The tablea 1 a 2 ... a n ...p 1 p 2 ... p n ...is called <strong>the</strong> distribution <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> variable ξ.It should be clearly imag<strong>in</strong>ed that, practically speak<strong>in</strong>g, almostalways we have to deal not with r<strong>and</strong>om variables <strong>the</strong>mselves but onlywith <strong>the</strong>ir distributions. In a word, <strong>the</strong> reason is that <strong>the</strong> r<strong>and</strong>omvariables, be<strong>in</strong>g functions <strong>of</strong> elementary events, are usuallyunobservable. As a result <strong>of</strong> an experiment whose outcome is one <strong>of</strong><strong>the</strong> elementary events ω, we usually determ<strong>in</strong>e a value <strong>of</strong> a r<strong>and</strong>omvariable ξ(ω), but we will not f<strong>in</strong>d out ω.Let us consider a throw <strong>of</strong> a die although <strong>in</strong>troduc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> set <strong>of</strong>elementary events <strong>in</strong> a complicated way underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g ω as <strong>the</strong> set <strong>of</strong>values <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> coord<strong>in</strong>ates <strong>and</strong> velocities <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> die at <strong>the</strong> moment whenwe let it go. More precisely, ω will be <strong>the</strong> set <strong>of</strong> those numbers writtendown precisely enough for uniquely determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> outcome ξ(ω).Such a determ<strong>in</strong>ation is not now possible for <strong>the</strong> microcosm but <strong>in</strong> ourcase we do not doubt it although no one ever checked that possibility.In any case, it is extremely difficult to observe ω so precisely, <strong>and</strong>practically although not <strong>in</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>ciple even impossible but <strong>the</strong>observation <strong>of</strong> ξ(ω) is easy, <strong>and</strong> that is what <strong>the</strong> gamblers are onlydo<strong>in</strong>g. The space <strong>of</strong> elementary events Ω is extremely convenient as aconcept, as we have seen <strong>and</strong> will see <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sequel, but as a rule it isnot actually observable. It is easier to observe events <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> k<strong>in</strong>d {ξ =a i }.And still, such events are too numerous <strong>and</strong> it is preferable tocharacterize <strong>the</strong> distribution <strong>of</strong> a r<strong>and</strong>om variable by severalparameters, i. e. by functions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> values a i <strong>and</strong> probabilities p i .Considered are not arbitrary distributions, but such as are uniquelydeterm<strong>in</strong>ed by a small number <strong>of</strong> parameters. F<strong>in</strong>e, if one or twoparameters is (are) needed, endurable if three or four. However,determ<strong>in</strong>e experimentally more than four parameters, <strong>and</strong> your resultswill be questioned. The po<strong>in</strong>t is, that, as empirically noted, whenselect<strong>in</strong>g too many parameters any experimental results can be fitted toany law <strong>of</strong> distribution.Expectation is <strong>the</strong> most important parameter <strong>of</strong> distribution. We willdef<strong>in</strong>e it not <strong>in</strong> its usual form; <strong>the</strong> generally accepted def<strong>in</strong>ition willappear as a very simple <strong>the</strong>orem.Def<strong>in</strong>ition. An expectation <strong>of</strong> a r<strong>and</strong>om variable ξ = ξ(ω) is numberEξ determ<strong>in</strong>ed by <strong>the</strong> formula∑Eξ = ξ(ω) P(ω),ω ∈Ω.It is assumed here that <strong>the</strong> series absolutely converges; o<strong>the</strong>rwise, <strong>the</strong>r<strong>and</strong>om variable is said to have no expectation.It is not difficult to conv<strong>in</strong>ce ourselves that our def<strong>in</strong>ition actuallyco<strong>in</strong>cides with <strong>the</strong> accepted formula [...]20
