)}\{P(X \in A) \in \{0, 1\}\ \forall A \in \mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R})\} implies that XX is almost surely constant. Define the distribution function F(t)=P(Xt)F(t) = P(X \le t). By the previous step, F(t){0,1}F(t) \in \{0, 1\}. Moreover, FF is monotonically nondecreasing and right-continuous, satisfying limtF(t)=0\lim_{t \to -\infty} F(t) = 0 and limt+F(t)=1\lim_{t \to +\infty} F(t) = 1. Therefore there exists a unique cRc \in \mathbb{R} such that: For t<ct < c, F(t)=0F(t) = 0, i.e., P(Xt)=0P(X \le t) = 0, hence P(X>t)=1P(X > t) = 1. For tct \ge c, F(t)=1F(t) = 1. Setting t=c1/nt = c - 1/n, we get P(X>c1/n)=1P(X > c - 1/n) = 1, and by taking the intersection, P(Xc)=1P(X \ge c) = 1. Setting t=ct = c gives P(Xc)=1P(X \le c) = 1. Therefore P(X=c)=P(Xc)P(X<c)P(X = c) = P(X \le c) - P(X < c). Note that P(X<c)=limtcF(t)=0P(X < c) = \lim_{t \uparrow c} F(t) = 0, so P(X=c)=10=1.P(X = c) = 1 - 0 = 1. Step 4. In summary, XX independent of itself implies that the distribution function takes only the values 0 and 1, which in turn implies the existence of cc with P(X=c)=1P(X=c)=1; conversely, if P(X=c)=1P(X=c)=1, then XX is clearly independent of itself. QED.

Final answer

QED.

Marking scheme

The following is an undergraduate mathematics marking rubric based on the official solution (total: 7 points):

1. Checkpoints (max 7 pts)

Part I: Sufficiency Proof [2 pts total]

*Prove that "XX is almost surely constant \Rightarrow XX is independent of itself"*

  • [1 pt] State that if P(X=c)=1P(X=c)=1, then for every Borel set AA, the probability P(XA)P(X \in A) equals either 00 or 11 (depending on whether cAc \in A).
  • [1 pt] Verify the independence identity: show that P(XA,XB)=P(XA)P(XB)P(X \in A, X \in B) = P(X \in A)P(X \in B) holds for all 0/10/1 combinations (i.e., 1×1=1, 1×0=01\times 1=1,\ 1\times 0=0, etc.).

Part II: Necessity Proof [5 pts total]

*Prove that "XX is independent of itself \Rightarrow XX is almost surely constant"*

Award marks for any ONE of the following logical paths (if multiple paths appear, take the highest score; do not combine):

> Path A: Via the 0–1 property and the distribution function (official solution approach)

> - [2 pts] Derive the 0–1 property: Using the independence definition (set B=AB=A or an analogous argument), obtain P(XA)=P(XA)2P(X \in A) = P(X \in A)^2, and conclude that P(XA){0,1}P(X \in A) \in \{0, 1\}.

> - [2 pts] Locate the constant value cc: Using the monotonicity, right-continuity, and limiting behavior of the distribution function F(t)F(t) (which takes only the values 00 and 11), show that a unique jump point cc exists (or equivalently, use the supremum characterization c=sup{t:F(t)=0}c = \sup\{t: F(t)=0\}).

> - [1 pt] Confirm that probability concentrates at cc: Rigorously argue that the jump size equals 1, i.e., P(X=c)=F(c)F(c)=10=1P(X=c) = F(c) - F(c-) = 1 - 0 = 1 (or provide an equivalent set-theoretic argument).

> Path B: Via variance/moment properties (alternative approach)

> - [1 pt] Introduce a bounded transform or justify moment existence: Introduce a bounded function (e.g., Y=arctanXY=\arctan X) or a truncation, or explicitly address the existence of moments. *(If E[X2]<E[X^2] < \infty is assumed without justification of generality, see deductions.)*

> - [2 pts] Derive zero variance: Use independence to show Var(Y)=Cov(Y,Y)=0\text{Var}(Y) = \text{Cov}(Y, Y) = 0 or E[Y2]=(E[Y])2E[Y^2] = (E[Y])^2.

> - [1 pt] Conclude almost sure constancy: Deduce from zero variance that YY is almost surely constant.

> - [1 pt] Transfer the conclusion: Use properties of the transform (e.g., injectivity) to conclude that the original variable XX is almost surely constant.


Total (max 7)


2. Zero-Credit Items

  • Merely restating the definitions of "independence" or "almost surely constant" from the problem statement without any substantive derivation.
  • Simply asserting "a constant random variable is obviously independent of itself" or "an independent-of-itself random variable is obviously constant" without mathematical justification.
  • Confusing independence of XX with itself and independence of XX and YY, rendering the derivation invalid.

3. Deductions

*Apply the most severe applicable deduction (minimum score is 0):*

  • [Cap at 3/7] Unjustified restriction to a specific distribution type: In the necessity proof, assuming without justification that XX is discrete (enumerating probability masses) or continuous (assuming a probability density function f(x)f(x) exists), thereby losing generality.
  • [Cap at 5/7] Failure to justify moment existence: If Path B is used, computing Var(X)=0\text{Var}(X)=0 directly without verifying that XX has a finite second moment (or without using a bounded transform) is considered a gap in rigor.
  • [-1 pt] Logical gap: In Path A, after obtaining F(t){0,1}F(t) \in \{0,1\}, directly asserting "therefore F(t)F(t) is a step function" without invoking properties of the distribution function (e.g., monotonicity or limits).
Ask AI ✨