When Adjacent Moving Sums of Independent Variables Are Independent
Summary
The document studies two adjacent moving sums formed from an independent, identically distributed sequence and asks when they are independent for any distribution of the inputs. For sums using three consecutive coefficients, the answer identifies the condition that the middle coefficient multiplied by the sum of the other two is zero. It examines the cases where the middle coefficient vanishes, or where the first and last coefficients both vanish; in each case, the sums depend on disjoint input variables, which ensures independence.
The response also uses covariance as a way to rule out independence when the stated coefficient condition fails, since independence implies zero covariance. That argument relies on the inputs having positive variance, as in the question’s assumptions. Zero covariance alone does not prove independence. The answer’s displayed equivalence should be read in the context of the distribution-independent condition: for a particular input distribution, covariance is not a complete test of independence.
Key ideas
- Adjacent moving sums can be independent when their nonzero coefficients make them depend on disjoint input variables.
- The proposed distribution-independent condition is that the middle coefficient times the sum of the other two is zero.
- Independence implies zero covariance, which can rule out independence when the covariance is nonzero.
- Zero covariance alone does not establish independence.
Tags
Full text
# Sums of random variables and independence
# Sums of random variables and independence
I'm having troubles with this proof:
Let $\{Z_i\}_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}$ be i.i.d. random variables with zero mean and unit standard deviation. For $(a_0, a_1, ..., a_r)$ a sequence of $r$ real numbers and $j\in\mathbb{Z}$, let
$$\begin{align} Y_j & = \sum_{i=0}^ r a_i Z_{j-i} \end{align}$$
For $r=2$, state and prove a general and sufficient condition on $(a_0, a_1, a_2)$ such that $Y_j$ and $Y_{j-1}$ are independent regardless of the probability distribution of $Z$.
How can one prove independence in this case? I was thinking about applying convolution and then expliciting $(a_0, a_1, a_2)$ in a way that $f_{Y_{j}, Y_{j-1}} = f_{Y_j}f_{Y_{j-1}}$ holds... But it seems to be a little complicated and I don't really know how to tackle the problem in a simpler way. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
## Answer by user25064 (score 3)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/18119
Write out the simple equations
$$\begin{align} Y_j &= a_0 Z_j + a_1 Z_{j-1} + a_2 Z_{j-2}\\ Y_{j-1} &= a_0 Z_{j-1} + a_1 Z_{j-2} + a_2 Z_{j-3} \end{align}$$
There are some very simple cases that make $Y_j \perp Y_{j-1}$ due to the independence assumption of the random variables $\{Z_i\}_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}$. An example is $a_0 \in \mathbb{R}\setminus \{0\},\, a_1 = 0,\, a_2 = 0$. Not sure if you were looking for a complete solution but this should help get you started.
Also, an easy check for RV which are not independent is using the contrapositive form of the common theorem $$X\perp Y \implies E[XY] = E[X]E[Y]$$ Note that the converse of this statement is not true.
Proof
Assertion $a_1a_0 + a_2a_1 = 0 \iff Y_j \perp Y_{j-1}$
Define $\mu = E[Z]$
($\implies$) Suppose $a_1a_0 + a_2a_1 = 0$. There are two cases where this is possible. Case 1, suppose $a_1 = 0$. The equations become
$$\begin{align} Y_j &= a_0 Z_j + a_2 Z_{j-2}\\ Y_{j-1} &= a_0 Z_{j-1} + a_2 Z_{j-3} \end{align}$$
Their $\sigma$-algebras are given by $\sigma(Y_j) = \sigma(Z_j)\cup\sigma(Z_{j-2})$ and $\sigma(Y_{j-1}) = \sigma(Z_{j-1})\cup \sigma(Z_{j-3})$. Thus $Y_j \perp Y_{j-1}$. This could be more gruesomely detailed but I take some for granted. See this for more details including definitions etc.
Case 2, suppose $a_2 = 0$ and $a_0 = 0$. The equations become
$$\begin{align} Y_j &= a_1 Z_{j-1} \\ Y_{j-1} &= a_1 Z_{j-2} \end{align}$$
The same $\sigma$-algebra argument applies more easily but a more elegant solution presents itself in the form of the CDF.
$$\begin{align} F_{Y_j, Y_{j-1}}(y_j, y_{j-1}) &= P(Y_j \leq y_j \text{ and } Y_{j-1} \leq y_{j-1}) \\ & = F_{Z_j}(y_j/a_1)F_{Z_{j-1}}(y_{j-1}/a_1)\\ & = F_{Y_j}(y_j)F_{Y_{j-1}}(y_{j-1}) \end{align}$$
($\impliedby$) Suppose $Y_j \perp Y_{j-1}$ by theorem, we know that $E[Y_j Y_{j-1}] = E[Y_j]E[Y_{j-1}]$ calculating these values separately,
$$\begin{align} E[Y_jY_{j-1}] & = (a_0^2 + a_0a_1 + a_0 a_2 + a_1^2 + a_1 a_2 + a_2 a_0 + a_2^2 )\mu^2 \\ & + (a_1a_0 + a_2a_1)E[Z^2] \end{align}$$
$$\begin{align} E[Y_j]E[Y_{j-1}] & = (a_0^2 + a_0a_1 + a_0 a_2 + a_1^2 + a_1 a_2 + a_2 a_0 + a_2^2)\mu^2\\ &+ (a_1a_0 + a_2a_1)\mu^2 \end{align}$$
In the non-degenerate case when the distribution of $Z$ is not a constant, the variance is strictly positive so that $E[Z^2] - \mu^2 > 0$ and so $E[Z^2] > \mu^2$ and more importantly $E[Z^2] \neq \mu^2$ Thus for the equality $E[Y_j Y_{j-1}] = E[Y_j]E[Y_{j-1}]$ to hold, it must be the case that $a_1a_0 + a_2a_1 = 0$.
## Answer by Hartvigsen (score 0)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/18118
My first idea would be to try writing up the characteristic functions and use the theorem stated in the bottom answer about independence here: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/376511/a-criterion-for-independence-based-on-characteristic-functionShown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.