Eξ = ∑ aipi.Our form <strong>of</strong> def<strong>in</strong>ition is however more convenient for prov<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><strong>the</strong>orems on <strong>the</strong> properties <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> expectation. Let us prove, forexample, [<strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>orem about <strong>the</strong> expectation <strong>of</strong> a sum <strong>of</strong> variables].[...] In many textbooks that statement is proved defectively. [...]The second most important parameter <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> distribution <strong>of</strong> ar<strong>and</strong>om variable is variance.Def<strong>in</strong>ition. [...]For r<strong>and</strong>om variables as also for events, <strong>the</strong> concept <strong>of</strong><strong>in</strong>dependence is most important. We def<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong>dependence (<strong>in</strong> totality)for three r<strong>and</strong>om variables, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> def<strong>in</strong>ition is similar for any number<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m.Def<strong>in</strong>ition. [...]We will prove that for <strong>in</strong>dependent r<strong>and</strong>om variablesE(ξ ⋅ η⋅ ς) = Eξ ⋅ Eη⋅Eς.Pro<strong>of</strong>. [...]It easily follows that <strong>the</strong> variance <strong>of</strong> a sum <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dependent r<strong>and</strong>omvariables is equal to <strong>the</strong> sum <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> variances <strong>of</strong> its terms.We have concluded <strong>the</strong> exposition <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> stochastic conceptsfor <strong>the</strong> discrete case, when <strong>the</strong> experiment has [only] a f<strong>in</strong>ite or acountable number <strong>of</strong> elementary outcomes. Now, we have to considerwhat happens when it is more natural to describe <strong>the</strong> experiment by amore complicated space.2.5. Transition to <strong>the</strong> general space <strong>of</strong> elementary events. If anexperiment results <strong>in</strong> some measurement, it is possible to state that,s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong> precision <strong>of</strong> all measurements is only f<strong>in</strong>ite, <strong>the</strong> set <strong>of</strong>elementary outcomes will at most be countable. However, <strong>the</strong> history<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> science <strong>in</strong>dicates that physical <strong>the</strong>ories are muchsimplified by consider<strong>in</strong>g cont<strong>in</strong>uous models for which experimentalresults can be any number. Differential equations can only be applied<strong>in</strong> such models.Readers, familiar with difference equations will easily imag<strong>in</strong>e howmore elegant <strong>and</strong> simple are <strong>the</strong> differential equations. Thus, althoughmodern physics has some vague ideas about <strong>the</strong> possible discreteness<strong>of</strong> space, it certa<strong>in</strong>ly is not at all easy to ab<strong>and</strong>on <strong>the</strong> notion <strong>of</strong>cont<strong>in</strong>uum. And, allow<strong>in</strong>g that notion, what k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> probability <strong>the</strong>oryshould we have? The answer to this question is given by <strong>the</strong>celebrated Kolmogorov axiomatics (Kolmogorov 1933; Feller 1950<strong>and</strong> 1966). Its foundation is <strong>the</strong> notion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> space <strong>of</strong> elementaryoutcomes Ω which can now be arbitrary. Some (but not all!) <strong>of</strong> itssubspaces are held to be so to say observable as an experimental result<strong>and</strong> called events. If A is an event, we are able to say whe<strong>the</strong>r itoccurred <strong>in</strong> an experiment or not <strong>and</strong> <strong>in</strong> this sense it is observable. Wemay thus discuss <strong>the</strong> frequency <strong>of</strong> its occurrence <strong>and</strong> consequently <strong>the</strong>probability P(A).The ma<strong>in</strong> dem<strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Kolmogorov axiomatics conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g asthough <strong>in</strong> embryo <strong>the</strong> merits <strong>and</strong> shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> entire <strong>the</strong>ory isthat, given a countable set <strong>of</strong> events A 1 , A 2 , ..., A n , ..., <strong>the</strong>ir sum <strong>and</strong>21
- Page 1 and 2: Studies in the History of Statistic
- Page 3 and 4: Introduction by CompilerI am presen
- Page 5 and 6: (Lect. Notes Math., No. 1021, 1983,
- Page 7 and 8: sufficiently securely that a carefu
- Page 9 and 10: is energy?) from chapter 4 of Feynm
- Page 11 and 12: demand to apply transfinite numbers
- Page 13 and 14: for stating that Ω consists of ele
- Page 15 and 16: chances to draw a more suitable apa
- Page 17 and 18: Let the space of elementary events
- Page 19: 2.3. Independence. When desiring to
- Page 23 and 24: absolutely precisely if the pertine
- Page 25 and 26: where x is any real number. If dens
- Page 27 and 28: probability can be coupled with an
- Page 29 and 30: Nowadays we are sure that no indepe
- Page 31 and 32: λ = λ(T)with λ(T) being actually
- Page 33 and 34: (1/B n )(m − A n )instead of the
- Page 35 and 36: along with ξ. For example, if ξ i
- Page 37 and 38: µ( − p0) ÷np0 (1 − p0)nhas an
- Page 39 and 40: distribution of the maximal term |s
- Page 41 and 42: ξ (ω) + ... + ξ (ω)n1n{ω :|
- Page 43 and 44: P{max ξ(t) ≥ x} = 0.01, 0 ≤ t
- Page 45 and 46: 1. This example and considerations
- Page 47 and 48: IIV. N. TutubalinTreatment of Obser
- Page 49 and 50: structure of statistical methods, d
- Page 51 and 52: Suppose that we have adopted the pa
- Page 53 and 54: and the variances are inversely pro
- Page 55 and 56: It is interesting therefore to see
- Page 57 and 58: is applied with P(t) being a polyno
- Page 59 and 60: ut some mathematical tricks describ
- Page 61 and 62: It is clear therefore that no speci
- Page 63 and 64: of various groups of machines, and
- Page 65 and 66: nnA(λ) x sin λ t, B(λ) = x cosλ
- Page 67 and 68: of the mathematical model of the Br
- Page 69 and 70: dF(λ) = f (λ) dλ, so that B( t
- Page 71 and 72:
usually very little of them. Indeed
- Page 73 and 74:
This is the celebrated model of aut
- Page 75 and 76:
applications of the theory of stoch
- Page 77 and 78:
achieved by differentiating because
- Page 79 and 80:
u(x 1 , x 2 , t 1 , t 2 ) = v(x 1 ,
- Page 81 and 82:
Reasoning based on common sense and
- Page 83 and 84:
answering that question is extremel
- Page 85 and 86:
IIIV. N. TutubalinThe Boundaries of
- Page 87 and 88:
periodograms. It occurred that work
- Page 89 and 90:
at point x = 1. However, preceding
- Page 91 and 92:
He concludes that since the action
- Page 93 and 94:
The verification of the truth of a
- Page 95 and 96:
In the purely scientific sense this
- Page 97 and 98:
ought to learn at once the simple t
- Page 99 and 100:
the material world science had inde
- Page 101 and 102:
values of (2.1) realized in the n e
- Page 103 and 104:
*several dozen. The totality µ ica
- Page 105 and 106:
Mendelian laws. It is not sufficien
- Page 107 and 108:
example, the problem of the objecti
- Page 109 and 110:
a linear function is not restricted
- Page 111 and 112:
258 - 82 - 176 cases or 68.5% of al
- Page 113 and 114:
The Framingham investigation indeed
- Page 115 and 116:
or, for discrete observations,IT(ω
- Page 117 and 118:
What objections can be made? First,
- Page 119 and 120:
eliability and queuing are known to
- Page 121 and 122:
Kolman E. (1939 Russian), Perversio
- Page 123 and 124:
measurement is provided. Recently,
- Page 125 and 126:
which means that sooner or later th
- Page 127 and 128:
The foundations of the Mises approa
- Page 129 and 130:
A rather subtle arsenal is develope
- Page 131 and 132:
4.3. General remarks on §§ 4.1 an
- Page 133 and 134:
BibliographyAlimov Yu. I. (1976, 19
- Page 135 and 136:
processes are now going on in the s
- Page 137 and 138:
obtaining a deviation from the theo
- Page 139 and 140:
VIOscar SheyninOn the Bernoulli Law